[_chrismccreadie]

This is the first I had heard of this particular story although I am aware similar stories like this exist. This follows on from another story on HN (can't find the HN link) about a UK armed forces member being denied boarding on a Virgin flight because she was wearing her uniform [1]. It seems to me that any form on questioning is now being taken as non-compliance, leaving customers with little choice, - comply or prepare to be inconvenienced when you are denied permission to fly.

Of all the flights I have personally been on the only time there has been a real issue of passenger safety is when the drunk who wont sit down or or demands to get off the plane mid-flight and yet they continue to make alcohol available on flights.

[1]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2290462/What-way-tre...

[RBerenguel]

Doesn't wearing an uniform imply (or could be thought so by other passengers) she was on duty? Being seen as military personnel on duty in a commercial flight doesn't just sound really good, but of course this is mostly due to the general atmosphere of flight fear

[DanBC]

You didn't read the link, did you? I don't blame you. I freaking hate the Daily Mail too.

> Armed Forces rules state that a serviceman or woman can wear their uniforms voluntarily from their ‘residence to place of duty, irrespective of whether they travel by public or private transport, or on foot.’

EDIT: The article has a nice blurb about the difference between US and UK views of personnel in uniform.

[RBerenguel]

No, I didn't read the link for that reason :) I'm from Spain, so I didn't know e rules, but was more thinking about the passenger impressions on the aircraft.