PDA

View Full Version : US FAA orders removal of oxygen systems in aircraft lavatories


Calmcavok
12th Mar 2011, 09:11
This is interesting. Little detail in the article, but would not like to be either stuck in the loo when it goes bang, or have a CC member checking on the LAVs on portable O2. What happens if you have to follow an escape route, and it's some time before LAVs can be checked?

Can anyone offer an insight? Article here:

US FAA orders removal of oxygen systems in aircraft lavatories (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/03/11/354262/us-faa-orders-removal-of-oxygen-systems-in-aircraft.html)

spannersatcx
12th Mar 2011, 13:51
it actually says deactivation of oxygen generators installed in the lavatories which is completely different to what they are implying with the title.

Torque2
12th Mar 2011, 16:21
US FAA orders removal of oxygen systems in aircraft lavatories


The title of the thread is the direct quotation of the title of the article in ATI, where's the problem?

spannersatcx
12th Mar 2011, 18:24
because there is a difference between o2 generators & gaseous systems, it's the generators that they want removed. ATI has it wrong as not all o2 systems use generators.

if you've ever felt a generator after it has been activated you'll know how hot they get.

Torque2
12th Mar 2011, 19:09
Yes but what was wrong with the thread title, the OP took it directly from the ATI article, that was your initial criticism which was not of the OP's making? I dont wish to argue the technical merits or otherwise.

sevenstrokeroll
12th Mar 2011, 22:21
like many newspaper articles, headlines are just that...headlines but not everything

some older planes use plumbing to bring oxygen from cylinders to outlets in the lavatory...while I haven't read this bit, it is obvious that only the chemical oxy gens are being removed.

DC9, some 737's, 727's should have the older and non effected system

FE Hoppy
13th Mar 2011, 08:42
Most modern aircraft use chemical oxygen generators and it looks like someone doesn't like the idea of people being left alone with these in the toilets. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out why.

BARKINGMAD
28th Mar 2011, 14:12
Letīs hope the Captain isn't in the crapper, trousers around ankles, with a low hours newly qualified F/O in the seat initiating the emergency descent solo???!!!!

Another case of Osama's boys winning again despite the assurances of the western "intelligence" agencies?

Where is this industry going to......?

Brian Abraham
29th Mar 2011, 00:20
Where is this industry going to......? Around the S bend?

AKAAB
3rd Apr 2011, 22:02
The info given to the flight crews in the US was declared Sensitive Security Information and should not be discussed on an open forum.

Ex Cargo Clown
4th Apr 2011, 10:39
The info given to the flight crews in the US was declared Sensitive Security Information and should not be discussed on an open forum.

You've got to be taking the mick, this is paranoia gone into overdrive.

Are you telling me I can't get any form of oxidising agent on board a commercial aircraft if I was that way inclined?

If they have any Chemistry knowledy of how to "use" the xxxxx Chemical that is in the system, I'm pretty sure they are smart enough to take some on board in solid form!

I'm not going to go any further into this for obvious reasons, but this is complete stupidity.

TURIN
4th Apr 2011, 10:50
Yes but what was wrong with the thread title

It is misleading, not entirely accurate, doesn't tell the whole truth.

You know, a bit like the Daily Mail. :suspect:

BizJetJock
4th Apr 2011, 12:10
The info given to the flight crews in the US was declared Sensitive Security Information and should not be discussed on an open forum.

That would be the information that's published on the FAA website?

Neupielot
4th Apr 2011, 13:39
Letīs hope the Captain isn't in the crapper, trousers around ankles, with a low hours newly qualified F/O in the seat initiating the emergency descent solo???!!!!



Was thinking bout the same thing. Now i really need to brush up on my emer descent drill in case the captain get stuck in the toilet :E.

PeetPeet
14th Apr 2011, 18:46
I came accross this petition supporting the reinstallation of oxygen generators in lavatories, chemical or otherwise, what do you folks think?

Petition: Demand that the FAA reinstall emergency oxygen systems in airliner lavatories | Change.org (http://www.change.org/petitions/demand-that-the-faa-reinstall-emergency-oxygen-systems-in-airliner-lavatories)

Data Guy
18th Apr 2011, 09:21
While trying to view the 'change.org' site, it appears to be down. Can anyone provide the key points ?

At another section to these forums (http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/447266-histories-oxygen-generators.html) I provided some data from three FAA Tech Center letters or Reports.

In short, the oxygen released does little, or nothing, to advance a fire already in progress, the shell (exterior) temperature of a operating canister is about 400 degrees F (about 125 degrees short of the minimum temperatures of common packing materials - i.e bubble wrap, cardboard) and, lastly, about 600 degrees F is needed to cause a canister to self actuate.

So absent some revelation of how this generator could somehow be converted into a 'weapon', the oxygen generator appears quite safe.

sb_sfo
18th Apr 2011, 13:58
Key point for me is that 3 people have signed the petition, 2 using what may be real names.

I guess some brainiac in TSA decided that someone unsupervised in a lav could pull out the generator and threaten something with it?

Good luck trying to change that...:ugh:

Shawn Coyle
19th Apr 2011, 23:49
Is there any truth to the rumour that the O2 is being removed to allow webcams to be installed?