View Full Version : FLU and CABIN AIR
ozthai
5th May 2009, 04:03
I am a dangerous goods instructor and with DG training we cover methods for clearing the cabin of toxic fumes from a DG spill.
In most cases to ventilate the cabin the recirculating fans are switched off with the result being 100% new air into the cabin and the old air being expelled through the outflow valves.
My question is : If flights were conducted with the recirc fans off during cruise, how much would this increase fuel burn ?
The theory being with the recirc fans off pax and cabin crew would be less subject to breathing second hand air thus lessonong the spread of flu.
Of most concern is the cabin crew who are subjected to this unhealthy environment so frequently.
Cheers.
My question is : If flights were conducted with the recirc fans off during cruise, how much would this increase fuel burn ?
Keep in mind that some designs do not have recirc fans.
The L1011 is one type.
A change of air in the cabin each three minutes.
A better design.:)
Hotel Mode
5th May 2009, 06:18
All manufacturers recommend that the recirc fans are left on to keep flow through the cabin at its maximum. All the air is HEPA filtered which removes more than 99.7% of bugs anyway.
In your case you are trying to dump a long lasting threat (which wont be filtered) out of the aircraft, in this case we want to keep a relatively short lived (per particle) threat (which will be filtered) moving and prevent stagnant air.
Pilot Pete
5th May 2009, 06:18
Most modern aircraft filter the air and this would capture the virus spores (according to Boeing regarding our fleets), so the advice is to keep the recirc fans on.
PP
GlueBall
5th May 2009, 12:21
If flights were conducted with the recirc fans off during cruise, how much would this increase fuel burn
That's an interesting question, because where I work this issue had never come up; in fact, passenger comfort is not ever curtailed in the interest of saving fuel. For that matter, we also run the APU [400-800kgs/hr] and 2 packs at the gate long before passengers board, to ensure proper conditioned cabin air. And besides pax comfort, I'm among those crewmembers who like lots of fresh, conditioned air. In flight and on the ground. :ooh:
That's an interesting question, because where I work this issue had never come up; in fact, passenger comfort is not ever curtailed in the interest of saving fuel. For that matter, we also run the APU [400-800kgs/hr] and 2 packs at the gate long before passengers board, to ensure proper conditioned cabin air. And besides pax comfort, I'm among those crewmembers who like lots of fresh, conditioned air. In flight and on the ground.
100% agree.
I will never ever trade passenger comfort in the 'interests' of fuel saving.
The company backs me up...every time.
IF you don't treat your passengers properly, they will not return.
No passengers, no job.
No company profits, either.
Unless, you fly a freighter.