Flybe Dash emergency at LGW?

[timmcat]

Friend on the ground at LGW has reported that a Dash just landed is surrounded by emergency vehicles on the runway. Pax and crew yet to evacuate.

Probably a non-event so feel free to flame / delete as appropriate.

[Neoburner]

Smoke filled cabin on finals, full evac on the runway, stacked n packed for up to one hour ive been told

[Avitor]

Just announced on Sky. More to follow.

[W2k]

Sky news link (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Gatwick-Airport-Emergency-Landing-By-Flybe-Jet-Closes-Airport/Article/200907415345579?lpos=World_News_First_UK_News_Article_Teaser _Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15345579_Gatwick_Airport%3A_Emergency_Landing_By _Flybe_Jet_Closes_Airport). Suggests the entire airport has been closed? :bored:

Gatwick Airport has been temporarily closed after an emergency landing by a Flybe jet.

[HeathrowAirport]

Gatwick Runway open, Now landing 26L.

[HeathrowAirport]

Paris CDG (LFPG) to Cardiff (EGFF) BEE143G

G-JECL (http://www.libhomeradar.org/aircraft/G-JECL.html)

[Drink Up Thee Cider]

Flybe issued these sage-like words, so obviously a good job done by the crew::D

Flybe Statement relating to Flight BE 1432 from Paris CDG to Cardiff

Flybe can confirm that Flight BE1432 flying from Paris Charles de Gaulle to Cardiff was diverted into London Gatwick landing at 1226 local time.

The priority landing, at which emergency vehicles were deployed by the airport as a precautionary measure, followed a suspected technical fault.

All 46 passengers disembarked safely and without incident and will be re-accommodated at the earliest possible opportunity.

The safety of its passengers and crew is Flybe’s number one priority.

[Avitor]

"Flybe issued these sage-like words, so obviously a good job done by the crew:":D
======================================================

Have just heard a passenger give his account of the incident on Sky news....confirms the above. :D

[Whatisthematrix]

Colleague of mine is on EK015. Ended up in Birmingham.

[KernowGuy]

Currently sat on the tarmac in Bournemouth

BA8114 AMS - LGW. 2 other BA a/c here too

[greekdalek]

How unfortunate that this aircraft had to divert to a single runway airport just before one of the busiest holiday travelling weekends of the summer. I'm not quite sure why it needed to block the operational runway for so long especially when Gatwick appears to have a secondary "emergency" runway, but I expect that it was being worked on at the time.
Could Manston be used - I recall that it used to "specialise" in emergency landings.:}

[howflytrg]

because manston has bugger all engineering. and should the worst come to be lgw is right next door to east surrey hospital. not even 5 mins away from airside!

[5milesbaby]

ATC "I'm sorry Sir, due to the fact my uncle's sister-in-law's boyfriends mum is due into Gatters in about half an hour and they have drinkies booked with their neighbours later we are going to ask you to fly for an extra 30 minutes with that acrid smell and go block some other piece of tarmac. Actually, most of Northern France are about to move out and shut down so would you mind possibly bogging off there instead so I don't even have to fill in any paperwork and we can save our foam for the firefighters to fill up the local nightclub later for the end of term foamparty? They would also appreciate not having their afternoon kick-a-round interrupted and the nursery school 3 miles from touchdown still have the kids in the playground following lunch................"
:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

[greekdalek]

I thought Manston had a nice wide and long runway suitable for emergency landings on foam for aircraft with collapsing gear?

Obviously I was venting my frustration in a somwehat petulant and thoughtless way and have subsequently realised the issue was "smoke in cabin" - apologies to the flight crew and passengers who looked as tho' they were stoic throughout.

Mrs Greekdalek will not mind missing 30 mins of Australian Pink Floyd when she knows what has caused all this.:}

[Danny2]

Can all the spotters and enthusiasts please take their comments to the copy of this thread (http://www.pprune.org/spectators-balcony-spotters-corner/382454-flybe-dash-emergency-lgw-copy-including-spotter-chat.html) over in the Spotters Balcony forum. It will save me and you much time. You won't have to post drivel and trivia on here and I won't have to delete it in order to keep the thread in some semblance of order and content relating to airline pilots and not the breathless repeating of, what we all already know, is media hype and distortion of facts.

Thank you. :ugh:

[racedo]

because manston has bugger all engineering. and should the worst come to be lgw is right next door to east surrey hospital. not even 5 mins away from airside!

Haven't the passengers suffered enough without inflicting East Surrey on them !!!!!!!

Know the hospital and if they weren't ill to begin with then hospital will soon change that.

5 mins from Airside is just about doable on an empty road all blocked off.

[Nashers]

friend of mine was flying out of gatwick and had a 2 hour delay. apparently (atleast about 2 hours ago) ryanair were the only ones departing due to thunderstorms, monarch were deploying slides and flybe had smoke in the cockpit?

anyone else heard about the monarch or is that another story like the virgin aricraft at heathrow a few weeks ago?

[Middleagedman]

Just for the record, BEE1432 declared a Mayday with smoke in the cabin, and requested an immediate diversion to Gatwick. That's why it went there! Crew on masks, ATC handled it very well I believe.

[A Very Civil Pilot]

Manston's fire cover is RFF 3. I'm not sure if that is sufficient for a Q400

EGMH AIP extract (http://www.nats-uk.ead-it.com/aip/current/ad/EGMH/EG_AD_2_EGMH_en.pdf)

[EGMH]

We're Cat-9 on request. Handled 2 BA A320's on divert today.

[G SXTY]

Why couldn't they land their crock of s**t at Manston and cause less disruption to everybody else?


Because, in language that even an idiot can understand, smoke or fumes in cabin and/or flight deck = land on nearest suitable runway. End of. Slightly more important than avoiding disruption to other people's travel plans.

[Phileas Fogg]

Then why not Biggin Hill with Farnborough hospital just down the road and if airport fire cover were a problem then the local fire brigade would only take minutes to be on site.

To hell with engineering facilities compared to the costs to other operators of closing a major international airport with a diversion.

[atco-matic]

If a pilot comes on and tells me he has smoke in the cockpit and wants to land at particular airfiled which I know is suitable for that aircraft type, he goes to that airport. End of. Being on board the aircraft, I'm sure he's in a better place than me to know what to do with his aircraft. If he asked to land at an airfield which I thought wasn't physically suitable I might make suggestions based on distance to nearest airfield, weather, runway length, or fire cover, for example, but If I tried to force him to go somewhere else because of the cost of closing a runway for an hour and he ended up in bits in a field near Reigate, I would be up sh!t creek without a paddle.

The one exception to this is LHR where we are discouraged from offering it as a diversion aerodrome for emergency traffic because of the risks involved in putting a defective aircraft over a large area of population. However, in practice if a pilot declared an emergency and wanted to go to LHR, all I could do is offer him alternatives. If he still wants to land there, he lands there.

[Wireless]

then the local fire brigade would only take minutes to be on site.



If for example smoke entered the cabin and the source was unknown you don't know what you're dealing with (see valuejet). Look. People bitch and moan about blogs diverting to wrong place. causing disruption, etc etc. When you have an emergency all the seas should part. Never mind delays! The Press and pax can be forgiven for being that short sighted but not us as Pilots. The aircraft in question was ok but the same would be blaming the Pilots for not choosing a major airport with on Airport max fire cover and a huge runway, loads of emergency infrastructure and thorough emergency services contigency planning if a fire had consumed the aircraft and people had perished.

[Stellas]

Yes well done to the Flybe lads for getting it safely down on the ground, so what if they choose LGW or wherever else to divert, I would have done the same too, are some of these muppets on this forum for real?:ugh:

[AltFlaps]

Spotters, amateurs and children .... please go away :mad:

[Bad Robot]

Getting totally p1ssed off with being called a "Spotter"
I re-iterate, if the Pax and Crew have breathed in ANY sort of fumes/smoke then they almost certainly should have gone to hospital for a check up, regardless of the source of the contamination. It is just plain old duty of care in my book.

But then.....................

Money speaks louder than "Lip Service" A very sad world we are all now living in.:ugh:

BR.

[Wireless]

Well to be honest they'd still close the rwy with a pax evac on the exit taxiway I'd think, and if you're on masks with smoke are you really going to be thinking of vacating and keeping the rwy clear to allow other folk to make an approach. I'd agree if OEIO landing to vacate but not fuz smoke/ suspected fire. You don't dick around there. On ground. Off, people ok....egg on face public Pilot website armchair pondering later

[5milesbaby]

Boeing 77W - Manchester Airport, August 1985

Why put 46 passengers more at risk when you can just stop ASAP on the runway and then get the hell out of it. The Manchester disaster took only 60 seconds for the fuselage to be totally destroyed.

[Wireless]

I'm starting to wonder about us as Pilots :ugh::ugh:. We seem more worried about rwy occupation and hold ups than dealing with an emergency. That is presuming of course people posting criticism aren't just armchair sim dudes.

[Wireless]

In one's Sim checks would you win favour if, with a smoke, poss fire emergency you decided to taxy about clear of rwy or diverting to a p**s small airfield with local public fire cover (that may be putting out burning haystacks) to avoid delays at "Big old Gatwick". Doubt it :rolleyes:

[learjet50]

To all concerned

Forget your drinks party your friend diverted to BHX


This Aeroplane had an emergency which required an immediate landing which the crew undertook.


Does it matter how many aircraft were diverted to any airfield the Crew did exactly what they are trained for I E Land ASAP

It is with regret it caused the Airport to Close but what do u say to the Crew when they declare an Emergency


OH I SO SORRY WE HAVE OTHER AIRCRAFT WITH PASSENGERS ATTENTING COCKTAIL PARTIES SO U CANT COME HERE.


The Crew were very proffesional in what they did


So Please WHINGERS Go Away and Knock some other Airline or are FLYBE the only Airline to have had to Divert with Smoke..

Why is the D8 a crock of SxxT are u an expert if its a crock of SxxT why have DHC sold so many

Go away and play with your Toys Pathetic Person

I am surprised this thread has gone so far


Moderator

Please close it its Pathetic no lives Lost no damage to A/C I am sure it was something or nothing and it will probaly be flying again very soon


There we go I have said my lot




Good Evening

[racedo]

Flybe Pilots did great job, plane on ground, passengers safe.

Some people delayed but Big F Deal.

Lots of people not having to explain daddy or mummy is dead because some idiots didn't want to be late so plane with problems had to find somewhere else to land but crashed into a field.

Given thunderstorms over Gatwick later in afternoon I guess they were delays anyway.

[Scott Diamond]

Boeing 77W - Manchester Airport, August 1985

Why put 46 passengers more at risk when you can just stop ASAP on the runway and then get the hell out of it. The Manchester disaster took only 60 seconds for the fuselage to be totally destroyed.

Well said that man. :D

How about we arrange for smoke to fill a cabin and chuck you lot that are whinging in it. See where you'd like to go from there. ;)

[oomje]

Started work at 1pm to fly to SPU.
Delayed 3 od hours due to an emergency compounded by weather in the area.
This sort of thing can happen any day, any time.
Everyone gets home safely, that is our job, that is what matters. Nothing else.
Good Job Guys:D

[Out Of Trim]

I thought Manston had a nice wide and long runway suitable for emergency landings on foam for aircraft with collapsing gear?


Manston does still have a nice wide and longish runway suitable for emergency landings, but it lost it's foam carpet capability back around 1982/1983. There was no funding available to replace the RAF's foam tankers which had been corroded by the urea used to create the foam. I believe there were also environmental concerns for when it drained off into the water table.

At that time, I think the only other available airfield for foam landings was then CDG.

With regards to using LGW. Wouldn't it have been so much easier on all concerned if LGW had had a second runway to enable them to rapidly continue operations instead of causing chaos and 3 hour + delays. :ugh:

[Nashers]

either we have alot of spotters around in here or we have ourselves a few trolls......

[mr.777]

Bloody nuisance as my partner will be 3 hours late from Vienna and will miss half the concert tonight!
Why couldn't they land their crock of s**t at Manston and cause less disruption to everybody else?

You are a tw*t.

From an ATC perspective , yesterday was the worst day i can remember having at work for a very long time. Top job done by all, pilots and ATCOs.

[Charley B]

Think ATCOs at Swanwick and the LGW & LHR towers did a fantastic job yesterday--the storms were really bad around here in the afternoon-and this didnt help at LGW after the earlier emergency,but an excellent job was done all round(Traffic was still going in and out of LHR way after midnight!!!)
We should be proud of our ATC here in the UK:)

[G SXTY]

I'm surprised no-one's suggested Headcorn or Shoreham yet. :ugh::ugh:

Fortunately, I've only ever had to use O2 masks in the sim, and it's not something I'd ever want to do for real. For those who have never had the experience (and judging by some of the comments here, that covers many of the 'contibutors' to this thread) it's an unpleasant and disorientating experience, and one that makes effective communication extremely difficult. And that's in the sim - never mind the real aircraft.

I say again - smoke and/or fumes in cabin and/or flight deck = land on nearest suitable runway. Briefing and setting up for an approach to an unfamiliar airport is a complication you can do without when it's an effort just to talk to each other.

[choppercopper 99]

Well said G SXTY,

I have been amazed by some of the comments here. Obviously some of the people posting about this incident have NO idea what happens on the flight deck during an emergency.:ugh:

Smoke in the flight deck / cabin. Oxygen mask on and get down ASAP!! Sod the people that maybe diverted or delayed. Their lives are not in danger at that moment in time!

Think of the Swissair MD11 in canada.

I never fancy being in that situation and would do exactly what they did yesterday.

If you have nothing sensible to say then bu:mad:er off.

CC99

[Super VC-10]

Headcorn! Pah!

Try Old Hay!

*sarcasm off*

[Matt101]

Quite frankly this incident just goes to show why I will continue to happily fly with Flybe. Professionally handled with safety the number one priority. I despair of those of you who feel you would rather put the commercial considerations of other airlines ahead of the safety of your passengers, fellow crew and ultimately, yourselves.

I'm half way through my fATPL at the moment so no real experience yet but I would hope that safety before cost would be soemthing we all accept is a given.

[parkfell]

I believe that Gatwick Airport Authority once used a form of words to "discourage" traffic with an emergency from landing at LGW due to the potential subsequent disruption. I think the Virgin? captain decided to decline their request to divert elsewhere. Hydraulic problem?

What are the "rules" for their emergency runway to be opened for trade?:)

[mr.777]

That happened at Heathrow, not Gatwick.

The "emergency" runway is not just used for emergencies. It is used when repair work is being done on the main runway or if the main runway becomes blocked for any reason. It is used quite frequently.

[Super VC-10]

I think you'll find that was the 1997 accident at Heathrow. I remember reading something to that effect in the AAIB report.

[5milesbaby]

It has happened at Gatwick but not that often. I personally discouraged a landing at Gatwick and the aircraft chose to go to Stansted as a result. However I feel very uncomfortable having to do that and have refused on occasions, its all about the nature of the emergency and how panicy the initial distress call is.....

[Dream Buster]

How Safe Is Airplane Air? | NBC Los Angeles (http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/airplane-air.html)

Contaminated cabin air is the subject of several court cases in the US at the moment.

The lawyers / victims wouldn't go to court unless they were sure of their facts - whilst the airlines claim breathing toxic oil fumes in a confined space is not dangerous.

Both sides can't be right....

DB :ok:

[vespasia]

I believe that Gatwick Airport Authority once used a form of words to "discourage" traffic with an emergency from landing at LGW due to the potential subsequent disruption.

Not quite true - The airport authority at Gatwick can request us in ATC to pass a request to aircraft to consider an alternate to avoid disruption, BUT they will not do so if the aircraft has already declared an emergency. If such a request reaches us in ATC after an emergency has been declared, we just advise the airport authority that we can't pass the request on. No drama - if you've declared an emergency you won't (or shouldn't) be asked to consider going anywhere else.

[lomo]

I guess the real issue is the over stretched UK aerodromes. ATC perform oh so well considering the traffic levels at LHR and LGW. A second wide spaced runway at LGW would do for starters!

;)

[Otto Throttle]

I must be missing a crucial document in the aircraft library. You know, the one that the nay-sayers must be using to identify medical facilities close to airports so that they can make a more informed decision about where to divert. :rolleyes:

[G SXTY]

You'll find it in the side pocket of the comfy armchair. :ok:

[RED WINGS]

For those who wonder, years back I completed a fire training course at Manchester airports fire station, one of the instructors was unfortunate enough to have been on duty the day of the fateful 737 fire at MAN. His advice and there prefered procedure was if you had any incling you had smoke or fire on board park it in the centre of the runway and position for wind! It makes access for the fire service easier and quicker. Plus doesnt really matter if you park it in the grass the airport will still close due to the reduced fire capacity due to the assets in use dealing with you anyway!

For the record If I was faced with the problem these guys had if LHR was the nearest suitable strech of tar thats where I would go regardless! I couldnt care less how much disruption it caused everyone would be alive!

If the crew in question are reading this, as a colleague I want to say well done! Everyone got on the ground safe, I know how stressful the situation was but good on you well handled hope you were well looked after!

[learjet50]

Well said RED WINGS


I was working at the Airport the day of the dreaded 737 Its a day Ill never forget.

As u say it does not matter how many aircrfat divert to other Airports
the Crew and Pax are 1st Prioity and the crew should land at what they know is the nearest airport


Bollxxcks to the people as I said prviously they missed the theatre oh how sad

There will be another performance I am sure but at least all ended well
and everbody was safe.

You could close all the airports in the UK as long as it saves lives


WELL DONE BE CREW

[RED WINGS]

Hostie 89, I think you will see I said the crew, meaning flight and cabin crew ;)

I to would be interested in more detail but would prefer to wait till either I see the said crew or the results of the investigation. Fact is better than BS theory on here or worst still the news!!!

[rickyxx]

Whilst I was annoyed at sitting in an aircraft at Bournemouth for around 3 hours waiting for my plane to get a slot to take off again to get to Gatwick, and finally arriving 5 hours after taking off from Amsterdam, I completely understand the reasons for the delay. The BA captain was superb and spoke to all the passengers, fully explaining the reasons and the options available.
My only suggestion to improve matters would have been to let passengers leave the aircraft and stretch their legs outside which I understand is prohibited by customs and immigration?

[Gingerbread Man]

Another Flybe Cardiff inbound from CDG diverted yesterday, this time to Exeter. Does anyone know anything about this one? Same airframe or just precautionary given the earlier incident?

Cheers

Ginger ;)

[FL370 Officeboy]

Yesterday's divert was thanks to a pretty hefty lightning strike I believe.

I'm intrigued how you envisage it could be 'precautionary' as a result of the previous incident? Are you under the impression that every flybe CWL flight will now divert because one had an emergency whilst operating that route recently? If so that's actually the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard :ugh:

[Gingerbread Man]

That was worded badly, I meant to ask if they'd experienced something similar but not as severe which led to them landing to sort it out. Coincidence should have been a far more obvious conclusion to draw.

I think a terse reply was well deserved for that one.

[rog747]

is there any prelim of the cause of the smoke on the LGW diversion yet?
thanks

[Bad Robot]

Any more info on the source of the smoke?

BR.

[Blink182]

Air seal on bearing failure No. 1 Engine.

Engine was changed and a/c serviceable a couple of days after the incident

[wbble]

“Air seal”? I presume that means oil seal, in which case I would imagine all the passengers have been contacted and informed that they’ve been exposed to engine oil fumes, what chemicals are involved, what the possible consequences may be and told to go to a hospital for a check-up and blood test. ;)

[Bad Robot]

Wbble, If this is indeed the case then I would not expect any "Duty of Care" wrt the pax or crews any time soon. The Flybe track record on this is Woeful to say the least.

BR.

[Dream Buster]

Crew and passengers can at last consult the following helpful US Government document for assistance with serious ill health following a smoke event in a confined space.

http://www.ohrca.org/pdf/quickreference.pdf

DB :ok:

[Cattle Class]

In the light of Blinks statement I'd totally agree with Bad Robot.

Flybe, like many others, are not good at accepting responsibility for this sort of thing.

If pax and crew haven't been for a blood test - then go now. And get it documented so when you are overcome in x weeks/months time you have some evidence of the cause.

Because they'll never accept liability otherwise. :ugh:

[Cloud1]

Bad Robot and Cattle Class - I have never heard such useless tripe in all my life, than that posted by you two.

This incident was a non-event and was not worthy of all the attention that it has received. A couple went to hospital and were discharged immediately as there was nothing wrong with them......there is a surprise (not)

I think this thread has now past its sell by date - there are no developments nor any further comment that can be made which is of any use or relevance :ugh:

[Cattle Class]

Cloud1 - if you want to ignore the potential and very real dangers of inhalation of organo-phosphates including TCP from very small quantities of such contaminants (as found in engine oil additives) then that is your choice.

However if you have ever met people who have had their life ruined by from such exposure you might think again. I would therefore suggest that you keep your ill informed thoughts to yourself rather than trying to influence people who may not know better. Blood testing does not harm - but may show that harm has been done. I would advocate it for all in such a position.

[Agent Oringe]

Cloud1,

How on earth can you call Smoke in the Cabin/Flight Deck a Non Event!
Any smoke/fume event is an MOR. Any event that necessitates the use of medical Oxygen, either Flight crews Oxy masks or Oxy administered in the cabin is also an MOR event.

For the record, the Dash Q400 does not have a drop down Oxygen supply,
which is why I assume the CC were offering it from portables if any Pax needed it.

Have any of the passengers been informed that they have been exposed to nuero toxins? No? I didn't think so. If they had, then they may well have wanted a very comprhehensive medical screening to see what poisons that they had been exposed to.

What is certain is, if the smoke and fumes came in to the Air Con system due to a seal failure then I can absoultley GAURANTEE that eveyone on board has been exposed to a serious alphabet soup of extremely toxic chemicals.

Still calling this an " Non Event" ?

Obviously you haven't a Clue about Commercial Aviation practices.:=

[Deano777]

Surely people with adverse reactions to the so called "toxins" are people who have been exposed to it over a period of time. I fail to see how 15 minutes of exposure is going to cause any long term health effects on anyone. I'm open to being proved wrong of course.

[Jackdaw]

Just one flight can cause Aerotoxic Syndrome and ruin your health for years to come...

Learn more at Aerotoxic Assiociation - Support for sufferers of Aerotoxic Syndrome (http://www.aerotoxic.org/)

The ignorance on such matters by some people in this forum is very sad to see.

[Dream Buster]

Cloud 1,

This is what can happen on 'just one flight'.

Vaughn press release (http://www.aerotoxic.org/index.php/news-and-articles/119-vaughn-press-release)

Seattle Video | News Video | TV Video | KING 5 News | KING5.com (http://www.king5.com/video/?z=y&nvid=356379)

Don't enjoy...

DB :ugh:

[lomapaseo]

Learn more at Aerotoxic Assiociation - Support for sufferers of Aerotoxic Syndrome

The ignorance on such matters by some people in this forum is very sad to see.

Saying that it is so because you want it to be so doesn't make it so.

The scientific community has to work with facts and data that prioritizes actions in a relative sense.

The general members of PPrune don't make up the scientific community with expertise in air borne toxins and their long term effects.

I'm still open to a consensus report that includes the government experts with a clear set of data not just opinions.

But certainly this whole subject belongs in its own thread and not just as a rider on a convenient incident/accident of the day thread.

[Nicc HK]

I was at Gatwick that day booked on BE802 scheduled to depart LGW for NQY at 0900. The inbound aircraft, a Q400 was held at NQY because of a failure of the oxygen system. BE sent an engineer from Exeter to NQY to fix the problem. Inbound aircraft arrived LGW about 1130 and we were allowed to board at 1215. Naturally loads of bitching from passengers regarding delay, including me as arrived from HKG at 0500.

1225 about to push back and Captain announced LGW closed due to emergency landing, i.e. BE1432. While we sat stuck for another 2 hours on the plane before eventually taking off, the Captain graciously allowing free use of the washrooms and soft drinks, nobody on the plane complained from that point.



Even the Stag Party lager louts and Party girls understood there was a situation requiring priority, and I did not mind eating my long awaited for Cornish Pasty cold (it still tasted good!).

Nicc HK

[Dream Buster]

Iomapaseo,

I think everybody is agreed that we need 'a clear set of data'.

We have been asking, on everybody's behalf, exactly which chemicals and concentrations are in visible oil fumes for nearly 3 years now - along with the UK House of Lords who recommended the Government urgently provide exactly this same data in 2007.

To date NO DATA has been provided, but it might be available 'next' year...

Most people can therefore conclude that the known data is NOT convenient and is being with held - for as long as possible.

I can assure you that if high levels of organo phosphates are found in oil smoke - it will immediately explain the very serious ill health found in the many people who have breathed these chemicals in confined spaces for so many years.

International experts at a BALPA conference in 2005 concluded that chemicals in confined spaces DEFINITELY cause serious ill health in aircrew and passengers. No question.

Witholding / denying the 'clear set of data' we all wish to see is not very intelligent. Is it?

After all, it will be known - one day.

YouTube - Pilot Union Boss Blows Whistle (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxwxzHMekb4&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaerotoxic%2Eorg%2Findex%2Ephp%2Fnews %2Dand%2Darticles%2F92%2Dbalpa%2Dthen%2D2005%2Dand%2Dnow&feature=player_embedded)


DB :ok:

[Maverick8701]

Gents,

I have been reading about the "fumes" advice as a Q400 pilot how quickly should you get a blood test? Or is that a limit when it becomes inaffective? As they say prevention is better than cure something to look out for in the future!

[Dream Buster]

Maverick8701,

The blood test presently being developed in the US needs to be tested within 10 weeks of exposure. It will then tell the exact time and date of exposure. It is not quite available, yet.

There are blood tests than can be done now which will show up organo phosphates etc but the most reliable check is to check the fat - that is where the toxins are stored.

Blood can be checked and this shows the past damage.

Example:

http://www.aerotoxic.org/download/docs/JGH/John%20Hoyte%20-%20Abou-Donia%2007-2009.pdf

None of this is done by the NHS; it is all private and costs around £450.

If you have odd medical symptoms and you want a blood / fat test, contact the experts for help.

DB :ok:

[Maverick8701]

Thanks Dreambuster pretty much covered everything there!

[sappl]

My Son was on that plane...and I take exception to many of the unprofessional comments on this diversion. Any half-trained pilot know that you dont mess with a cockpit fire of any description, you get the thing down on the ground and the pax out. I hope none of the guys who posted the comments about the inconvenience of the diversion are in the cockpit or ATC when any member of my family flies in the UK again!

[G SXTY]

Just to put your mind at rest, I think you'll find that the inane comments and 'should have gone somewhere else' suggestions were from spotters / amateurs / enthusiasts / passengers.

Most is not all commercial pilots would treat smoke and/or fumes in the cabin or flightdeck as a serious emergency requiring immediate diversion to the nearest suitable runway, and would be given every assistance by ATC. Which is exactly what happened. :ok: