More evidence of leathal cockpit fumes harming pilots.

[Boeing 7E7]

Don't worry folks, it won't happen to you....!

http://www.private-eye.co.uk/sections.php?section_link=in_the_back&issue=1374

[Chocks Away]

See other previous threads on this topic, with in depth studies and more, under this section or Downunder.
Search function (top right) will help.
:ok:

[Heffalump363]

That link doesn't do much for me anyway mind, it takes me to Mediaballs

[Boeing 7E7]

See if this one works.

Private Eye In The Back: Pilot study (http://www.private-eye.co.uk/sections.php?section_link=in_the_back&issue=1374)

[cockney steve]

My crystal ball tells me, the fat-cats who are attempting to keep a lid on this scandal, will take their pensions /golden goodbyes and whatever else they can rape from the industry parties involved......they will then leg it, leaving the claimants to fight over an empty, bankrupt carcass.
Yes, I see a total whitewash, the manufacturing and service industry jobs will be transferred to "phoenix" Companies, the victims *might* get some token compensation from a Government Quango, the fat-cats will be exonerated and "lessons will be learned" (while they gloat over their ill-gotten gains)

[FAStoat]

There are far more than you think.The Pilots interviewed in the Ex BA Pilot's Professionally made Film "Welcome to Toxic Airlines",are now mostly no longer with us!Just look at Aerotoxic.org website and you will see.
If you ignore these facts you have you head up your :mad:!!

[barit1]

More scientific research has uncovered the curious correlation of "death" being preceded by a long period of "life", the latter sometimes dragging on for several decades.

But statisticians remind us that "correlation is not causation". :ooh:

[Boeing 7E7]

Barit1,
What an unhelpful and irrelevant reply to what appears to be a serious issue. What are your motivations in seeking to undermine?

[BOAC]

Ignorance, in a word.

[captplaystation]

Welcome Aboard Toxic Airlines (2007) - IMDb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1142585/)



Am I right in saying that a large percentage of these problems are B757 related ?

[Nemrytter]

Am I right in saying that a large percentage of these problems are B757 related ?It must be somehow aircraft limited. I often fly for fieldwork with a large number of air quality sensors and, when allowed, I switch them on during the flight. None of them have ever detected any significant quantity of the contaminants mentioned on the aerotoxic website. Most of the time they detect cleaner air than they do on the ground in a (relatively) unpolluted city.
But I only ever fly on 747s, 777s and A330s so the problem must be limited to other types.

[Ian W]

Welcome Aboard Toxic Airlines (2007) - IMDb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1142585/)

Am I right in saying that a large percentage of these problems are B757 related ?

It may be engine type related. All those aircraft that use compressor air bleeds for pressurization/heating take the air as it comes from that engine. It may be a worthwhile exercise to check on the engine type and manufacturer. There were LOTS of complaints about cabin air quality on the 146 (do an internet search on: BAE 146 cabin air quality ) If you take air from an engine and it is lubricated with 'total loss' lubrication system then you WILL get hot oil vapour into the cabin. Each engine type and each engine of each type will be slightly different.

Seems the only way to avoid the problem is to use a separate air compressor and not take air from the engines; as is done now in the 787.

[Ancient Observer]

Hazy memory. Didn't someone add up the "issues" reported, back in about 2006, and suggest that 146's and 757's were the main causes of this "alleged" issue?

[barit1]

Ian W:Seems the only way to avoid the problem is to use a separate air compressor and not take air from the engines; as is done now in the 787.

...and was done on early jets, 707, DC-8 (pre-70 series), likely British & French as well.

[barit1]

Some notes from an old TWA FE who knew the early 707 well:

The 707/727/DC-8 were certificated under CAR 4b which was the legacy of 20+ years of piston transport experience - service difficulties, accident investigations, etc. It specified that no direct route for engine air (such as supercharger discharge, etc.) was to be used for cabin pressurization. Recips used gear-driven compressors on the accy section exclusively for cabin air.

Thus early jets under CAR 4b had turbocompressors - evident on 707 inboard nacelles as an extra scoop at 12 o'clock. Some ships also had one on an outboard nacelle. Similar to a turbosupercharger, they used engine bleed air to drive it, and had a separate compressor wheel to pressurize the cabin with clean air.

But in the mid-60s, when FAR25 came along as a cert basis, bleed air could be taken directly from the engine compressor for cabin pressurization.

http://www.airplane-pictures.net/images/uploaded-images/2014-1/24/358147.jpg