Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Aerotoxic in the news

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Aerotoxic in the news

Old 3rd Mar 2015, 19:47
  #141 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 7
Denials end

Dear Kenv.

In answer to your questions.

Am I certain about the source of Organophosphates on my shirt? Yes 100%

Does Marks and Spencer produce shirts pre laced with OPs? No, how do I know? Because I bought a pack of three, repackaged them all in separate ziplock bags. I unpacked one in the toilets of my Aircraft on the way to my seat and put it on. The other two are the controls you are concerned about.

There is a second more accurate test offered by Professor Chris Van Netten in Canada, he will send you a test kit if you want to see for yourself. His tester is a small electrically powered unit that comes in a sealed bag. You unwrap it before pushback, turn it on and leave it. It expires after about 90 minutes, you then reseal it in its bag and send it to the lab.

These testers are a newer idea and come back with the same results.

Additionally, my shirt tested positive for OPs in the same proportions as they appear in the Aircraft engine oil.

Can you please tell us all where OPs are found in Cars?

Can you please tell us all where OPs are found in homes?

As far as I know they are not present in either place, and even if they were they would not have made it onto my shirt, and they definitely wouldn't have made it into Professor Van Nettens testers.

Please contact him, order a tester and do it yourself. All flights so tested, fume event or not, have, to my knowledge, tested positive for OPs. The only flights so far to be tested negative are the B787. You refer to this being "my little experiment", it isn't little (there have been many many tests carried by by a huge cross section of people), and it's not mine (these tests are being carried out by multiple University Professors and not some bunch of amateurs).

Why don't Airbus develop these systems like Boeing? Cost (all easily researched on the net). Therefore Boeing spent money to redesign their Aircraft this way, Why? Because they know its a problem.

Getting back to where OPs are for sure, they make up 3% of the engine oil used in Jet Aircraft. The warning is right there on the can.

The Aircraft I flew was a large four engined type, it smelled of oil on most flights, produced smoke fairly often. It even has a QRH procedure for dispatch with a bleed supply known to be contaminated. We would start with 20 quarts in each of the four engines, complete flights up to 17 hours in length and typically have as low as 14 quarts remaining.

Lastly, what came first was my illness. I carefully checked and excluded other possible sources of this, specifically;

I bought a Hygrometer, left it out for a whole flight and recorded the minimum reading. This was 11%, coincidentally the same as in my house on a dry day. I assumed this might be the source of my constant colds/chest infections, burning eyes, burning nose and chemical burns on my lips after a flight. It was not.

I assumed the in flight food may have been causing my near permanent bad stomach, I eventually packed my own food for the entire flight including tea bags, cup, spoon etc, I even used bottled water for tea and boiled this in the Aircraft microwave. None of this had any effect.

I wondered if the high in flight pressure altitude was giving me the terrible headaches? This was confirmed as a negative by taking a holiday with accommodation at 10,000 feet for eight days, no headaches here.

This only leaves cosmic radiation and Aerotoxic Syndrome.

I would like to remind all reading this that I had a top class job, the Aircraft I flew was absolutely stunning to fly, the routes were superb, I had a very large salary, I was a Training Captain at the top of my game, I have two young kids that I need my salary to support, I have been obsessed with flying since childhood, I am addicted to travel and so on...

If I could go to the Airport and fly this Aircraft now I would, it was the most exciting thing I have ever done.
NOMANSNEMESIS is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2015, 21:14
  #142 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 212
No need to say anything else.

After the last post above, we must say nothing more, nobody can deny the problem anymore.

My post #nr 5, page 1, on this topic, now, after the last post, is critically re-confirmed as a very valid and true post.


I knew I was not exaggerating. It is just awful reality: profit before health & safety.
ILS27LEFT is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2015, 21:46
  #143 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,364
nobody can deny the problem anymore.
Well "we" can certainly ask about the scale of the problem.

Me? 40 years plus flying, 20,000ish hours with all bar 100 hours on jets...of my peer group of 15 who went through military training over the years we've lost two, yep, two due to medical conditions - heart attacks..one on a cross country run..one jumping into his swimming pool. In my next peer group through into the airline ( 50+ of those, joining 25 year ago ) we've lost none, nil, ziltch, due to neurological illness. To be fair none of us flew the RJ but many did fly the 757/767 . In addition like many of that group I have got about 10,000 hours on another RB-211 type, albeit longhaul so not exposed to too many start cycles....so after a flying career of 40 years and knowing hundreds of pilots both military and civilian I personally know not one person who claims to have suffered from"aerotoxic syndrome"....so sceptical..you bet your ***", but not of a closed mind.

So lets ditch the anecdotes, including mine, run trials properly with all the controls, without interference from the airlines, aircraft makers, filter makers and lawyers, don't expect the trials to prove your own POV and then, and only then, we can continue the debate.....

Last edited by wiggy; 3rd Mar 2015 at 22:10.
wiggy is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2015, 23:22
  #144 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 52
Posts: 809
profit before health & safety
No its not about profit before health and safety. There is no such thing as absolute health and safety. Its all done to a probability, legislation and affordability, this is the same in every industry.
rh200 is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2015, 23:58
  #145 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 52N 20E
Posts: 713
The Jumbelino was lovely to fly but over the 8 years I flew it there were serious Air Con problems. Not only for myself but other whole crews who would end up in hospital for checks after fume events, which were all to common on this aircraft.
Smokie is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2015, 00:46
  #146 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,393
OK, here is a little study that could be done relatively cheap that should bound the problem:


There are literally hundreds of thousands of people who fly commercial aircraft for a living - mainly cabin crew and pilots. Pick a large data set - say the entire USA or the EU. Or if that's too big, do it for several large carriers. Do the demographics for all those who fly commercially for a living - break it down into age groups, say younger then 35, 35-50, 51-65, and over 65. Do the percentage of deaths by cause - with a little more effort include survivors of serious illness such as cancer and neurological issues. Then compare those numbers with the general population and see if the differences are statistically significant.
Because what we currently have barely qualifies as antidotal. Quite frankly some of it reminds me of a friend who smoked like a chimney for over 40 years, but when he came down with lung cancer immediately claimed it was due to asbestos exposure from his six months in a shipyard 4 decades earlier
tdracer is online now  
Old 4th Mar 2015, 01:09
  #147 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chicago USA
Posts: 27
After reading all of this, and while I believe yes we are exposed, instead of speculating about all of this, please go get tested. Then you know for sure and then you will really need to make a decision about this and what you are going to do about it.
ChicagoHeights is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2015, 05:43
  #148 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: london
Posts: 18
On BBC Radio Berkshire, lots of discussion here:

BBC Radio Berkshire - Andrew Peach, 03/03/2015
Pacific Blue is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2015, 13:48
  #149 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
NOMANSNEMESIS, your description of your actions sounds quite complete and thorough. I apologize for casting aspersions on your thoroughness. I sincerely hope your problem is properly diagnosed and resolved.

Separately, you made a good point about radiation exposure. I have no idea and wonder if some people are exceptionally sensitive to radiation exposure as it appears some people are exceptionally sensitive to some organophosphates.

Nevertheless I would recommend having the air in your home and/or car tested. I had a friend who had similar chronic problems, and it turned out after years of suffering and a lot of expense that the hot water heater in his home was defective. His wife and children were unaffected, but apprarently they were not as sensitive as he was.
KenV is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2015, 16:17
  #150 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: "this is where the magic happens"
Posts: 260
@tdracer

Because what we currently have barely qualifies as antidotal. Quite frankly some of it reminds me of a friend who smoked like a chimney for over 40 years, but when he came down with lung cancer immediately claimed it was due to asbestos exposure from his six months in a shipyard 4 decades earlier
So basically the 40 years of smoking could be compared to 40 years of working as a pilot? Or are you suggesting that 'it's obvious that cabin air is bad for a person?'

I'm nor sure if a single fume event could have extreme effects on a human body, but I can well image that crews who are exposed to even small doses of toxic air for thousands of flight hours and years and years in a row can develop physiological, neurological and psychological symptoms. Why do those symptoms develop in one person and why not in somebody else? Well, I have hay fever and start sneezing uncontrollably when cutting my lawn, but other can cut grass and have no problems. Why me? Some people can drink 4-5 beers and have few symptoms of impairment, while others drink 1 beer and feel totally wasted. Why do some people smoke die at 85, and others die at 65?

It's quite amazing that in today's world of asbestos, 'Black Lung,' 'CSE/Painter's Disease,' second hand smoke, car particle filters and 'Clean Air Acts," any possible long term effects of air crew to the exposure of small but toxic oil vapors is simply being dismissed as 'old wife tales' and people wanting to 'get rich quick' to claim a disability insurance.

The reluctance of any real industry wide study suggests to me that there are many skeletons hiding in this closet...
Bokkenrijder is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2015, 17:16
  #151 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: space
Posts: 20
"
Between 1950 and 1992, BA monitored 6,209 pilots and 1,153 flight engineers comprising 143,500 person years of observation. The results were encouraging and revealed that life expectancy for long haul crew was four to five years better than that of the average recorded in members of the public - with short haul crew having an increased life expectancy of two to three years ."

If the results had been reversed i would have been one of your most vocal suporters .IMO it's a personal problem , if you are one of those unlucky sensitive ones then treat it like a bad case of bad luck or just another flight terminating disease , don't ask the world to change all the planes for YOU .
Ahernar is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2015, 17:46
  #152 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: "this is where the magic happens"
Posts: 260
@Ahernar

...treat it like a bad case of bad luck or just another flight terminating disease , don't ask the world to change all the planes for YOU
Interesting post and I wonder why you even created an account and replied anyways? You seem like the kind of person who doesn't care much about anything, so why would you care if some people have their doubts about the quality of bleed/cabin air? Are you a management pilot? Are you a pilot at all? Read my post, I never asked 'the world to change all the planes for me,' and I never said that I'm suffering from the symptoms.

Sorry for you (and your corporate sponsors...) but this problem won't 'just go away' just because it's more convenient for YOU to ignore it. Why not start ignoring it by not posting in this thread? It's all nonsense anyways, isn't it? Good, then there's nothing to be afraid off because all scientific data will not support any Aerotoxic Syndrome and all the judges and juries will quickly agree with that!

Newsflash: it's not 1992 anymore, testing methods are much more advanced, people are more connected and will find out stuff much more easily, and people are no longer the gullible sheep that they were 20-25 years ago.
Bokkenrijder is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2015, 18:18
  #153 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: In the bar
Posts: 2
Aerotoxic

Can I just point out that the German government have recently added this condition to their official list of recognized industrial illnesses.
explorer61 is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2015, 18:28
  #154 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
NOMANSNEMESIS, just a quick follow up from my previous post.

From what you wrote I got the impression (rightly or wrongly) that you are experiencing your symptoms only during/after a flight. If we assume that the problem is one of inhaling organophosphates rather than dermal contact with organophosphates, then a simple solution might already be available. Don the crew oxygen mask and set it to 100%. If this would be too cumbersome to do on every flight, maybe you could do it on a single flight. If there are no symptoms on that flight then you could explore various options. Perhaps not wear the mask during takeoff and landing and only wear it during cruise. Or obtain some kind of filtered mask. I'm assuming the mask has a built in microphone for comms.
KenV is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2015, 21:41
  #155 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,899
That "solution" hinges, Ken, on your belief that the harm done by OP poisoning is cured by breathing clean air (or bottled O2) for a few hours. If only!
ShotOne is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2015, 04:07
  #156 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: space
Posts: 20
@Bokkenrijder

Yeah , i will stop posting here , im just an IT guy with a mild interest in aviation ,arrived here looking for more info after the Trans Asia crash because i was bewildered how could they do that error . Now i know .

Good luck to everyone .
Ahernar is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2015, 08:14
  #157 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 732
Shot one, exactly. Which in turn suggests the naysayers on here view aerotoxic syndrome as analogous to CO or CO2 poisoning, that is temporary and easily reversible with no long term damage. Organophosphate poisoning results in permanent damage, is irreversible and is usually progressive in the deterioration of one's health, the victim not necessarily being ill at the time of the event. It is that last point that makes it so insidious and is why the industry gets to play innocent.
Aluminium shuffler is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2015, 11:06
  #158 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: "this is where the magic happens"
Posts: 260
Can I just point out that the German government have recently added this condition to their official list of recognized industrial illnesses.
Yes, "zee Germans" appear to be a lot more proactive with this matter and it seems they take the health of passengers and crews a lot more serious. In the long run this is IMHO the smart thing to do, instead of desperately trying to brush everything under the carpet in order to maximize short term profitability and management bonuses.

In the end the truth always comes out, and if it's not now then perhaps in 5-10 years from now. Testing methods will continue to be improved, the public and crews will continue to ask inconvenient questions and testing will continue to become cheaper and cheaper.

Here's an excellent documentary from the AerotoxicSyndrome channel on Youtube, unfortunately it's in German; part I and part II. (English subtitles are available though)

p.s. the excuse that massive law suits would cripple the industry are IMHO nonsense because all airlines (*) and aircraft/engine manufacturers will be effected equally. Of course all airlines will be effected, but it will be the ones that are best prepared that will actually profit from this. Therefore it's again very smart what the Germans are doing, because sometimes the best defense is an offensive with the truth. The only reason why the industry is so reluctant to investigate is for the very same reason that has been hollowing our our T&C's: short term gains and bonuses for airline managements, and a laziness and stinginess to develop alternatives and filters on the manufacturers' side.

(*) except Boeing 787.
Bokkenrijder is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2015, 11:59
  #159 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 732
The longer it is left, the greater the resultant litigation will be, especially since it will be argued it was a known problem, which will bring it from a civil case to a criminal one.
Aluminium shuffler is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2015, 14:31
  #160 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: "this is where the magic happens"
Posts: 260
The longer it is left, the greater the resultant litigation will be, especially since it will be argued it was a known problem, which will bring it from a civil case to a criminal one.
Absolutely right but unfortunately most politicians think no further than their next election, and most managers only think as far as their next bonus.
Bokkenrijder is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.