Danger in the skies
Stercus Accidit
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Swimming with bowlegged women
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Danger in the skies
Toxic cockpit fumes that bring danger to the skies
Dozens of pilots have flown while dizzy, nauseous and suffering double vision on crowded passenger flights. The cause is contaminated air and it can strike without warning - but the cases have been kept from the public. Antony Barnett reports
Sunday February 26, 2006
The Observer
Three weeks ago the pilot of a FlyBe flight from Belfast international airport to Gatwick was preparing his passenger jet for take-off . He had just received clearance from air traffic control and released the aircraft's brakes, pushing forward on the power levers in the cockpit to open the throttle.
As the plane began to accelerate down the runway at more than 100mph, he began to smell a strange odour described as similar to a 'central heating boiler'. His throat became very dry and his eyes began to burn. Such was his discomfort that he was forced to hand control of the plane to his co-pilot. His fingers were tingling and his shirt soaked in sweat. He was confused, talking incoherently and unable to answer questions from his co-pilot. He could not accurately do safety checks. An emergency was declared and the flight returned to Belfast.
In December, a pilot flying a passenger aircraft for another airline experienced something eerily similar when he brought his aircraft in to land. The captain had complained of a strange smell on the flight deck before his first officer pointed out that he was making 'operational errors', including missing calls from air traffic control and misjudging the aircraft's altitude and speed on descent. Over the next two days the captain was unable to fly, suffering severe headaches and fatigue. Two months earlier on a flight to Gatwick, a pilot handling the take-off had pains in his chest and complained of breathing difficulties. His heart was beating unusually fast. The captain quickly realised his co-pilot was in trouble and took the controls. But at an altitude of 850ft and within 10 seconds he began to feel similar symptoms himself. Both pilots had to don oxygen masks.
More
Dozens of pilots have flown while dizzy, nauseous and suffering double vision on crowded passenger flights. The cause is contaminated air and it can strike without warning - but the cases have been kept from the public. Antony Barnett reports
Sunday February 26, 2006
The Observer
Three weeks ago the pilot of a FlyBe flight from Belfast international airport to Gatwick was preparing his passenger jet for take-off . He had just received clearance from air traffic control and released the aircraft's brakes, pushing forward on the power levers in the cockpit to open the throttle.
As the plane began to accelerate down the runway at more than 100mph, he began to smell a strange odour described as similar to a 'central heating boiler'. His throat became very dry and his eyes began to burn. Such was his discomfort that he was forced to hand control of the plane to his co-pilot. His fingers were tingling and his shirt soaked in sweat. He was confused, talking incoherently and unable to answer questions from his co-pilot. He could not accurately do safety checks. An emergency was declared and the flight returned to Belfast.
In December, a pilot flying a passenger aircraft for another airline experienced something eerily similar when he brought his aircraft in to land. The captain had complained of a strange smell on the flight deck before his first officer pointed out that he was making 'operational errors', including missing calls from air traffic control and misjudging the aircraft's altitude and speed on descent. Over the next two days the captain was unable to fly, suffering severe headaches and fatigue. Two months earlier on a flight to Gatwick, a pilot handling the take-off had pains in his chest and complained of breathing difficulties. His heart was beating unusually fast. The captain quickly realised his co-pilot was in trouble and took the controls. But at an altitude of 850ft and within 10 seconds he began to feel similar symptoms himself. Both pilots had to don oxygen masks.
More
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilots at risk from toxic gas
Numerous stories in the media today about the ongoing contaminated air scandal. The Aviation Minister Ms Karen Buck has now resigned.
Typical media story:
Pilots at risk from toxic gas
Sunday, 26th February 2006, 12:01
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LIFE STYLE EXTRA (UK) - Pilots have called for an inquiry over dramatic new evidence of gas fumes poisoning British cockpits.
In the past three years, there have been over 100 cases of fumes inside British aircraft, according to records of airline regulator the Civil Aviation Authority and confidential testimony from pilots.
In more than 40 of the incidents, it appears pilots who inhaled the gases were partially impaired while flying.
Many reported feeling sick and dizzy and needed oxygen masks. Some have admitted they made mistakes while taking off or landing.
In many cases, the fumes are caused by burning engine oil leaking into the ventilation system. The two planes worst affected are the BAE146 and Boeing 757, which are used by a string of international and regional airlines.
A University College London report has also suggested that up to 197,000 passengers are being exposed to contaminated air each year.
Now the British Airline Pilots Association is warning the Government that it is unacceptable that the safety of its members, cabin crew and passengers is being jeopardised.
Jim McAuslan, BALPA's general secretary, said today: "It's quite clear we have to get to the bottom of this urgently.
"All pilots need to get together and realise we have an emergency situation. The safety of pilots, cabin crew and passengers should be of paramount importance.
"What will happen otherwise is that people will become ill and a few pilots and cabin crew will have to retire early.
"The industry has largely ignored this but as these figures show, it is a real problem.
"This is something the government and airline regulator must start taking seriously. We urge all parties to work out a solution."
Copyright © 2006 National News +44(0)207 684 3000
Typical media story:
Pilots at risk from toxic gas
Sunday, 26th February 2006, 12:01
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LIFE STYLE EXTRA (UK) - Pilots have called for an inquiry over dramatic new evidence of gas fumes poisoning British cockpits.
In the past three years, there have been over 100 cases of fumes inside British aircraft, according to records of airline regulator the Civil Aviation Authority and confidential testimony from pilots.
In more than 40 of the incidents, it appears pilots who inhaled the gases were partially impaired while flying.
Many reported feeling sick and dizzy and needed oxygen masks. Some have admitted they made mistakes while taking off or landing.
In many cases, the fumes are caused by burning engine oil leaking into the ventilation system. The two planes worst affected are the BAE146 and Boeing 757, which are used by a string of international and regional airlines.
A University College London report has also suggested that up to 197,000 passengers are being exposed to contaminated air each year.
Now the British Airline Pilots Association is warning the Government that it is unacceptable that the safety of its members, cabin crew and passengers is being jeopardised.
Jim McAuslan, BALPA's general secretary, said today: "It's quite clear we have to get to the bottom of this urgently.
"All pilots need to get together and realise we have an emergency situation. The safety of pilots, cabin crew and passengers should be of paramount importance.
"What will happen otherwise is that people will become ill and a few pilots and cabin crew will have to retire early.
"The industry has largely ignored this but as these figures show, it is a real problem.
"This is something the government and airline regulator must start taking seriously. We urge all parties to work out a solution."
Copyright © 2006 National News +44(0)207 684 3000
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Bendigo, Victoria
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AVIATION MINISTER RESIGNS
Rather than be faced with numerous questions in the house on why the UK Government continues to cover up for BAe and the ongoing BAe 146 scandal, the Aviation Minister has resigned.
Fab!
Whose next for the gas chamber ?
Fab!
Whose next for the gas chamber ?
I don't think her resignation has anything to do with this. Check out this story...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...058885,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...058885,00.html
Another vacancy will be created this week when Karen Buck, a junior transport minister, is expected to quit her job. She said yesterday that she found her portfolio unsuited to her interests and wanted to work on the London Child Poverty Commission. She insisted that her resignation did not indicate any disillusionment with the government.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Henley
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SHE WAS PUSHED
You guys need to stop being so naive. Do you really expect her to admit she was pushed ?
Political lies are frequently couched in the form of a denial - remember Bill Clinton's famous denial, 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.' When a politician denies that he is going to introduce a new measure, like raising taxes, you can usually take this as a sign that the measure is about to be introduced. As Otto von Bismarck said, 'Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.' Liars are more likely to use negative statements. For example, during the Watergate scandal, President Nixon said, 'I am not a crook.' He didn't say, 'I am an honest man.'
Tony Blair's missing WMD in Iraq....... have you already forgotten ? :
You guys need to stop being so naive. Do you really expect her to admit she was pushed ?
Political lies are frequently couched in the form of a denial - remember Bill Clinton's famous denial, 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.' When a politician denies that he is going to introduce a new measure, like raising taxes, you can usually take this as a sign that the measure is about to be introduced. As Otto von Bismarck said, 'Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.' Liars are more likely to use negative statements. For example, during the Watergate scandal, President Nixon said, 'I am not a crook.' He didn't say, 'I am an honest man.'
Tony Blair's missing WMD in Iraq....... have you already forgotten ? :
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do recall that BAE146's were a bit stinky.
I hope an old DC8 driver can remind us all of the wonderful cabin superchargers located beneath the radome.
on the dc9 we always said, "change the socks" when the special air conditioning filters got wet.
oh well, I believe just about everything in that article, thanks for posting it!
jon
I hope an old DC8 driver can remind us all of the wonderful cabin superchargers located beneath the radome.
on the dc9 we always said, "change the socks" when the special air conditioning filters got wet.
oh well, I believe just about everything in that article, thanks for posting it!
jon
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sorry to do this, but this is utter and complete crap, and the result of a hugely misguided campaign by the pilots unions.
Three Pilots ( Yes, I mean that, THREE Pilots) have been directly responsible for filing 98% of these reports of fumes. All three work for UK airlines , two for a 757 operator, and one for a 146 operator. Now read that again .. 98% of all reports of oil fumes in aircraft cockpits have been made by THREE pilots)
This is the worst example of scaremongering that I have witnessed in my (long) career as a pilot, and the Pilots Unions involved should be ashamed of themselves for putting their name to this hoax. I have said as much to my Union Rep, in writing.
There is NOcredible , tangible or widespread evidence of oil fumes in the cockpits of aircraft.
There were two specific problems a long time ago. One involved overfilling of 757 engine oil by a certain big carrier based in heathrow ( since resolved) , and seals on BAE146 that have since been replaced.
JMC-man
Three Pilots ( Yes, I mean that, THREE Pilots) have been directly responsible for filing 98% of these reports of fumes. All three work for UK airlines , two for a 757 operator, and one for a 146 operator. Now read that again .. 98% of all reports of oil fumes in aircraft cockpits have been made by THREE pilots)
This is the worst example of scaremongering that I have witnessed in my (long) career as a pilot, and the Pilots Unions involved should be ashamed of themselves for putting their name to this hoax. I have said as much to my Union Rep, in writing.
There is NOcredible , tangible or widespread evidence of oil fumes in the cockpits of aircraft.
There were two specific problems a long time ago. One involved overfilling of 757 engine oil by a certain big carrier based in heathrow ( since resolved) , and seals on BAE146 that have since been replaced.
JMC-man
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Penzance, Penzance.
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jmc-man
I find your attitude absolutely unbeliveable! How on earth can only 3 (Three) Pilots be responsible for filling that many reports? If this is indeeed the case then the under reporting is MASSIVE on a criminal scale and should be investigated without further ado. Perhaps the media were correct to highlight the problem if the under reporting is as bad as you say it is.
"Three Pilots ( Yes, I mean that, THREE Pilots) have been directly responsible for filing 98% of these reports of fumes. All three work for UK airlines , two for a 757 operator, and one for a 146 operator. Now read that again .. 98% of all reports of oil fumes in aircraft cockpits have been made by THREE pilots)"
PROVE IT.
"There is NOcredible , tangible or widespread evidence of oil fumes in the cockpits of aircraft."
PROVE IT OR SHUT UP.
I find your attitude absolutely unbeliveable! How on earth can only 3 (Three) Pilots be responsible for filling that many reports? If this is indeeed the case then the under reporting is MASSIVE on a criminal scale and should be investigated without further ado. Perhaps the media were correct to highlight the problem if the under reporting is as bad as you say it is.
"Three Pilots ( Yes, I mean that, THREE Pilots) have been directly responsible for filing 98% of these reports of fumes. All three work for UK airlines , two for a 757 operator, and one for a 146 operator. Now read that again .. 98% of all reports of oil fumes in aircraft cockpits have been made by THREE pilots)"
PROVE IT.
"There is NOcredible , tangible or widespread evidence of oil fumes in the cockpits of aircraft."
PROVE IT OR SHUT UP.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portugal (sometimes)
Age: 52
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree 3 pilots responsible for 98% of the reports? My maths isn't what it used to be but it surely would mean that they would have made almost 100 complaints each then? Maybe i'm wrong but if there were 300 complaints and 294 of them were from 3 people then this would be 98% coming from the 3 people!
Is this really true? Does this airline only operate 3 a/c, all of which have 1 crew and all of which have some kind of CO problem which only affects the flight deck? Come on, just another case of mis-reported cr@p
Tex
Is this really true? Does this airline only operate 3 a/c, all of which have 1 crew and all of which have some kind of CO problem which only affects the flight deck? Come on, just another case of mis-reported cr@p
Tex
Life's too short for ironing
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Scotland, & Maryland, USA
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jmc-man
As a former, perfectly healthy, airline pilot who flew the 146 I have to beg to differ. I knew nothing of the air contamination problem until a good year after I left the airline and moved abroad. After reading something about it all on pprune, and recognising symptoms similar to those which caused me to go into hospital for tests prior to leaving for the US and their exhorbitantly expensive medical system, I contacted the folks in the UK doing the research and added my tu'penny worth to the reports. If my experience can help prevent anyone else from suffering in any way, so much the better.
From what I read, I was one of the lucky ones, suffering only temporarily (no symptoms now for about 4 years) and relatively mildly.
As I haven't worked for the airlines for nearly 5 years now, I don't think your statement that ""Three Pilots have been directly responsible for filing 98%" is very accurate.
Aside from this current kerfuffle, what I can't comprehend is the vehement denial by some people that there is anything wrong. If there is even a tiny chance of some kind of contamination which could have a direct and detrimental effecton the health, lives and careers of some crews, surely you'd want to see some action taken to remove that contamination? This research and the end result is unlikely to have a negative effect on the crews, (anything that improves the air quality in any working environment is an asset) therefore why get so aggressive about it, making accusations of hoaxes etc?
As a former, perfectly healthy, airline pilot who flew the 146 I have to beg to differ. I knew nothing of the air contamination problem until a good year after I left the airline and moved abroad. After reading something about it all on pprune, and recognising symptoms similar to those which caused me to go into hospital for tests prior to leaving for the US and their exhorbitantly expensive medical system, I contacted the folks in the UK doing the research and added my tu'penny worth to the reports. If my experience can help prevent anyone else from suffering in any way, so much the better.
From what I read, I was one of the lucky ones, suffering only temporarily (no symptoms now for about 4 years) and relatively mildly.
As I haven't worked for the airlines for nearly 5 years now, I don't think your statement that ""Three Pilots have been directly responsible for filing 98%" is very accurate.
Aside from this current kerfuffle, what I can't comprehend is the vehement denial by some people that there is anything wrong. If there is even a tiny chance of some kind of contamination which could have a direct and detrimental effecton the health, lives and careers of some crews, surely you'd want to see some action taken to remove that contamination? This research and the end result is unlikely to have a negative effect on the crews, (anything that improves the air quality in any working environment is an asset) therefore why get so aggressive about it, making accusations of hoaxes etc?
Psychophysiological entity
If it were always the case that only one pilot suffered these symptoms, I would be deeply concerned.
The sensations of smell, followed by the other debilitating feelings, can be symptomatic of another quite serious malaise. It is the times that there is only one pilot thus affected that worries me.
There needs to be a clear cut assessment of the incidents defining when both pilots have symptoms v one pilot.
Having said this, some people react to smoke etc by shallow breathing. The result during a period of increased heart-rate, i.e. take off phase, will of course be accentuated.
Going onto oxygen is the obvious course of action even if the problem is slight.
The sensations of smell, followed by the other debilitating feelings, can be symptomatic of another quite serious malaise. It is the times that there is only one pilot thus affected that worries me.
There needs to be a clear cut assessment of the incidents defining when both pilots have symptoms v one pilot.
Having said this, some people react to smoke etc by shallow breathing. The result during a period of increased heart-rate, i.e. take off phase, will of course be accentuated.
Going onto oxygen is the obvious course of action even if the problem is slight.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Torycanyon
jmc-man
"There is NOcredible , tangible or widespread evidence of oil fumes in the cockpits of aircraft."
PROVE IT OR SHUT UP.
"There is NOcredible , tangible or widespread evidence of oil fumes in the cockpits of aircraft."
PROVE IT OR SHUT UP.
As Sartre examines, proving definitive lack of something can be tricky, no?
Last edited by MrFire; 2nd Mar 2006 at 04:00. Reason: *sarcasm*
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally know 2 chaps who were severly affected by fumes from the 146. One of whom was hospitalised and the took nearly 2 years to recover.
These are just the worst cases I know about, but certainly not the only ones.
JMC-MAN,
Since I sent in a report, am I one of the 98%? Doubt it. So show us your figures or press the rewind button on your neck.
These are just the worst cases I know about, but certainly not the only ones.
JMC-MAN,
Since I sent in a report, am I one of the 98%? Doubt it. So show us your figures or press the rewind button on your neck.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To add to the 'confusion' in 'JMC-man's' mind, I and another BA Captain at LGW reported a 737 a few years back - so we've found the three.
I recall that was a faulty oil seal too, and only evident at take-off power.
I recall that was a faulty oil seal too, and only evident at take-off power.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: South East UK
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You guys need to stop being so naive. Do you really expect her to admit she was pushed ?
While a degree of scepticism is healthy, I think there's few people more naive than those who insist on trotting out sweeping generalisations about politicians - or any group - and cite them as 'evidence' in order to attack an individual about whom they know nothing.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will this Observer article be the one that finally opens the can of worms that has been waiting to be opened for the past few years?
As a recently prematurely retired ex airline Captain from 15 years on the 146 I can categorically state that flying them continuously can "Seriously damage your health".
I know this because I haven't been anywhere near a 146 for over 6 months and one just feels so much better for it. It may also have something to do with not having the rediculous pressures of low cost flying to balance, but that's another story.
Perhaps this time the CAA and the Lords may start to listen and then act a bit more responsibly. I just know that where there's smoke, there's often fire (if you will excuse the pun) and ignoring it or hoping it will go away does not normally work.
What happened to 'fail safe' and 'benefit of the doubt' and all those other sound aviation principles that we normally take for granted?
It may be worth everybody who has been effected giving the Observer a ring to confirm the extent of the problem and the obvious 'under reporting' that has occured.
There is definitely a problem. Unfortunately, for everybody.
As a recently prematurely retired ex airline Captain from 15 years on the 146 I can categorically state that flying them continuously can "Seriously damage your health".
I know this because I haven't been anywhere near a 146 for over 6 months and one just feels so much better for it. It may also have something to do with not having the rediculous pressures of low cost flying to balance, but that's another story.
Perhaps this time the CAA and the Lords may start to listen and then act a bit more responsibly. I just know that where there's smoke, there's often fire (if you will excuse the pun) and ignoring it or hoping it will go away does not normally work.
What happened to 'fail safe' and 'benefit of the doubt' and all those other sound aviation principles that we normally take for granted?
It may be worth everybody who has been effected giving the Observer a ring to confirm the extent of the problem and the obvious 'under reporting' that has occured.
There is definitely a problem. Unfortunately, for everybody.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: South East UK
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How on earth can only 3 (Three) Pilots be responsible for filling that many reports? If this is indeeed the case then the under reporting is MASSIVE on a criminal scale
Or it's over-reporting on a criminal scale
Why has this 146 stuff suddenly emerged now? It's not a new story, I remember Private Eye doing it a couple of years ago.