Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Toxic Cabin Air/Aerotoxic Syndrome

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Toxic Cabin Air/Aerotoxic Syndrome

Old 23rd Aug 2017, 20:14
  #281 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Latest on toxic cabin air from BALPA - August 2017

Latest on toxic cabin air from BALPA August 2017:

A new path in NHS care for pilots affected by fume events | BALPA

From BALPA April 2005:

Proceedings of the BALPA Air Safety and Cabin Air Quality International Aero Industry Conference. Held at Imperial College, London (2005) - Aerotoxic Association

Toxic cabin air is either:

A risk or

Not a risk...



Guardian article from 19th August 2017: https://www.theguardian.com/science/...ent-flyers-ill
Dream Buster is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2017, 20:16
  #282 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sunnydale
Posts: 252
Received 85 Likes on 40 Posts
Knowledge does move on in 12 years
back to Boeing is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2017, 07:40
  #283 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: .
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There is a crisis in science, particularly the lack of reproducibility.
I think that's a bit too extreme, some parts of science are suffering from a reproducibility crisis but it's by no means all-pervasive and - in most cases - is a problem in the 'soft' science subjects.
From BALPA April 2005:...Aerotoxic Association
That sounds like an unbiased and reuptable source.
I really wish you could start quoting reputable, evidence based sources rather than sources whose reports are based on anecdotes. It'd do your credibility the world of good.
Nemrytter is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2017, 14:22
  #284 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
I rather think that's missing the point.

The aim is to stop oil residues contaminating the cabin air at all, not to substitute a more benign regime that emulates a flying chip shop.

Bare in mind, its not just exposure to cabin air, its also through skin contacts for ground engineers. I have worked in aviation since 1970, mostly mucking about with turbines. Made a lot of contact with MobilJetII, Shell Aero500 and Exxon 2380. Eventually health and safety got on the scene and I started to wear protection, gloves and barrier creams. Guess what? retired now I suffer from a neurological disease affecting my feet, legs and awful headaches. Although diagnosed they wont make the connections to my aviation background.
oilyturbineguy is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2017, 18:45
  #285 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
David Learmount's latest analysis of bleed air...

https://davidlearmount.com/

Don't shoot the messenger.
Dream Buster is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2017, 17:46
  #286 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: north
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by lomapaseo
This observation is common throughout the many pages of this thread.

Also equally common in everybody's lives

Association does not equal causation.

We await hard statistical validated scientific data to discuss this kind of subjective observation further.


I appreciate correlation isn't causation - I have a degree in physiology and over 10 years experience in pharma before I became a pilot nearly 10 years ago, so understand clinical evidence.

I maintain a log of the events . I am just looking for others experience of such and the idea we draw in the exhaust gases from start up, with associated oil leakage from further down the engine, into the bleed air system as we turn on the packs .

A less glib response would be more appropriate.

Last edited by its easy; 14th Sep 2017 at 17:59.
its easy is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2017, 18:10
  #287 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In your log do you include the time spent taxiing behind other aircraft and ingesting their exhaust?
Or even when doing external checks when aircraft are held on the ramp?
Ian W is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2017, 16:23
  #288 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Under a recently defunct flight path.
Age: 77
Posts: 1,373
Received 21 Likes on 13 Posts
Surprised no one has mentioned EasyJet's move regarding toxic cabin air.

EasyJet to filter toxic air in cabins

Snip from the article:-
EasyJet is to fit filters to stop toxic fumes entering its passenger cabins and cockpits in a move seen as the industry’s first acknowledgment of “aerotoxic syndrome”.

The condition, long denied by airlines, is feared to be responsible for several deaths of pilots and crew and hundreds of incidents where pilots have fallen ill, sometimes at the controls. Frequent flyers and young children could also be affected, it is claimed.

EasyJet told The Sunday Times that “health concerns” had led it to work with a commercial supplier, Pall Aerospace, to “develop and design a new cabin air filtration system” for testing on the company’s aircraft next year.
Lyneham Lad is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2017, 16:32
  #289 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Esher, Surrey
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Pall are the obvious company for the job.
They produced aircraft cabin filters for dealing with tobacco smoke decades ago.
With their vast experience of making all sorts of aircraft and medical filters it is an easy choice
beamender99 is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2017, 17:35
  #290 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: L.A.
Age: 56
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Better now.

I have no idea if toxic air is real. But after 30 years of niggling medical problems (stomach and headache) they all mysteriously disappeared after I stopped flying for a number of years. But how am I to prove a correlation?
silverstrata is offline  
Old 19th Sep 2017, 07:33
  #291 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Many posts hinge on the proof of causal link. All this really demonstrates is that proving a causal link to legal standard for anything is hard. There was a similar rearguard action over agricultural organophosphates in 70's and early 80's relating to near-identical medical issues. Whatever the debate on causality we KNOW aero-engine oil contains OP's. Pushback is where I often experience oily smells. Would it not make sense to delay switching on packs until moving forwards?
ShotOne is offline  
Old 19th Sep 2017, 10:07
  #292 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,548
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Would it not make sense to delay switching on packs until moving forwards?
I'm not sure I understand the logic of that..stationary or not you are still going to end up breathing air that has come from the Engine Bleed system.

Last edited by wiggy; 19th Sep 2017 at 10:19.
wiggy is offline  
Old 19th Sep 2017, 10:33
  #293 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The issue is that even with a perfectly designed and maintained bleed system you'll get a (un)healthy whiff of start-up smoke if the packs are on during/immediately after start-up
ShotOne is offline  
Old 19th Sep 2017, 11:38
  #294 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,548
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Ok..FWIW on the the types I'm most familiar with the packs aren't running during the start process, they are off before start and go on after all engines are running.
wiggy is offline  
Old 19th Sep 2017, 13:05
  #295 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes, wiggy; which is often while the aircraft is still pushing backwards
ShotOne is offline  
Old 20th Sep 2017, 06:02
  #296 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,548
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Given packs are off for engine start I'm still not sure what the aircraft's movement has to do with it...what would you suggest at airports where the tug does a push and then a pull, and engines are started when you are moving forward or have already moved forward to a release point?

Are you simply saying leave the packs off for a specified time after engines are running, presumably in the hope of burning off any oil, residue or similar that gets into the engine bleed system during engine start?

Last edited by wiggy; 20th Sep 2017 at 06:12.
wiggy is offline  
Old 20th Sep 2017, 08:57
  #297 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 335
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I think that the primary cause of aerotoxic syndrome is not to do with fumes from outside, but burnt oil that gets into the air conditioning giving the "sweaty sock" smell familiar to many who have operated the types notorious for it.
Having flown such a type for over twenty years and experienced the smell briefly on very many occasions and had "fume events" a few times I now have many of the symptoms described in aerotoxic syndrome.
The symptoms are often the same as those experienced by farming organophosphate exposure, which is unsurprising as the oils contain the same chemicals.
The problem is that all this is very difficult to scientifically prove, though I do remember some measurements being taken many years ago in affected aircraft which must have proved the presence of fumes but which nothing was ever heard of.
snooky is offline  
Old 20th Sep 2017, 09:41
  #298 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: .
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
though I do remember some measurements being taken many years ago in affected aircraft which must have proved the presence of fumes but which nothing was ever heard of.
There have been numerous studies, none of which (to my knowledge) have seen any meaningful quantities of toxic substances in the cabin air, even during what crews described as fume events.
This report is interesting, for example. The downside is the lack of any control study, which makes the results interesting, but not particularly robust. The conclusion is particularly interesting:
Therefore, with respect to the conditions of flight that were experienced during this study, there was no evidence for target pollutants occurring in the cabin air at levels exceeding available health and safety standards and guidelines.
A much more widespread investigation (including controls, airport samples, and home samples) is needed in order to draw meaningful conclusions, though.
Nemrytter is offline  
Old 20th Sep 2017, 09:55
  #299 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: malta
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In 2014 a Dutch research team also looked at TC(o)P at flight and during fume events.

The link is in Dutch, but the conclusion was both they did not find any significant concentration of TC(o)P, but could not conclude the symptoms were not a result of the few particles that were found.
the_stranger is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2017, 07:14
  #300 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
On the 737, the smell/fumes happen mostly during the first start of the day.
I wonder if it is because of some oil or other contaminants collecting somewhere inside the engine during night stop? They get burned off during start —> smell/fumes?
I find that switching the packs off before start, and keeping them off for a few minutes after engine start, will pretty much eliminate this problem.
ManaAdaSystem is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.