British Airways 747 diverts to Las Vegas - fumes in flight deck
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the straight story, go to the Daily Mail
This well-researched and scientifically literate article from the Daily Mail might shed a little light on the origins and effects of fumes encountered onboard aircraft.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: England
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dream Buster
http://www.aerotoxic.org/download/do...don%202006.pdf
Here is a University College London paper from 2006 estimating that:
(Top of page 523.)
Quote:
".......recorded a total of 72 flights experiencing
contaminated air. Given the low reporting rate of
3.66%, this could indicate that up to 1,967 flights in
the UK may have experienced contaminated air
events during 2004. If a modest passenger number
of 100 per flight is assumed, over 196,000
passengers could potentially present to general
physicians with symptoms of acute toxicity."
~ 500 a day.
The numbers game is impossible with no toxic air detection systems - remember, that's how the airlines want it....
And the doctors can't work out why their anti-depressants aren't working.
Here is a University College London paper from 2006 estimating that:
(Top of page 523.)
Quote:
".......recorded a total of 72 flights experiencing
contaminated air. Given the low reporting rate of
3.66%, this could indicate that up to 1,967 flights in
the UK may have experienced contaminated air
events during 2004. If a modest passenger number
of 100 per flight is assumed, over 196,000
passengers could potentially present to general
physicians with symptoms of acute toxicity."
~ 500 a day.
The numbers game is impossible with no toxic air detection systems - remember, that's how the airlines want it....
And the doctors can't work out why their anti-depressants aren't working.
As for filters, are there any on the market that could filter out these harmful fumes. I doubt it. We have high quality HEPA filters on all of our aircraft but they don't filter out smells.
Is there really a conspiracy? Have hundreds of airline employees been systematically hiding evidence of physical damage to their flight crews or is it a small number of individuals that are unfortunately very sensitive to these events?
It's an interesting subject and one I'd particularly like to see put to bed properly one way or another.
Unfortunately sloppy research like that quoted above does nothing to further this subject. Extrapolation like that is pure fantasy. I'm sure if there were 500 people a day reporting to GPs with acute symptoms it would become obvious to everyone what the cause was. Or are you suggesting all patients with depression have been poisoned on board an aircraft?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
30% and 3% vulnerable
Fargoo,
It is reckoned that about 30% of the population are vulnerable and 3% are extremely vulnerable - a minority.
Sloppy research? UCL is a top notch UK University which has been studying this issue for 10 years but have not been helped and currently lack further funding - I wonder why?
Cranfield University, who are funded by the Aero$pace indu$try, were asked to measure a fume event in 2007 by The House of Lords.
By 2011 they had eventually identified all of the neurotoxins, but incredibly had not measured a single fume event....
Aircraft Cabin Air Quality: 10 May 2011: Hansard Written Answers and Statements - TheyWorkForYou
This was despite being advised exactly how to fill a BAe 146 with visible oil fumes, on the ground (for ease of testing) in 2007.
A 'fume event' and something I and others have witnessed many, many times.
Don't worry, there's only a little bit of poison in the cabin air today - Learmount
This is the report which the Governments and industry are now using to say 'it's all ok.'
Meantime 'expert' aviation doctors are not accepting Aerotoxic Syndrome, so what chance have GP's and passengers got in a 10 minute consultation?
How come breathing tobacco smoke is death, but oil smoke is safe?
How do they get away with it. I guess you've heard of the shenanigans with horsement?
Conspiracy? - When the history of the world is written - No question.
It is reckoned that about 30% of the population are vulnerable and 3% are extremely vulnerable - a minority.
Sloppy research? UCL is a top notch UK University which has been studying this issue for 10 years but have not been helped and currently lack further funding - I wonder why?
Cranfield University, who are funded by the Aero$pace indu$try, were asked to measure a fume event in 2007 by The House of Lords.
By 2011 they had eventually identified all of the neurotoxins, but incredibly had not measured a single fume event....
Aircraft Cabin Air Quality: 10 May 2011: Hansard Written Answers and Statements - TheyWorkForYou
This was despite being advised exactly how to fill a BAe 146 with visible oil fumes, on the ground (for ease of testing) in 2007.
A 'fume event' and something I and others have witnessed many, many times.
Don't worry, there's only a little bit of poison in the cabin air today - Learmount
This is the report which the Governments and industry are now using to say 'it's all ok.'
Meantime 'expert' aviation doctors are not accepting Aerotoxic Syndrome, so what chance have GP's and passengers got in a 10 minute consultation?
How come breathing tobacco smoke is death, but oil smoke is safe?
How do they get away with it. I guess you've heard of the shenanigans with horsement?
Conspiracy? - When the history of the world is written - No question.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: England
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the honest reply. I hope there isn't a giant conspiracy as you suspect.
What would you like to see done given that you don't trust the current aviation experts to investigate this properly?
What would you like to see done given that you don't trust the current aviation experts to investigate this properly?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fargoo,
A conspiracy is 'a secret plan or agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal or subversive act' - so here we have medical and legal 'professionals' preventing the following statement from being accepted - causing untold misery for many, but as it's a key industry - Governments are also conspiring:
"Exposure to oil fumes in a confined space can cause ill health"
This means that they have been blatantly ignoring:
The future is:
A conspiracy is 'a secret plan or agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal or subversive act' - so here we have medical and legal 'professionals' preventing the following statement from being accepted - causing untold misery for many, but as it's a key industry - Governments are also conspiring:
"Exposure to oil fumes in a confined space can cause ill health"
This means that they have been blatantly ignoring:
- Basic Health and Safety rules.
- Genuine testimonies from aircrew and passengers.
- Published accepted science.
- Previous High Court judgements.
The future is:
- Accepting the above, which would result in correct Diagnosis’s and treatments, saving both health and money.
- Adopting known solutions - B787, Toxic air detectors etc
- Free and open public debate - at present the mass media appear to be gagged from even mentioning the word AEROTOXIC. Yet everything else seems to be toxic....
- Educating aircrew and passengers that invisible oil fumes can do serious harm.
- Emerging scientific tests - which are already proving the cause of illness 'Beyond reasonable doubt'.
- Winning by natural competition - a brave airline which promotes 'clean air' and accepts responsibility for their staff and customers. Short term pain for long term gain.
- Forcing any dubious doctors, CEO's, scientists to be repeatedly exposed to visible oil fumes in a confined space on the ground - so that they can demonstrate to their shareholders their faith in their (mistaken) opinion - that oil fumes are somehow not dangerous, whilst other smoke is universally accepted as - deadly.
- Stop lawyers from Judging cases before they even get to Court - leave it to Judges and juries.
- The health and safety of our children.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fargoo,
yes, it is possible to catch and analyse oil fumes. I work for a company that makes precision optics. Hydrocarbons may be cracked by UV light and deposit on lens and mirror surfaces. We have been hunting for outgassing components for more than a decade. Typically, we let some of the purge air flow through a tube that is filled with a high surface area mineral. The, offline, the tube is heated with a slow ramp, and the substances that are released from the mineral filling are analysed with a gas chromatograph.
Lufthansa is participating in a study where they are installing monitors on some planes. This announcement (unfortunately in German but with google translation at the bottom) is from 2012, pertinent sections are F and I:
http://www.aerotoxic.org/download/do...hema%20TCP.pdf
I believe I read somewhere that they have installed the sensors by now but can't find the link right now.
It is intesting to see that the Lufthansa CP acknowledges known problems with RR power plants in the 346 (solved) and 380 (being addressed).
As for filtering, hepa filters have a hard time catching particles in the 100 to 300 nm range which would be the size of a larghish oil droplet but they do achieve this, depending on what filter class is used and how much loss of space and increase in flow resistance can be accepted.
yes, it is possible to catch and analyse oil fumes. I work for a company that makes precision optics. Hydrocarbons may be cracked by UV light and deposit on lens and mirror surfaces. We have been hunting for outgassing components for more than a decade. Typically, we let some of the purge air flow through a tube that is filled with a high surface area mineral. The, offline, the tube is heated with a slow ramp, and the substances that are released from the mineral filling are analysed with a gas chromatograph.
Lufthansa is participating in a study where they are installing monitors on some planes. This announcement (unfortunately in German but with google translation at the bottom) is from 2012, pertinent sections are F and I:
http://www.aerotoxic.org/download/do...hema%20TCP.pdf
I believe I read somewhere that they have installed the sensors by now but can't find the link right now.
It is intesting to see that the Lufthansa CP acknowledges known problems with RR power plants in the 346 (solved) and 380 (being addressed).
As for filtering, hepa filters have a hard time catching particles in the 100 to 300 nm range which would be the size of a larghish oil droplet but they do achieve this, depending on what filter class is used and how much loss of space and increase in flow resistance can be accepted.
Last edited by BRE; 22nd Feb 2013 at 07:49.
Read somewhere the 787 was to have electrically driven air compressors for cabin air, which, assuming the bearings were not lubricated with oil containing organo-phosphates, would solve the problem. Did this happen, or was it too hard?
As long as engines use organo-phosphate containing oils and cabin air is a bleed from the engine this problem will not go away.
As long as engines use organo-phosphate containing oils and cabin air is a bleed from the engine this problem will not go away.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B 787 The Best Kept Secret in Aviation?
SLF3,
Correct.
That's why:
It's still incredible to hear so called 'experts' say that the main reason for the change is for 'fuel economy etc'.
The absolute reason is to simply not poison the crews and customers; but they obviously can't EVER admit that.....
Correct.
That's why:
- Boeing changed back to compressed outside air (as on the B707) in around 1999 - ironically EXACTLY when Aerotoxic Syndrome was identified.
- Everyone wants to fly the 787 in the future.
- Boeing have record orders - 950?
It's still incredible to hear so called 'experts' say that the main reason for the change is for 'fuel economy etc'.
The absolute reason is to simply not poison the crews and customers; but they obviously can't EVER admit that.....
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA 747 diverts to Las Vegas
Seat 0A
"Better a thousand times careful than once dead" (Proverb)
Or better still, "Safety is cheap and effective insurance policy"(anonymous)
And as they say, "Better safe than sorry".
Does this makes sense?
"Better a thousand times careful than once dead" (Proverb)
Or better still, "Safety is cheap and effective insurance policy"(anonymous)
And as they say, "Better safe than sorry".
Does this makes sense?
