Incident: British Airways A320 near London on Oct 1st 2021, fumes in cockpit
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Islas Baleares
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a fantastic video from a Spirit Captain about their mitigation procedures for fume events. It's a few years old but was made in the aftermath of another Spirit Captain dying a month or so after an extreme fumes event.
Only half a speed-brake
From the other apex of the pendulum, let's make sure not to forget Swissair 111.
Even if the crew couldn't had saved that day, the 'thorough methodic professionalism' A.K.A. negligent leniency rightfully sent shockwaves through safety and training teams worldwide. Somehow UPS6 did not get the message.
Borrowing this one from #37 (in wider agreement but to underscore the point):
Not quite, measured and proficient should not be slow. Investigation report on G-VIIO explains.
The airspace DVR-KOK has the most professional ATC that ever existed in the whole universe known to man. Claiming that stopping a climb there complicates things is a stretch, the same applies for the cockpit work behind it.
Sure there's no need for a dramatic first word out, before the situation is understood. An adjustment to CLB clearance does not fall into the 'Aviate' / 'Safe flight path' category here, nor takes precedence over the troubleshooting items of the C/L. However, any (implied) suggestion that a continuous climb of 8 minutes during a smoke event is evidence of procedures being executed properly does not pass.
I have no opinion on the crew's actions. Was not there and might had done the same.
Even if the crew couldn't had saved that day, the 'thorough methodic professionalism' A.K.A. negligent leniency rightfully sent shockwaves through safety and training teams worldwide. Somehow UPS6 did not get the message.
Borrowing this one from #37 (in wider agreement but to underscore the point):
(one other day) the captain rushed into unnecessarily rapid action I can only agree with your analysis. Slow and calm deliberation is the only way to deal with an event like this.
The airspace DVR-KOK has the most professional ATC that ever existed in the whole universe known to man. Claiming that stopping a climb there complicates things is a stretch, the same applies for the cockpit work behind it.
Sure there's no need for a dramatic first word out, before the situation is understood. An adjustment to CLB clearance does not fall into the 'Aviate' / 'Safe flight path' category here, nor takes precedence over the troubleshooting items of the C/L. However, any (implied) suggestion that a continuous climb of 8 minutes during a smoke event is evidence of procedures being executed properly does not pass.
I have no opinion on the crew's actions. Was not there and might had done the same.
Last edited by FlightDetent; 16th Nov 2021 at 08:23.
Masks on early seems to be some good advice.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aviation herald “Accident: Allegiant A319 enroute on Dec 13th 2021, fumes injure fli
its time for cabin fumes sensors to be installed on A320s
aviation herald
“Accident: Allegiant A319 enroute on Dec 13th 2021, fumes injure flight attendant.
“An Allegiant Airbus A319-100, registration N318NV performing flight G4-33 from Las Vegas,NV to Bozeman,MT (USA), was enroute about 20 minutes into the flight, when a flight attendant noticed a strong, thick foul locker room smell near seat rows 7-12 and began to feel burning sensations in chest, eyes and nose. Other flight attendants confirmed smelling some odour, however, did not report to be affected. Headache, dizziness and shortness of breath followed. The flight attendant walked to the back of the cabin worrying she might faint, at the back of the cabin her fingers and arms cramped, she lost feel of her legs, and needed to be laid onto the floor, a collegue administered oxygen. Medical personnel on board was called out, three passengers came to provide first aid, however, because of the cramps had trouble to remove the clothing and connect a defibrillator with the medics suspecting she was tachycardiac. While the flight crew accelerated approach and landing to Bozeman, the passengers prepared for a landing with the flight attendant on the floor, with 3 of them holding her on the floor throughout the landing. The aircraft landed without further incident about 75 minutes after departure from Las Vegas, emergency services came on board, cut open the flight attendant's clothes, connected an automatic external defibrillator (AED), diagnosed acute supraventricular tachycardia, used a wheelchair to get the flight attendant off the aircraft, then put her onto a stretcher and took her to the hospital.“
aviation herald
“Accident: Allegiant A319 enroute on Dec 13th 2021, fumes injure flight attendant.
“An Allegiant Airbus A319-100, registration N318NV performing flight G4-33 from Las Vegas,NV to Bozeman,MT (USA), was enroute about 20 minutes into the flight, when a flight attendant noticed a strong, thick foul locker room smell near seat rows 7-12 and began to feel burning sensations in chest, eyes and nose. Other flight attendants confirmed smelling some odour, however, did not report to be affected. Headache, dizziness and shortness of breath followed. The flight attendant walked to the back of the cabin worrying she might faint, at the back of the cabin her fingers and arms cramped, she lost feel of her legs, and needed to be laid onto the floor, a collegue administered oxygen. Medical personnel on board was called out, three passengers came to provide first aid, however, because of the cramps had trouble to remove the clothing and connect a defibrillator with the medics suspecting she was tachycardiac. While the flight crew accelerated approach and landing to Bozeman, the passengers prepared for a landing with the flight attendant on the floor, with 3 of them holding her on the floor throughout the landing. The aircraft landed without further incident about 75 minutes after departure from Las Vegas, emergency services came on board, cut open the flight attendant's clothes, connected an automatic external defibrillator (AED), diagnosed acute supraventricular tachycardia, used a wheelchair to get the flight attendant off the aircraft, then put her onto a stretcher and took her to the hospital.“
found From the GCAQE website
“A newly published study has identified increases in Ultrafine Particle (UFP) concentrations in aircraft cabins associated with normal aircraft engine and Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) operation. These results correlate with times when engine and APU oil seals are known to be less effective, enabling oil to leak into the aircraft flight deck and passenger cabins. The concentrations reached in the passenger cabins exceeded those taken in other ground-based environments. These results support that UFP exposures in aircraft cabins during normal flight are associated with adverse health consequences for long serving aircrew and some passengers.
The airline industry has focussed on occasional oil system failure events and exposure to individual substances. However, this study for the first time makes the clear link between the aircraft design factor that enables oil and other fumes to enter the aircraft air supply in normal operation and exposure to UFPs. This enables a complex mixture of chemicals associated with oil fumes to attach to the surface of the UFPs, cross the blood brain barrier and thereby enter the brain. UFPs have been raised as a causative factor in the emergence of Aerotoxic Syndrome.” GCAQE
“A newly published study has identified increases in Ultrafine Particle (UFP) concentrations in aircraft cabins associated with normal aircraft engine and Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) operation. These results correlate with times when engine and APU oil seals are known to be less effective, enabling oil to leak into the aircraft flight deck and passenger cabins. The concentrations reached in the passenger cabins exceeded those taken in other ground-based environments. These results support that UFP exposures in aircraft cabins during normal flight are associated with adverse health consequences for long serving aircrew and some passengers.
The airline industry has focussed on occasional oil system failure events and exposure to individual substances. However, this study for the first time makes the clear link between the aircraft design factor that enables oil and other fumes to enter the aircraft air supply in normal operation and exposure to UFPs. This enables a complex mixture of chemicals associated with oil fumes to attach to the surface of the UFPs, cross the blood brain barrier and thereby enter the brain. UFPs have been raised as a causative factor in the emergence of Aerotoxic Syndrome.” GCAQE
An excellent post. As one seriously crippled and otherwise affected by these fumes it really is time that this should be exposed. It is basically a design fault in that the seals will inevitably leak and expose crews to regular small doses which over time accumulate.
There is a pprune thread on this important issue which was moved to a less prominent part of the site. If you’d care to read it here’s a link. https://www.pprune.org/safety-crm-qa...cabin-air.html
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another A320 fumes event Alaska Airlines
“Alaska Airlines has confirmed that two of its flight attendants were sent to the hospital after they started to feel unwell when they breathed in a ‘strong chemical smell’ on a flight from Seattle to San Jose on Friday.
The two flight attendants were in the rear galley of the aircraft and none of the other crew or passengers was affected, a spokesperson for the airline said. There were 44 passengers onboard, along with three other flight attendants and two pilots.
Alaska Airlines flight AS338 was approaching San Jose at around 10 am on Friday when the flight attendants at the back of the aircraft started to feel unwell. An ambulance responded to the incident and after being evaluated on the plane, the pair were transported to a local hospital for further checks.
The Association of Flight Attendants (AFA-CWA) which represents crewmembers at Alaska Airlines recommends that flight attendants who are exposed to a ‘smoke, odor or fume’ event record their symptoms and get checked out by a medical professional as quickly as possible.
Alaska Airlines said the Airbus A320 aircraft involved in Friday’s incident had been temporarily removed from service for engineering checks. An onward flight from San Jose to Portland was cancelled on Friday but the 11-year-old aircraft is expected to return to Seattle on a revenue service later on Saturday.“
The two flight attendants were in the rear galley of the aircraft and none of the other crew or passengers was affected, a spokesperson for the airline said. There were 44 passengers onboard, along with three other flight attendants and two pilots.
Alaska Airlines flight AS338 was approaching San Jose at around 10 am on Friday when the flight attendants at the back of the aircraft started to feel unwell. An ambulance responded to the incident and after being evaluated on the plane, the pair were transported to a local hospital for further checks.
The Association of Flight Attendants (AFA-CWA) which represents crewmembers at Alaska Airlines recommends that flight attendants who are exposed to a ‘smoke, odor or fume’ event record their symptoms and get checked out by a medical professional as quickly as possible.
Alaska Airlines said the Airbus A320 aircraft involved in Friday’s incident had been temporarily removed from service for engineering checks. An onward flight from San Jose to Portland was cancelled on Friday but the 11-year-old aircraft is expected to return to Seattle on a revenue service later on Saturday.“
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aviation Herald Fumes on Approach
Incident: Easyjet Europe A320 at London on Feb 3rd 2022, fumes on approach, cabin pressure issues
By Simon Hradecky, created Saturday, Feb 5th 2022 17:50Z, last updated Saturday, Feb 5th 2022 17:50ZAn Easyjet Europe Airbus A320-200, registration OE-ICU performing flight U2-8418 from Lyon (France) to London Gatwick,EN (UK), was on approach to Gatwick descending through about 6000 feet, the crew was slowing the aircraft and extending the first flaps, the crew noticed a very strong odour of wet socks on board, the flight crew donned their oxygen masks. Descending through about 2000 feet the cabin altitude began to rise rapidly through 5000 feet prompting the crew to perform a manual depressurization of the aircraft. The aircraft landed on Gatwick's runway 26L about 10 minutes after the first detection of the fumes. The crew remained on oxygen until after arriving at the stand as the fumes persisted, the aircraft was finally ventilated on the stand with doors and cockpit windows open and the APU shut down.
The crew went for medical checks.
The aircraft is still on the ground in Gatwick about 47 hours after landing.
By Simon Hradecky, created Saturday, Feb 5th 2022 17:50Z, last updated Saturday, Feb 5th 2022 17:50ZAn Easyjet Europe Airbus A320-200, registration OE-ICU performing flight U2-8418 from Lyon (France) to London Gatwick,EN (UK), was on approach to Gatwick descending through about 6000 feet, the crew was slowing the aircraft and extending the first flaps, the crew noticed a very strong odour of wet socks on board, the flight crew donned their oxygen masks. Descending through about 2000 feet the cabin altitude began to rise rapidly through 5000 feet prompting the crew to perform a manual depressurization of the aircraft. The aircraft landed on Gatwick's runway 26L about 10 minutes after the first detection of the fumes. The crew remained on oxygen until after arriving at the stand as the fumes persisted, the aircraft was finally ventilated on the stand with doors and cockpit windows open and the APU shut down.
The crew went for medical checks.
The aircraft is still on the ground in Gatwick about 47 hours after landing.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Incident: Swiss BCS1 near Frankfurt on Sep 2nd 2022, unusual odour in cockpit By Simo
Aviation Herald
“A Swiss International Airlines Airbus A320-200, registration HB-IJL performing flight LX-2802 from Zurich to Geneva (Switzerland) with 56 people on board, had been enroute at FL170 and was descending towards Geneva when the crew donned their oxygen masks and reported fumes on board. The aircraft continued for a safe landing on Geneva's runway 22.
The crew went for medical checks after landing.@
“A Swiss International Airlines Airbus A320-200, registration HB-IJL performing flight LX-2802 from Zurich to Geneva (Switzerland) with 56 people on board, had been enroute at FL170 and was descending towards Geneva when the crew donned their oxygen masks and reported fumes on board. The aircraft continued for a safe landing on Geneva's runway 22.
The crew went for medical checks after landing.@
Last edited by Manual Pitch Trim; 10th Oct 2022 at 11:10.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sepla calls on aircraft manufacturers to take steps to make air travel safer
https://sepla.es/en/sepla-calls-on-a...-travel-safer/Sepla is today calling for contaminated air warning systems to be installed in the cockpit as a matter of priority and for effective bleed air filtration systems to be installed on aircraft. Companies specialized are known to have developed filtration solutions for the Airbus A320 series of aircraft which frequently has such events. However, Airbus are not supporting the important introduction of this much needed technology.
to climb or to ALT
When it gets miserable in the cockpit and it isn't from last nights curry, a few things are supposed to happen. One of those is a checklist thingy, which starts with some suggestions.
that's enough on that bit.
------
fumes in the cockpit is not trivial, it may be given a bit of a low priority, but that isn't always a good thing in the real world. Way back, a crew that were with bone domes and masks on normal ended up with smoke in the cockpit, one crew member got to emergency in about 4 seconds, the other one had to be helped, and while on 100/emergency he was out for the count. There is an immediate action that should be followed, and at least one of the drivers needs to go on ASAP. Have had more than my share of cockpit smoke, on B767 B747 B744 and B777, and a few military aircraft, and none of them are much fun, although one got close to being amusing, The day the Capt left his glasses in Scotland and then left his spares in the hotel happened to be the day the classic B747 ended up with a full dose of smoke in the cockpit, in low viz and snow. Would have been OK but he left his seeing eye dog with his mother in Scotland too. Lost both packs on a B773. and that blew shrapnel all around the belly. Doing the smoke checklist, the FO could not see the EICAS, and could not identify where the right switches were in the overhead. Easy to find, if you whack across at the guys left ear, go up vertically about 18", they are up there. It was thick enough that the vision would not allow looking at both the window and the gauges, which would not be a problem had the APLT stayed happy in it's job.
Prefer engine failures, fires, or control problems over smoke or fire. When someone indicates they are fighting flames it's interesting how fast you can age.
that's enough on that bit.
------
fumes in the cockpit is not trivial, it may be given a bit of a low priority, but that isn't always a good thing in the real world. Way back, a crew that were with bone domes and masks on normal ended up with smoke in the cockpit, one crew member got to emergency in about 4 seconds, the other one had to be helped, and while on 100/emergency he was out for the count. There is an immediate action that should be followed, and at least one of the drivers needs to go on ASAP. Have had more than my share of cockpit smoke, on B767 B747 B744 and B777, and a few military aircraft, and none of them are much fun, although one got close to being amusing, The day the Capt left his glasses in Scotland and then left his spares in the hotel happened to be the day the classic B747 ended up with a full dose of smoke in the cockpit, in low viz and snow. Would have been OK but he left his seeing eye dog with his mother in Scotland too. Lost both packs on a B773. and that blew shrapnel all around the belly. Doing the smoke checklist, the FO could not see the EICAS, and could not identify where the right switches were in the overhead. Easy to find, if you whack across at the guys left ear, go up vertically about 18", they are up there. It was thick enough that the vision would not allow looking at both the window and the gauges, which would not be a problem had the APLT stayed happy in it's job.
Prefer engine failures, fires, or control problems over smoke or fire. When someone indicates they are fighting flames it's interesting how fast you can age.
Since procedures do change sometimes, is this still an accurate rendering of the Airbus ECAM/QRH procedures for SMOKE/FUMES/AVNCS SMOKE? In order?
SMOKE/FUMES/AVNCS SMOKE
LAND ASAP
APPLY IMMEDIATELY
VENT EXTRACT.....OVRD
CAB FANS..............OFF
GALLEYS...............OFF
SIGNS....................ON
CKPT/CAB COM....ESTABLISH
• IF REQUIRED:
CREW OXY MASKS...ON/100%/EMERG
• IF SMOKE SOURCE IMMEDIATELY OBVIOUS, ACCESSIBLE AND EXTINGUISHABLE
FAULTY EQPT......ISOLATE
• IF SMOKE SOURCE NOT IMMEDIATELY ISOLATED
DIVERSION...........INITIATE
DESCENT..............INITIATE
....etc.
What is the understood time frame for "immediately obvious" and "immediately isolated?"
What is Airbus's recommendation if any doubt exists regarding the last two items? Is it.......?
DIVERSION...........INITIATE
DESCENT..............INITIATE
What is the Airbus recommendation for troubleshooting? Is it.........?
"Once the diversion is initiated, the troubleshooting may be carried on in an attempt to identify and fight the origin of the smoke."
SMOKE/FUMES/AVNCS SMOKE
LAND ASAP
APPLY IMMEDIATELY
VENT EXTRACT.....OVRD
CAB FANS..............OFF
GALLEYS...............OFF
SIGNS....................ON
CKPT/CAB COM....ESTABLISH
• IF REQUIRED:
CREW OXY MASKS...ON/100%/EMERG
• IF SMOKE SOURCE IMMEDIATELY OBVIOUS, ACCESSIBLE AND EXTINGUISHABLE
FAULTY EQPT......ISOLATE
• IF SMOKE SOURCE NOT IMMEDIATELY ISOLATED
DIVERSION...........INITIATE
DESCENT..............INITIATE
....etc.
What is the understood time frame for "immediately obvious" and "immediately isolated?"
What is Airbus's recommendation if any doubt exists regarding the last two items? Is it.......?
DIVERSION...........INITIATE
DESCENT..............INITIATE
What is the Airbus recommendation for troubleshooting? Is it.........?
"Once the diversion is initiated, the troubleshooting may be carried on in an attempt to identify and fight the origin of the smoke."
I can understand how filtration systems would help, both particle and activated charcoal, similar to what is used for chem and biowarfare. The trick with filters is to ensure they get replaced when required / before they are too contaminated to function correctly.
What is unclear to me is how one might make a general purpose "cabin fumes sensor" as there are hardly any universal detection methods. The common ones for CO and some combustible gasses each require entirely different surface chemistries and processing to make the detection. I suppose one could find a sensor for a particular sort of chemical that is used on the plane, but there is a reason there aren't robots replacing sniffer dogs any time soon. And if that chemical is partly combusted then one would need sensors for each of the possible combustion products. Perhaps it's time to reintroduce canaries into the working environment.
What is unclear to me is how one might make a general purpose "cabin fumes sensor" as there are hardly any universal detection methods. The common ones for CO and some combustible gasses each require entirely different surface chemistries and processing to make the detection. I suppose one could find a sensor for a particular sort of chemical that is used on the plane, but there is a reason there aren't robots replacing sniffer dogs any time soon. And if that chemical is partly combusted then one would need sensors for each of the possible combustion products. Perhaps it's time to reintroduce canaries into the working environment.
I can understand how filtration systems would help, both particle and activated charcoal, similar to what is used for chem and biowarfare. The trick with filters is to ensure they get replaced when required / before they are too contaminated to function correctly.
What is unclear to me is how one might make a general purpose "cabin fumes sensor" as there are hardly any universal detection methods. The common ones for CO and some combustible gasses each require entirely different surface chemistries and processing to make the detection. I suppose one could find a sensor for a particular sort of chemical that is used on the plane, but there is a reason there aren't robots replacing sniffer dogs any time soon. And if that chemical is partly combusted then one would need sensors for each of the possible combustion products. Perhaps it's time to reintroduce canaries into the working environment.
What is unclear to me is how one might make a general purpose "cabin fumes sensor" as there are hardly any universal detection methods. The common ones for CO and some combustible gasses each require entirely different surface chemistries and processing to make the detection. I suppose one could find a sensor for a particular sort of chemical that is used on the plane, but there is a reason there aren't robots replacing sniffer dogs any time soon. And if that chemical is partly combusted then one would need sensors for each of the possible combustion products. Perhaps it's time to reintroduce canaries into the working environment.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA and EASA sensors in development
Funny canaries in the coal mine, not funny for safety and those who have become ill.
Ultrafine fine particle detectors look like the best option…
The thing is the sensors need to developed and the installation of ultrafine particle detectors should be really mandated by EASA and the FAA, to develop reliable sensors and have indications in the cockpit. Boeing and Airbus prefer to have sensors for maintenance only at the moment. From my point of view we pilots need to write our unions and the authorities on this issue. As the manufacturers and airlines fear lawsuits,etc theres a reluctance to admit the problem and advance safety in this issue.
Also..
“ several chemicals have been identified as having potential as markers for oil contamination.
60
“Potential marker chemicals representative of bleed air contamination
Chemical Potential
Formaldehyde Good
Acetaldehyde Good
Carbon Monoxide Fair
TVOC Fair
Carbon Dioxide Good
*Note: Good as a discriminator but not for primary detection
Various methods can be used to detect these gasses. These methods can be divided into four broad categories: 1) electro-chemical sensors, 2) metal oxide sensors, 3) photo ionization detectors, and 4) spectrometers.
The electrochemical sensors and the metal oxide sensors are relatively inexpensive and can be designed to target a variety of specific compounds. They have the potential for detecting low concentrations. Multiple sensors can be combined and tuned to detect specific substances. Some disadvantages include a tendency to drift over time, poisoning of the sensing medium, and slow recovery after exposure. Various measures may be employed such as cleaning cycles and calibration to address these concerns.”
Have a look this FAA document
https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/6..._62770_DS1.pdf
“The purpose of this project was to provide a data-driven process to identify sensing technology with good potential for detecting bleed air contamination from engine oil, hydraulic fluid, or deicing fluid. Reports from major aircraft cabin air studies were reviewed to identify the range of constituents that can be expected in cabin air, especially as they pertain to the aforementioned contaminants and their potential markers. One of the projects was the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Vehicle Integrated Propulsion Research (NASA-VIPR) project where controlled amounts of engine oil were injected into the engine compressor of a C-17 transport aircraft and the resulting contaminants in the bleed air measured. Three additional cabin air quality studies conducted on revenue flights were reviewed. These three studies provide data for a combined total of 249 flights on a variety of makes and models of aircraft. These studies provide adequate documentation of typical aircraft cabin air. Information from this review was used to identify potential markers of the bleed air contaminants. Additionally, collaboration was established with several technical committees from the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), American Society of Heating, Air-Conditioning and Refrigerating Engineers (ASHRAE), and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and with project personnel from the prior European Union Aviation Safety Administration (EASA)-funded cabin air study. Key objectives of the project were to identify sensors and sensing technology with potential for detection of one or more of the three aforementioned bleed air contaminants and to develop a plan for test stand engine experiments to evaluate the sensors with controlled amounts of the three contaminants. Sensors and instruments were identified and a test plan was developed. Additionally, through the collaboration with ASHRAE 1830 and the support of the industry working group, many of the experiments identified in the test plan were completed. The analysis of the data from these experiments is ongoing and will be reported in the ASHRAE 1830 project report. However, preliminary assessment of the sensing technology has been possible”.
Ultrafine fine particle detectors look like the best option…
The thing is the sensors need to developed and the installation of ultrafine particle detectors should be really mandated by EASA and the FAA, to develop reliable sensors and have indications in the cockpit. Boeing and Airbus prefer to have sensors for maintenance only at the moment. From my point of view we pilots need to write our unions and the authorities on this issue. As the manufacturers and airlines fear lawsuits,etc theres a reluctance to admit the problem and advance safety in this issue.
Also..
“ several chemicals have been identified as having potential as markers for oil contamination.
60
“Potential marker chemicals representative of bleed air contamination
Chemical Potential
Formaldehyde Good
Acetaldehyde Good
Carbon Monoxide Fair
TVOC Fair
Carbon Dioxide Good
*Note: Good as a discriminator but not for primary detection
Various methods can be used to detect these gasses. These methods can be divided into four broad categories: 1) electro-chemical sensors, 2) metal oxide sensors, 3) photo ionization detectors, and 4) spectrometers.
The electrochemical sensors and the metal oxide sensors are relatively inexpensive and can be designed to target a variety of specific compounds. They have the potential for detecting low concentrations. Multiple sensors can be combined and tuned to detect specific substances. Some disadvantages include a tendency to drift over time, poisoning of the sensing medium, and slow recovery after exposure. Various measures may be employed such as cleaning cycles and calibration to address these concerns.”
Have a look this FAA document
https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/6..._62770_DS1.pdf
“The purpose of this project was to provide a data-driven process to identify sensing technology with good potential for detecting bleed air contamination from engine oil, hydraulic fluid, or deicing fluid. Reports from major aircraft cabin air studies were reviewed to identify the range of constituents that can be expected in cabin air, especially as they pertain to the aforementioned contaminants and their potential markers. One of the projects was the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Vehicle Integrated Propulsion Research (NASA-VIPR) project where controlled amounts of engine oil were injected into the engine compressor of a C-17 transport aircraft and the resulting contaminants in the bleed air measured. Three additional cabin air quality studies conducted on revenue flights were reviewed. These three studies provide data for a combined total of 249 flights on a variety of makes and models of aircraft. These studies provide adequate documentation of typical aircraft cabin air. Information from this review was used to identify potential markers of the bleed air contaminants. Additionally, collaboration was established with several technical committees from the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), American Society of Heating, Air-Conditioning and Refrigerating Engineers (ASHRAE), and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and with project personnel from the prior European Union Aviation Safety Administration (EASA)-funded cabin air study. Key objectives of the project were to identify sensors and sensing technology with potential for detection of one or more of the three aforementioned bleed air contaminants and to develop a plan for test stand engine experiments to evaluate the sensors with controlled amounts of the three contaminants. Sensors and instruments were identified and a test plan was developed. Additionally, through the collaboration with ASHRAE 1830 and the support of the industry working group, many of the experiments identified in the test plan were completed. The analysis of the data from these experiments is ongoing and will be reported in the ASHRAE 1830 project report. However, preliminary assessment of the sensing technology has been possible”.
Last edited by Manual Pitch Trim; 11th Oct 2022 at 10:58.
