Seat 62K

No. Its fumes caused by oil getting through leaking engine seals into the bleed air system. This alows the vapours to get into the air conditioning and is often refered to as a "sweaty socks" smell.

There is an ingredient added to aircraft engine oil called TCP, and its pretty nasty stuff (it's been used in chemical weapons!). Its is thought that this is the stuff that is casuing the health problems.

Organophosphates
 

I understand that the problem is fumes from the burnt engine oil, getting into the engine bleed air and thus into the aircraft pressurisation system. For some reason the lubricating oil contains organophosphates and these are a major risk to health. See link re problem with this chemical and the health of vets who have to supervise the dipping of sheep with a 'dip' which also contains organophosphates. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/572960.stm

A2QFI.
See my post #130 on page 7, burnt oil can only come from the rear of the engine, cabin air is normally taken from the compressor at the front of the engine, I wouldn't argue that the leaking oil isn't hot however.

Source of oil fumes
 

Seat 62K,

Oil fumes are known to occur in two seperate and different situations:

1) Oil fumes are frequently noticed on main engine or APU start - the 146 often fills with visible oil fumes after a cold APU start, for example. These are often referred to as 'normal'.

2) Oil fumes also occur after an engine oil seal malfunction in flight; these are clearly 'abnormal'.

However oil fumes are oil fumes - whatever causes them and means that many 'normal' exposures can be experienced by aircrew and passengers alike.

If only the Department of Transport would be kind enough to tell people exactly what is in these visible oil fumes, they might then begin to realise that breathing multiple 'normal' doses of oil fumes causes serious ill health - for some people who have the genetic make up to be vulnerable to such extremely toxic chemicals.

DB :ok:

The seal doesn't have to fail!
On the RR RB211-535c engines there are a lot of problems with big power changes, t/o to climb power ,climb to cruise ,cruise to idle!
Its a known problem what keeps happening but that is ignored by my company and the CAA ,they just don't care!

Neil

Back to TCs then?

Tri Cresyl Phosphate (TCP)
 

To be "fair" the oil additive tri cresyl phosphate (TCP) has never actually been used as a nerve gas itself - its "LD50" (ie the lethal dose required to kill 50% of a defined population sample in a defined time) is way too low for military use, but its close chemical cousins most definitely have been and its close proximity to them chemically makes it a substance to avoid at all costs.

The following links may be of interest, the better to inform us about just how nasty chemically organo phosphate esters actually are.

http://dspace.dsto.defence.gov.au/ds...ndle/1947/3349

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricresylphosphate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent


For the record and in brief summary, there are two basic types of nerve gas; the G Series and the V Series.

The Gs were discovered and developed in Germany in the 30s and the Vs in England in the 50s. Both were accidental discoveries "found" in the pursuit of developing new and more effective insecticides.

The Vs are generally more toxic than the Gs.

Both function by interfering with nerve impulse transmission by blocking the action of the enzyme acteyl choline esterase at the nerve synapses or junctions.

Because of this systemic attack on the nervous system exposure to them can produce a bewildering variety of symptoms.

As ever I suspect that preventing oil contamination of bleed or any other kind of air being used in cabins will revolve around cost/benefit analysis but in my view the contamination has to stop. I further suspect that this will only happen after a few very expensive lawsuits.

Think asbestos.

The oil system is pretty damn complex in an engine and the oil gets so hot that it is necessary to cool it in what is known as a fuel-oil cooler. In addition the bearing compartments depend on localize pressurization (buffered air) to assist keeping the oil inside. This pressure has to come from the high pressured areas of the engine which are operating at temperatures high enough to fry an egg (try putting some turbine oil in a fry pan and see what happens). Now add some wear and tear to the engine oil seals and some of the fumes start leaking outside the bearing compartments as the engine changes speeds. Look at the bottom of a nacelle someday and you may notice what looks like a little pipe blowing smoke as you taxi arround. That's connected to the oil system. There is liittle you can do to seal an engine oil system from breathing oil.

The question is how much gets to the passengers and what is really too much. Zero is not practical.

Thank you for the answers to my earlier question. (For some reason I'd thought that maybe the fumes on start up were aviation fuel and not engine oil.) Does anyone know if there are practical measures one can take if fumes are smelt (I gather, though, that some are odourless) such as holding a wet handkerchief to one's nose?

Thanks for the clarification!

TCP and Dose
 

Many thanks to FG and Iomp; informative and useful posts.

I appreciate that a reduction of TCPs et al contamination to zero is indeed impracticable for all the reasons given.

The solution to the problem in the here and now is, in part, going to involve TCP dose calculations and risk assessments to run in parallel with the search for engineering improvements

Such dose calcs bring in several factors; toxicity, concentration and time to name but three.

I doubt that there is (i) that much precise data to hand and (ii) an exact alogrithm to run it on and it's dangerous to make a sweeping statement as I'm sure I did at the end of my last post.

We perhaps need to exert firm pressure to collect better data.

But .......intuition/common sense says that SLF like me are going to be at a generally lower statistical level of risk than all types of crew and that was the point I was trying to make previously - badly!

CW

xla120 anyone know about contaminated air event feb last yr?
 

anyone know about air contamination event last yr on xla120, lgw-sfb , 1st feb 07?? 40 plus pax reported illness including children and to date?
could this be exposure to tcp????

Sick???

Sick of what, Being in economy class, Sick of get what you pay for?

To be honest I don't have much belief in these claims of pax getting sick,

It's the usual 'media' hype that generates all these claims, Yes they may be the odd and that's a very odd flight that does get the odd smell of the Aircraft, But hey it's a working machine and machines do smell.

As an example in all the years of BY/TOM I have only ever heard of one such incident of pax feeling poorly, A flight inbound to BHX about 11 years ago on a 757.

I don't disagree that pax can't get poorly/sick, But when you weigh up all the potential compo cliams I'm not surprised.:*

If there is a chance of fumes/smell in the Aircraft it's usually in the cockpit.

I don't implaud to be rude, I just think it's all in the mind:hmm:

Regards.;)

ansett
 

f/a s from ansett a/l australia back in the 90s used medical certificates so that they
couldn't be rostered for the 146 due fumes causing illness.
guess the techies had no choice.
this topic has been around a long time

62k and All,

one thing to consider in all of this, is the performance of the human nose. When trying to detect these odours/fumes one is susceptible to de-sensitization, i.e. the olfactory sensing system slowly 'get's used to' the smell. Like when you splash on your Brut 33 aftershavein the morning, and 5 minutes later you can't smell it, but women are fainting at your feet all day.

We have noticed this a lot when investigating events of oil smell. Crew will return to base and en-route radio in a report of oil smell, then on arrival perhaps 30 mins later, we open the a/c door and get knocked over by the fumes, but the crew by this time are desensitized due to continuous exposure and they say that the smell has almost gone!

My two-penneth,

N1 Vibes

Google found..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/75...g-us-sick.html

17. Posted by SAMANTHA SABATINO on February 29, 2008 01:12 PM
XLA120 1ST FEBRUARY 2007, LGW-SFB.( orlando florida).
Many passengers became unwell on this flight and many are reporting symptoms still to date. This is a serious issue which can result in serious health affects, people must report such incidents to the appropriate authorities including the AVIATION HEALTH UNIT at the CAA, take advice first from the organisations listed.If i knew then what i know now there is no way i would have ever placed my children into that enviroment!
Its a disgusting disgrace that money is more important than health, daily my family are cruelly reminded of this fact!! Its about time media has the backbone to stand up to this money orientated industry! customer health and comfort comes second to profit!so well done to all who are responsible for this article. s.sabatino

Google also found this in it's cache...

http://tinyurl.com/4ahnuc

Flight Smoke or Fume Event – London Gatwick to Orlando – 1 February 2007

If you have travelled on a flight, on the above route, on 1 February 2007, and you and your family have suffered illness and/or contractual complaints, be advised that you are not alone. If you are unsure as to the nature of such a Smoke or Fume Event, and believe that you may have been affected, then you should read the following press release from HolidayTravelWatch which will provide further information on the nature of this issue –


It continues but the link provided doesn't appear to work.

economy class???
 

firstly i would like to point out to the person with the sarcastic remarks,
many of these people were NOT in economy class!!! there was a mix of both classes of passenger's with clear seperation between.
Secondly you do not end up in hospital on steroids and oxygen not being able to breath properly when its all in the mind!!
you obviously need to do more research on the issue before posting such ignorant comments.......
and finally there has been alot of media coverage AFTER the incident and when you qualify as a specialist doctor please do let us know???

sammie71 are you Samantha Sabatino?

Just curious, as...

If so, you'll already know a fair bit about what you refer to as you were a passenger on the flight.

There's the article in The Sun too, as well as the contribution to the discussion thread in the Daily Telegraph

Plus your written evidence contribution to the House of Lords Select Committee on Science & Technology : Air Travel & Health

just curious to know whether any pilots or crew may have been affected during this flight? for no other reason than curiosity?