Could be some sort of mass hysteria event... where a couple of the cabin crew genuinely felt ill (could be due to anything, such as a real or perceived fume event) -- then the rest of the cabin crew thought they must be unwell too as they must have been similarly exposed.

Funny but in this case, crap, me thinks Core Dump.

I hesitate to read too much into the pilot's calm demeanor while explaining the situation to Edmonton Center. However, my first blush impression listening to the liveatc.net recordings was that there was mild skepticism on the flight deck of the need for a divert.

I've certainly seen thinly disguised 'let's make a deal' union job actions done with 'safety' as a justification. As in 'we're going to call fatigued for the next sector unless the company drops next week's trip and gives us four hours of premium pay'.

The numbers are consistent with some kind of fume release in the rear-crew rest area. Is it possible that something went wrong there and assistants from unaffected attendants who descended into the area also got sick. Only those pax close to the crew rest area entrance may have been affected.
As the crew rest area in the a380 is downstairs it might allow pooling of fumes from cleaning, disinfecting or insecticide that might affect the first 'off duty' team down there.

Perhaps totally coincidental but here's a news item from a few weeks ago:

https://www.theguardian.com/business...tion-no-strike

Whatever the cause, will some sort of safety report be publically issued since medical attention was requested in this case?

Or, will the details disappear into some internal company file citing 'privacy issues' and 'pending litigation'?

CBC pax interviews state that the cabin crew took their bags and left the A/C on arrival at the gate. Pax were left onboard to fend for themselves.
Quite odd, and contrary to Regs if this is the case, to leave 400 plus pax onboard an A380 with no crew, especially if fumes on board suspected??

British Airways flight diverted to Vancouver after cabin crew becomes ill - British Columbia - CBC News

FWIW these day's BASSA don't represent a significant number of the cabin crew in BA.

(Anyone know if this was a mixed fleet service?)

As I understand it a report (MOR) was filed with the UK national authorities, not just BA so if all else fails the UK's CAA should publish something at some point.....

YVR makes sense when you consider that the pax and crew would have to clear Canada Customs and Immigration upon arrival and YVR is set up to clear a plane load of international travellers. Therefore Moose Jaw would be off the wall to begin with. Flying the extra distance to YVR would burn off fuel so the landing weight would be reduced. it's a judgement call and a lot of factors go into the final decision.

Then again , I can't fault the crew , for wanting to stay away from Londonstan for an extra day or two.

Perhaps, but such fumes rarely affect all people at the same speed; not all at once. If you're down there in the romper room and detect a strong odor and then one of your coworkers begins to become ill, are you going to stay down there sitting on your thumb until the last person keels over? All of you? Naw. I'd expect them to have enough common sense to move to safer air with only a few being affected badly enough to require a look-over.

Maybe one FA was a bit under the weather for legitimate reasons and had a good yack in his/her bunk. That could certainly set off a chain reaction, but it still doesn't explain the trip to hospital.

It is highly unfair to accuse the cabin crew of a willful action to disrupt a transatlantic flight for hundreds of passengers, especially when there is a high probability that there was an actual medical problem. It's even worse because the cabin crew are not in a position to defend themselves to this (at this point) ridiculous accusation.

Don't forget that the media is also reading on this forum. We don't need The Sun to have a headline which says "CREW ON BA FLIGHT WAS LIKELY FAKING ILLNESS, ACCORDING TO PROFESSIONAL PILOTS".

Probably not the best of ideas to post it in all caps then ...

No fault found with the aircraft so far which positions back to LHR overnight 26OCT without cabin crew.

Public debate and Chair of CAA
 

Journalist Philip Whiteley & public cabin air quality Correspondence following BA 286 fume event with Dame Hutton, Chair of the Civil Aviation Authority - 26th October 2016 - PUBLIC INTEREST, PLEASE REPORT & SHARE... - Aerotoxic Association

An interesting public exchange today between a professional scientific writer and Chair of CAA concerning this flight.

So there is no evidence that it is related to the engines.

that ought to narrow it down

Interesting that the crew apparently were well enough to collect their luggage before deplaning ahead of the PAX. Kind of like PAX taking hand baggage during an emergency evacuation. It seems clear that much more exists to this story than is currently being revealed.

I was also struck by the letter given to PAX as they arrived at YVR seen in this link British Airways flight diverted to Vancouver after cabin crew becomes ill - British Columbia - CBC News It tells them that their first opportunity to rebook would be by calling BA beginning at 0400 YVR time. Why is this? Is it because BA does not maintain a 24-hour call center for such issues? In any event, this is brutal. You are dumped in YVR at 2330 local. If you are lucky, you will only be getting into bed at a hotel by 0200 -- and if you want to be first in line for rebooking, you need to wake up at 0400.

I had thought that US airlines were the champions of nongraceful service recovery. But if this is correct, BA would appear to be a strong contender for the title.

May be ICAO and FAA should audit CAA. All this airline has been doing is effectively managing social media.

"..they left the A/C.."? Air conditioning? Good one. There are never enough undefined abbreviations and acronyms for us, the great unwashed, to get our collective heads around. Quite unusual and not in keeping for PPRune posters.

dirty sock
 

Nth degree journo investigation - another LiO battery incident perhaps ?
Journalist Philip Whiteley & public cabin air quality Correspondence following BA 286 fume event with Dame Hutton, Chair of the Civil Aviation Authority - 26th October 2016 - PUBLIC INTEREST, PLEASE REPORT & SHARE... - Aerotoxic Association

So let me get this straight.

Allegedly, the Cabin Crew reported a trumped up in flight emergency to the flightdeck?

Which provoked an unnecessary divert?

Whereupon landing, they promptly abandoned their pax?

Surely there must also have been onboard announcements to pax to "explain" the divert? Were they advised it was a cabin air issue?

In which case the CC deplaning ahead of anybody else must have left any half knowledgable pax dumbfounded.

If I'd been onboard and next to an overwing exit I might have been tempted to pull the hatch just for extra added f@*kedupness.

Just to keep the lawyers happy, you understand.

I do hope they get royally sh@fted if that is the case.

So every F/A went down into the rest area? Otherwise only the one's that went on break would have been affected.


To have F/A's go on break meant that the entire meal service and clean up was accomplished. That should be easy enough for a passenger to comment on.