Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Is contaminated bleed air harmful? YES...

Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Is contaminated bleed air harmful? YES...

Old 24th Apr 2005, 15:43
  #1 (permalink)  

www.aopis.org
(Aviation Organophoshate Information Site)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is contaminated bleed air harmful? YES...

Conclusions of The Contaminated Air Protection Conference, London 20/21 April 2005.

The British Airline Pilots Association (BALPA) invited every leading airline, aircraft manufacturer, engine manufacturer, lubricant manufacturer, regulators and every person who has ever had an input into the issues of contaminated air, whether independent or from industry to make a presentation at what was a very well organised conference by BALPA. BALPA also sensibly invited experts from issues which appear to have very similar medical effects to those being reported in crews and passengers, issues related to the Gulf War Syndrome and the Sheep Dippers.

Everyone who wished to present a paper was accommodated by the conference organisers BALPA. This only reinforces the conclusions drawn as a result of some 25 presentations made over the two days by the doctors, regulators, scientists, industry representatives and interested parties.

The conclusions were very clear, alarming, simple and included:

‘There is a workplace problem resulting in chronic and acute illness amongst flight crew (both pilots and cabin crew)’.

‘Further, we are concerned the passengers may also be suffering from similar symptoms to those exhibited by flight crew’.

‘Fume events are clearly being under reported’.

‘This, we conclude, is resulting in significant flight safety issues, in addition to unacceptable flight crew personnel health implications’.

‘Pregnant passengers are probably most at risk’.

'It is most likely the synergistic effect of the chemicals being breathed in by crews and passengers that is causing these medical effects.'

'Filters exist to remove most of these contaminants but airlines have not chosen to fit them'.


www.aopis.org
AOPIS is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 18:51
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Belfast
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
146 Aircraft

WELL DONE TO THE PILOTS FOR THE CONFERENCE BUT WHAT ABOUT US YOUR WAGE PAYERS...THE PASSENGERS?

I often fly to Belfast and back from Gatwick where I work near.

The 146 often sting of dirty socks and other smells due to polluted aircraft air. I feel so sorry for those crew stuck on what can only be called a flying gas chamber. Many times I walk off with a headache & nausea and sometimes tell the cabin crew. They tell me they have the same but are not in a union and can do nothing.

Why does the HSE not do something.

Its a public disgrace.

I have decided to now do the longer journey via Heathrow with Midland rather than be gassed any more.

146 ARCRAFT ARE NOT GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH!

Why does a journalist not get on airplane with some sort of detector like a CO detector and write a front page story!!

GROUND 146 AIRCRAFT NOW OR STOP THE GASSING ITS NOT 1943!
JIPPO is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 20:53
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: U.K.
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs up

Ater 17 years flying the 146, I can only say "B------s" A pax on the 146 is on one of the safest airliners in this world!
Croqueteer is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 21:18
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Intertesting opening post by AOPIS.

The report that I got from the conference was just the opposite than he reported.

The scientific data showed that there was little support for claiming a persistant hazardous threat to safety of flight.

With exception of two incidents the complaints were subjective in nature and certainly not in a safety of flight category to affect any immediate action (bottom of the barrel safety concern)

Looks like little will be done on an industry wide basis and probably only affect some problematic aircraft.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 21:39
  #5 (permalink)  

www.aopis.org
(Aviation Organophoshate Information Site)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
lomapaseo.... DIDN'T SEE YOU AT THE CONFERENCE.

Dear lomapaseo

Sounds like your sources must have been asleep.

Perhaps you didn't see the document drawn up by BALPA and signed at the conference by so many present with the conclusions we previously reported....Crews are sick from exposures and flight safety is being seriously compromised.

If anyone has any doubts that 'lomapaseo' is trying to protect industry we filmed the whole thing and have copies of all the papers presented by all the speakers.

If you don't trust us as sponsors call BALPA, IPA, T&G, ITF etc... They cover about 2 millions workers, ask them what they think.

If you don't trust them contact Channel 4, BBC radio, Sky, ABC TV etc.. who interviewed many of the presenters who also confirmed the conclusions we previously reported.

I hope you will discontinue your 'misinformation campaign' especially without revelealing your name and who you represent.
AOPIS is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2005, 18:52
  #6 (permalink)  

I am a figment of my own imagination
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Unhappy

From UK. Used long haul for flights to from re-current in US from ME. frequent to and from home for hols, or positioning to from A/C when on maint or long deployement. Have noticed very frequently will pick up infections on these flights. Has been too often for mere co-incidence. Use multiple airlines, different routes only commonality is most sectors in excess of five hours some up to 12-13.
My conclusion has been that I tend to pick up these mainly respiratory or airborn vectored complaints due to the decreased outflow and increased re-circulation of cabin air and close proximity/ exposure of pax to infected people 'sharing' their various sneezes and sniffles.
Son daughter-in-law and another daughter-in-law to be are all in the longhaul business, all have complained similarly.
Not imagination. based on a small pool of regular travellers in the profession.
I would say based on my experience. YES the conclusion that bleed air in modern systems may be harmfull to your health is more than likely.
Paterbrat is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2005, 21:29
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
New book on this subject coming this year...

http://www.chemport.de/sgw/cda/front...9600-0,00.html

Air Quality in Airplane Cabins and Similar Enclosed Spaces
Series : The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry
Vol. 4: Air Pollution , Part H
Hocking, Martin B.; Hocking, Diana (Eds.)
2005, Approx. 254 p. Also available online., Hardcover
ISBN: 3-540-25019-0
Online version available

Due: September 2005

The issue of aircraft air quality is attracting considerable attention of late, as access to public air travel has expanded exponentially. Aircrew and passengers are increasingly concerned about operating and service decisions that could affect their health, comfort, and safety. The editor of this volume invited a wide range of experts to provide an in-depth treatment of virtually all aspects of aircraft cabin air quality. The topics are covered at a level comprehensible to all who fly as well as being of sufficient depth to be informative to decision makers concerned with purchase, design, operation, and servicing of passenger aircraft.
Topics are grouped under: Control of Aircraft Cabin Air Quality; Possible Effects of Low Humidity, Decreased Outside Air Flows; and Effects of Some Aircraft Malfunctions on Cabin Air Quality. The volume concludes with Air Quality Systems for Related Enclosed Spaces, in which chapters cover air quality in buildings, ships, submarines, and spacecraft, which provide novel approaches potentially applicable to aircraft.

Written for:

Scientists, engineers, graduate students in the field of Environmental Sciences, Aerospace Engineering, Risk Assessment and Risk Controlling, Toxicology and Ecology; decision-makers in Government, Industrial and Regulatory Bodies.
cwatters is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2005, 22:02
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Well I won't refute the claim that pilots have tremors and hacking coughs etc. I guess all those that have chronic breathing borne difficulties will be claiming bleed air problems aggravated by the poisonous innards of modern jet engines.

The problem is that one can not provide sound technical data to support other than hearsay or an extremely local sample to support industry wide findings.

This is akin to the cellphonemania that has swept the industry.

If you want sympathy then carry on per usual. Hold news conferences etc. sprinkled with tales of horror and attact the public to your case and I'm sure that they will add even more emotion to the subject.

If you want a specfic corrective action taken than provide the irrefutable technical data that shows a statistically valid comparison of medical illnesses within high time flyers of various age groups, and low time flyers, to clearly show whether or not such medical problems occur for the reasons claimed And correctable by your proposed action.

Lacking that, your industry will continue to priotitize technological advances towards items affecting the greater comfort and safety of its users. Things like more legroom and CFIT etc.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2005, 23:32
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 52N 20E
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Iomapaseo,

More leg room, more movies are all fine and dandy if you have your Health!

Can I politely suggest then that you make a more concerted effort to conduct all your short haul buisness travels on the BAe146 or MD80 and all your Medium/Long haul on the B757 or A320.

And if your feelin cute and decide to hitch a ride on an EMB 145; Beware! Because there are a lot more reports comming in regarding Contaminated Air on these aircraft now and they are not that old ( Industry wise)


Tick... Tick... Tick... Tick ........
Smokie is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2005, 00:50
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
In my first post on this subject I did admit that there were problamatic fleets. However to present this as an industry wide problem in front of the public is a stretch.

And yes I shall continue flying all the aircraft you mentioned, because I have faith in the corrective actions taken to date vs my exposure risk.

I also avoid smoke filled rooms when able and smoggy cities except for very short stays. However I don't expect that the citiy residents will all move out of town.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2005, 02:12
  #11 (permalink)  

Life's too short for ironing
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Scotland, & Maryland, USA
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As an ex-146 pilot, and small contributor to the research that has been ongoing, I hope that a solution is found, especially for those who have lost their licences and careers.

After only 2 years of flying the aircraft, I suffered, in comparison to others, minimal negative effects, but there is no doubt my symptoms were related to the time I spent flying the aircraft. At no time before or since have I had the same problems. I am (relatively) young and healthy and lead a pretty harmless lifestyle - no smoking etc.

I knew nothing, at that time, of the problems others had experienced, and only put two and two together after I had stopped flying the 146, my problems faded away and I came across some documentation, either in The Log or on here.

So, Croqueteer, as a 17 year veteran of flying the 146, I guess you are one of the many fortunate people who have enjoyed a good career flying this aircraft. From what I've read, the problems, which vary from mild to severe, seem to be selective, not affecting everyone, kind of like the ever elusive Gulf War Syndrome, or the effects of organophosphates on farmers. No one else that I worked with complained of any problems, but then, neither did I complain - I just thought I was getting old or something. I ended up in hospital having assorted tests and things stuck in places where they ought'n't to be stuck Nothing was ever found, and now, four years since I stopped flying the 146, I'm fine. Go figure... I'm not a person who suffers from, or enjoys, ill health, something must have caused me to be ill, and if the research helps prevent others suffering the way some people have suffered (I can't imagine what it must be like to be told that due to health problems, you can never fly again), then so much the better.

ps - I'm not Australian, have never been there, nor as far as I'm aware, ever flown an Australian aircraft, so I'm not quite sure what the quip regarding AOPIS's nationality was referring too.

Last edited by fernytickles; 26th Apr 2005 at 02:41.
fernytickles is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2005, 06:44
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To the skeptics out there, I too say b******s!

As the captain of a regional jet variant (not the 146) which is prone to cabin air quality incidents, I feel well qualified to report first hand to the armchair critics that I have experienced the effects several times. On the most recent occasion I smelt the familiar 'sock' odour just after takeoff and within seconds developed a moderate headache and the sensations of the 'leans' and being out of touch with my surroundings. The smell stopped once we selected climb thrust and my symptoms cleared soon afterwards although the headache remained for an hour or so. The other pilot smelt the odour but did not notice any effect. Interestingly, no sooner had we released the cabin crew and the No1 (who sits close to the flightdeck) called through to say that she felt ill and dizzy.

There is definately a reluctance to report these incidents. There is always the self doubt aspect - am I being overly sensitive, why is it just me that feels ill?, etc. The effects are so difficult to prove after the event that you feel like a fool when you have to answer to the company and the engineers if you Tech the aircraft with nothing solid to back you up. The smell may not reappear for days afterwards - in my experience these faults are not consistent.

You are also faced with a quandry - on the occasion in question it seemed safer to continue to destination once the problem and symptoms had cleared than to immediately return and attempt a landing whilst feeling the full effects. On the turnaround, the fault did not go 'in the book' because (a) no-one wanted an unscheduled nightstop, (b) there would have been hell to pay and (c) we were convinced by the engineers to do some diagnostics and operate back with the 'suspect' a/c pack off. Sure enough, the problem did not reoccur and the aircraft operated single pack for several days.

Foolishly, I did not tech myself. I felt fine by that stage and as I have a medical to protect there was no way I want any history whatsoever logged against me. The No.1 filled in the requisite forms and was required to have a mandatory period off work and a visit to the doctor. Again, people are reluctant to report because of the rigmarole.
G-LOST is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2005, 11:47
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have been on the 146 for 15 years and been following pprune for the last five years but this is the first time I have felt the urge to post a reply.

I remember, about 15 years ago when I started and for the first ten years or so feeling very unwell and it was DEFINITELY caused by the rotten egg odours about which so many people have experienced - mostly from the APU on the ground.

We were being gassed and I guess it's easy to prove a link between gassing people and illness?

I have to say that in the past five years or so the problem does seem to have been sorted out but I am still left feeling exhausted and generally not 100% after a long day on the aeroplane. Wonderful aeroplane in every other respect.

So if things have changed then there MUST have been a problem in the first place, which they have admitted and common sense says that it's still there, but not as much as before?


I just feel sad that in aviation you have to have an actual accident and wipe out a few people before anybody will take any notice. Half doing the job doesn't appear to work. There's too much money at stake and the crews can't possibly take on the manufacturers and airlines until there's irrefutable proof which is rather difficult to gather.

I know my short term meory has been effected; at the end of a long day I can hardly add the times up in the tech log or at least it takes me a few minutes which is a bit scary. It's easy to disguise it though and as somebody else said it doesn't do to go around saying that you can't add up as people will think you're cracking up - which we might well be doing!

It would be interesting to give a crew a real full blown emergency diversion at the end of a long day and monitor the performance, compare it to SOP's and then wonder why there was such a gap in the actual and the expected.

Mind you if the authorities tried this they would be so alarmed by the results they would probably dicontinue the experiment in case it got out to the outside world.

So sorry I haven't come out sooner and said this in public but I guess like everybody else eventually one gets around to it.

I can't imagine anything is going to change without any concrete proof. Perhaps that's why I didn't bother to do anything.

Rant over.
Dream Buster is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2005, 12:05
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In the past two weeks I have had the pleasure of flying on a 146/RJ twice. Diferent aircraft each time. Both times on entering the cabin the smell of oil was noticable. On the first flight the smell did not go untill we were well into the cruise. In fact the smell was almost un bearable for about 10mins.
On the second flight it was a little better. The cabin crew gave me a "customer satisfaction survey" to fill in. I did the decent thing by the crew but when it came to the "Coments" bit I said I was an aircraft engineer and knew of the problems the 146/RJ have had but I expressed my concern for the long tearm helth of the crews (Crawler!).
The next thing one of the crew came down and said they had read my coments (I thought they were confidential?). She said that they were all concerned about it and she had been suffering from headaches and dizzy spells since joining the RJ fleet.
Not knowing the 146/RJ is there a quick fix for this? or eaven a slow one?

Rgds Dr I.
Dr Illitout is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2005, 15:18
  #15 (permalink)  

Nice-but-dim
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Rural Yorkshire
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Air passengers 'risking health'

Apologies if this has already been posted.

BBC link here.
timmcat is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2005, 15:35
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: near EDDF
Posts: 775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs down

Sorry, but the title is characteristic for the press.
Only to catch attention.

Tataaaa here comes the major point:
Quote
...The oxygen levels would not be harmful to healthy passengers, we are only talking about people with health problems, such as lung and heart...
/Quote

Ingo
IFixPlanes is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2005, 17:53
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Online!
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't get it dreambuster.... 15 years being gassed????

Why stay on an airplane that is poisoning you? Did the vapours first destroy your capacity for reason??

Health or career.. what's more important....
OneBall2 is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2005, 18:09
  #18 (permalink)  
Uneasy Pleistocene Leftover
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Gone, but not forgotten apparently?! All forums marked "Private"...
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Air is composed of 78% Nitrogen (N2) 21% Oxygen (O2) and .3% Carbon Dioxide (CO2). Well about that, at sea level, away from big trees and heavy breathers.

There can be major benefits in modifying gas levels to the range of 3-5% oxygen and 3-10% carbon dioxide. These gas levels slow respiration (calming effect) and thereby slow physiological ageing (at a fraction of the price of plastic surgery or those slimming lotions), inhibit enzymatic browning (whatever that is - something to do with tanning?) and slow microbiological growth (they must be nasty little things - always there but you can't see 'em).

Oh sorry, I thought we were talking about flying fruit...

Take me home, country roads, to the place, I belong, JetBlast beckons...
airship is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2005, 22:07
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thank you for the excellent advice about changing careers, which I am in the process of doing as I write.

It ain't half challenging changing though, and yes with hindsight I should have got off the 146 a while ago but plan to get out of aviation altogether.

When I started flying the 146 it seemed a really good aircraft and one doesn't necessarilly imagine that it might be doing long term damage and take the correct action.

After all, all the experts said there was nothing to worry about.
They would say that though, wouldn't they?

I am a simple pilot, after all.
Dream Buster is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2005, 22:25
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 52N 20E
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hmmmm....... The "Experts" ( Manufacturers, Regulators etc) were invited to attend the Conference but alas most of them couldn't be bothered.

Shame really.


Quick Fixes? Well yes there are but alas the Industry again can't be bothered.
Most of the solutions have been around for a long time too.
Smokie 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.