Aerotoxic Syndrome
Discussion
They are in the engine oils. The oil gets burnt, and small amounts get into the air conditioning system. Therefore, over a period of time, there is an accumulation in the body. There are hundreds, maybe thousands, of airline crew around the world who have been affected.
Have a look at http://aerotoxic.org
Have a look at http://aerotoxic.org
Edited by nightflight on Saturday 21st February 00:06
Some aircraft types certainly appear worse than others, depending on the plumbing and bleed air systems. The 146 and B757 seem to feature prominently in these events.
The 787 doesn't use engine bleed air in air conditioning but Airbus even still use it on all their new aircraft like the A350 and A380.
The problem is that if you get rid of bleed air systems (and thus the chance of air contamination) you need to replace that with heavy electrical generators.
The 787 doesn't use engine bleed air in air conditioning but Airbus even still use it on all their new aircraft like the A350 and A380.
The problem is that if you get rid of bleed air systems (and thus the chance of air contamination) you need to replace that with heavy electrical generators.
I fail to understand why the airlines haven't dealt with this before now; it's not like it's a difficult, expensive or heavy fix, just active carbon filters in the bleed air lines and an extra inspection/replacement on the weekly checks. Presumably some actuary has calculated that not doing it will be 10p cheaper than the impending lawsuits.
hidetheelephants said:
I fail to understand why the airlines haven't dealt with this before now; it's not like it's a difficult, expensive or heavy fix, just active carbon filters in the bleed air lines and an extra inspection/replacement on the weekly checks. Presumably some actuary has calculated that not doing it will be 10p cheaper than the impending lawsuits.
There are filter kits available which cost around 20K per aircraft. The airlines think it's cheaper to pay insurance premiums for their crews, so when they go sick, they get paid off by the insurers. I suspect they are about to pay for this folly.Simpo Two said:
Seeing as the thing is flying at 600mph through vast quantities of fresh air I'm surprised they have to take it from the engines. Or is it just that it's too cold?
That's fine if you want a cabin temperature at something like -30c (hence bodies get frozen if they stow away in an undercarriage bay). To get it a bit warmer you take hot air from the engine and mix it in via other bits like water extractors etc.el stovey said:
Some aircraft types certainly appear worse than others, depending on the plumbing and bleed air systems. The 146 and B757 seem to feature prominently in these events.
The 787 doesn't use engine bleed air in air conditioning but Airbus even still use it on all their new aircraft like the A350 and A380.
The problem is that if you get rid of bleed air systems (and thus the chance of air contamination) you need to replace that with heavy electrical generators.
If it's ram air fed, how do they condition the cabin on the ground?The 787 doesn't use engine bleed air in air conditioning but Airbus even still use it on all their new aircraft like the A350 and A380.
The problem is that if you get rid of bleed air systems (and thus the chance of air contamination) you need to replace that with heavy electrical generators.
Aerotoxic syndrome is a very serious health risk for airline professionals, it has been glossed over for far too long by the airlines.
Edited by Mojocvh on Sunday 22 February 14:06
eccles said:
Simpo Two said:
Seeing as the thing is flying at 600mph through vast quantities of fresh air I'm surprised they have to take it from the engines. Or is it just that it's too cold?
That's fine if you want a cabin temperature at something like -30c (hence bodies get frozen if they stow away in an undercarriage bay). To get it a bit warmer you take hot air from the engine and mix it in via other bits like water extractors etc.
Some Gump said:
^ about the same as it will cool on the other side.. Not sure refrigerating the cabin is required?
The cabin is at a higher pressure than outside - but I agree, subject to doing the physics which I can't, that any temperature gain is likely to be small.But the point is that there is (1) lots of spare fresh air (2) lots of spare heat from four jet engines. It should not be beyond the wit of man to combine them in a way that doesn't expose people to anything other than heat and air...
Simpo Two said:
Some Gump said:
^ about the same as it will cool on the other side.. Not sure refrigerating the cabin is required?
The cabin is at a higher pressure than outside - but I agree, subject to doing the physics which I can't, that any temperature gain is likely to be small.But the point is that there is (1) lots of spare fresh air (2) lots of spare heat from four jet engines. It should not be beyond the wit of man to combine them in a way that doesn't expose people to anything other than heat and air...
Fonz said:
Just seen an item on BBC South Today where they reported that although the industry says that there are no links to the condition the Boeing Dreamliner has been designed with a different way of pressurising the cabin. “Make of that what you will†was the parting line.
Isn't that simply because the 787 is philosophically a "more electric aircraft" - specifically trying to replace pneumatic and hydraulic with distributed electrical systems?Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff