Thank you for posting. I watched it with English subtitles and these seem to be well translated.
I was of course aware of the bleed air concept but always thought there had to be some kind of filtration to prevent pollution of the cabin air, I’m astonished there isn’t…
Unless you have a pressurized cabin, I suppose.
Quote:
“A very good reason for GA versus airlines: you breathe cleaner air”
Do you? In an SEP? I wonder….
Very serious issue that doesn’t receive enough attention by the authorities. What are they waiting for?
Just take a look at Aviation Herald, it is full of fume events on almost a daily basis.
A pilot has even died after such an event.
Just to get the facts right:
- The pilot died after taking an overdose of sleeping pills. Not after „such an event“. Before his suicide he had neurological symptoms that he himself attributed not to „such an event“ but to a long term exposure to contaminated air.
- One of the biggest challenges in these discussions (also in the TV report at the start) is, that 2 completely different things that have nothing to do with each other beyond both are claimed to happen in planes are always mixed up: On one hand Fume Events were due to a technical defect visibly contaminated air is getting in to the cabin and on the other hand what some people describe as „aerotoxic syndrome“ where mainly cabin crew claims that they suffer from verly low dose chronic intoxication from contaminated cabin air
- With fume events, it is extremely unlikely that -a as the one flight attendent claims in the video – it takes „up to three years“ after the acute intoxication that symptoms are developed and therefore flight passengers do not draw a connection to that fume event. The opposite is the truth: Typically a real fume event is even more shocking for passengers than for crew (as they don‘t know at all what is happening) And therefore they would be even more likely to attribute symptoms to it.
- With aerotoxic syndrome – like with any very low dose very long time intoxication – it is extremely difficult to prove that there is a cause and effect relationship. One of the unanswered questions in that field is, why flight crew risk for this seems to be by order of magnitude higher than the risk of real frequent flyers that spend almost the same time on board breathing the same air…
There was a theory (conspiracy, maybe) about the Eurowings crash not having been a suicide but a bleed air incident.
@Malibuflyer I apologize, I was too fast typing in Google to find the accident and took the wrong article.
This is the pilot I was referring to: https://avherald.com/h?article=4b6eb830
@Dimme: Yes, this is a different case – a quite complex one as well – but let‘s look at the facts of this case:
- There has been a fume event in the Cockpit which has been reported by Captain and Co
- The intoxication from this fume event was so severe, that both were significantly impacted – close to incapitation
- The days immediately following the event, both cockpit crew experienced significant medical problems
- Although this problems went away after few days, the Captain died from a heart attack about 2 months after the event
- There is no indication of any heart problems in the medical history of the pilot
So much for the facts that indeed seem to indicate a connection between the fume event and the death (although this connection has never been officially made). There are, however (and unfortunately for the case), some more facts on the case that actually produce more question marks than answers:
- The heart attack happened while the Captain was running away from police that was chasing him for assault he committed on open street
- At this point in time the Captain had a significant concentration of an opioid painkiller in his blood – and it is unclear where he got this from
- The heart did not only show a mycarditis (that can easily be caused by an intoxication) but also very significant arthereosclerosis – which is something which typically grows over time and is hard to imagine that it grew within 2 months in a perfectly healthy heart.
All in, it is for sure a case that can give some indications, but too questionable of a case to act as „principal witness“ for a multi billion investment that is required to go away from bleed air (and not only the money but also the lifes sacrificed in accidents caused by the new, less mature technology…)
We haven’t heard anything from the B787 no bleed cabin pressurization system being “less mature”, have we?
