Toxic Fumes on Planes Blamed for Deaths of Pilots and Crew

This is especially prevalent on the Airbus A320-series aircraft due to the way it's very easy to overfill or spill oil on the APU in a way where the fumes can get sucked into the cabin air.

The only commercial aircraft immune to this issue is the B787 because it does not use engine "bleed air".

▲

hodgesrm 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

WSJ reporting on toxic fumes in aircraft has been excellent. There was a previous article in September that highlighted the problem. [0]

Problems like these make the value of good reporting obvious. If you want to be a muckraker this is a golden age.

[0] https://www.wsj.com/business/airlines/air-travel-toxic-fumes...

▲

jabl an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Hooray for the Boeing 787 with its electrically powered cabin air compressor rather than using engine bleed air like other contemporary airliners.

▲

karakoram 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

https://archive.md/yejLz

▲

OutOfHere 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

From what I recall from a prior article, this really is a bigger problem on Airbus planes than on Boeing planes, so much so that I will not fly on an Airbus plane. Until you vote with your wallet, no one will care.

Also, for multiple reasons, no one should fly without wearing a P95 or comparable or superior mask. You never know when smoke will hit. It is most critical during takeoff and landing, or if on the ground at a terminal. 3M 8577 is decent, with an essential bonus carbon layer. Place a disposable ASTM level 3 surgical mask on top too.

Note that an SpO2 finger meter can fail to recognize CO poisoning; it can be misleading with a false normal value of SpO2.

▲

AgentK20 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Uh.....what planes are you on where you, the passenger, can simply "pull down the oxygen mask"? Also, wouldn't the P95 only help with particulates (e.g. soot), but not with the actual toxic fumes?

▲

janice1999 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

OP has no idea what he's talking about. Passengers masks are for depressurisation events and oxygen supplies last 15 minutes - enough time for the pilots to descend. Pilots have a separate longer lasting oxygen supply. In many (most older?) planes, a single passenger activating their mask will activate the chemical based oxygen supply that feeds all passenger masks.

▲

OutOfHere an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> but not with the actual toxic fumes?

3M 8577 has a bonus carbon layer for this purpose. Its protection is not complete, but can limit the damage. You should also carry spares in case the carbon layer is exhausted.

▲

kubelsmieci 41 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

How will you know that you should change mask?

	▲	OutOfHere 22 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		The mask itself starts to smell. You will start sneezing and also dripping from the nose, but this will stop if you remove or replace the mask. Also, you start to smell the diesel fumes. The more you wear a clean mask, the more sensitive your nose becomes to mild fumes.

▲

AgentK20 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Oh, very cool. TIL. Thanks!

▲

tenuousemphasis an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I'd love to know what percentage of flights experience fume events to determine if it's a real problem I should worry about.

	▲	4d4m an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		100% outside of those with electric compressors for bleed air. You can smell it with your nose on takeoff and landing.
	▲	OutOfHere an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		For what it's worth, there is a very high number of harmful ultrafine particles in the air whenever a flight is taking off or landing, and also on the ground at the terminal. Most cases of exposure are just not acutely damaging to someone with normal lung function, but the damage absolutely accumulates with multiple flights. The heart in particular is no less sensitive to them than the lungs. The noted mask, if worn tightly, will block a good chunk of them.