PASSENGERS and crew are exposed to on board plane fumes so dangerous they can be life-threatening.
The in-cabin oxygen supply is not just stuffy, it’s filled with toxic fumes that no one’s told about.
Just this week a BA flight to Vancouver was diverted due to crew illness.
The reason for their sickness has not yet been confirmed, but the incident has again raised questions over air cabin quality.
Frank Brehany, Consumer Director of HolidayTravelWatch, said: “If the reports we have seen are correct, then they represent a text-book case of why Passengers should have a Right to information following a Fume Event on-board an aircraft.”
BA said in a statement: “We are sorry for the delay to our customers’ flight but the safety and well being of our customers and crew is always our top priority.
“The flight from San Francisco diverted to Vancouver after members of the cabin crew became unwell.”
BA has been contacted for comment.
The mixture of ‘bleed air’ to normal air is in a 50/50 ratio inside the plane cabin
This process called ‘bleed air’ circulates through the cabin and comprises an astounding 50% of the total air supply.
Wet seals on the jet engines are designed to keep the oil and air apart but according to the Aerotoxic Association – a group formed by pilots forced out of work because of the issue – this is not completely effective.
When the seals wear down or suddenly fail, a sizeable amount of oil is mixed with hot compressed air and a ‘fume event’ occurs.
Sometimes it’s visible to passengers on board in the form of a blueish haze and sometimes it’s picked up by an oily smell.
Other times it’s not detectable at all, but the event can cause the deadly aerotoxic syndrome.
Despite numerous reported incidences from crew over the years, including the death of British Airways co-pilot Richard Westgate in 2012, little action has been taken to eradicate the toxic environment.
The new Boeing 787 Dreamliner is the only aircraft that filters out ‘bleed air’
Dr Michaelis said: “The hazardous substances are regularly being found in the various ad-hoc studies of the cabin air being undertaken and it is not possible to dismiss the substances as being too low to cause harm as the airline industry repeatedly does.
“While crew and frequent flyers may be more regularly exposed, some people are particularly susceptible to these hazardous substances and we do not have the tools to say who is more susceptible, so we must protect all.”
One such substance in the oil is listed on the European ‘substances of very high concern’ (SVHC) for its potential to cause harm to the unborn or infertility.
Dr Michaelis believes the aviation industry has known about the toxicity since the 1950s but has largely ignored it.
She said: “Since this time, the aviation industry has either done very little or gone around in circles to delay action. There are a few isolated projects going on in recent years, but none of these are being implemented.”
Air from the jet engine is filtered into the cabin of the plane
She also said: “Current aircraft should all have the bleed air filtered as it comes off the engine & detection systems must be introduced rather than relying on the pilot’s nose alone.”
Chairman of the Aerotoxic Association John Hoyte agrees that evidence from crew has been consistently ignored.
He said: “This issue is a 60 year old fundamental design flaw where crews and passengers are knowingly being exposed to nerve gas agents in the confined space of commercial jets.”
Symptoms of aerotoxic syndrome include fatigue, headaches, nausea, chest tightness and loss of balance.
A Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) spokesperson said: “Our priority is always the safety of passengers and crew and we continue to work with airlines, manufacturers and international regulators to drive improvements in safety standards across the industry.
“We understand the concerns that have been raised about cabin air quality and we take very seriously any suggestions that people have suffered ill health from their experience of aviation.
“We rely on guidance from scientific experts based on the results of a number of independent studies and evidence reviews – including Government commissioned research. The overall conclusion of those studies is that there is no positive evidence of a link between exposure to contaminants in cabin air and possible acute and long-term health effects, although such a link cannot be excluded.
“Accordingly, we continue to support the steps being taken by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which maintains responsibility for approving the safety of aircraft and setting aviation standards for European airlines, and is carrying out further research into cabin air quality.”
Read the full article here