Nicoeddf
Posts: 947
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:13 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 2:18 pm

uta999 wrote:
Shouldn't the pilots involved insist this aircraft is taken out of service until the source is found? The CAA or AAIB could too (hint) if it reaches them.


That may come as a surprise to you, but pilots rarely get to decide which aircraft are taken out of service.

A PIC might refuse an aircraft, that doesn't mean another PIC might accept that very plane regardless.

And on what basis anyway? A "feeling" something might occur?
Enslave yourself to the divine disguised as salvation
that your bought with your sacrifice
Deception justified for your holy design
High on our platform spewing out your crimes
from the altar of god
 
Phoenix757767
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 2:33 pm

JannEejit wrote:
IWMBH wrote:
I wasn't aware that BA operated secondhand A320's. Seems like GATL had quite the life before joining the BA-fleet.


Yes, all of the G-GAT* fleet were acquired from previous operators. Another example of life under Mr Cruz.

Delta has bought numerous used aircraft as has AA and UA getting into the mix as well as WN. Normal practice.
 
IWMBH
Posts: 441
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2018 5:01 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 2:38 pm

Phoenix757767 wrote:
JannEejit wrote:
IWMBH wrote:
I wasn't aware that BA operated secondhand A320's. Seems like GATL had quite the life before joining the BA-fleet.


Yes, all of the G-GAT* fleet were acquired from previous operators. Another example of life under Mr Cruz.

Delta has bought numerous used aircraft as has AA and UA getting into the mix as well as WN. Normal practice.


Maybe in the US but most legacy carriers in Europe only operate new-built planes.
 
Phoenix757767
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 2:57 pm

IWMBH wrote:
Phoenix757767 wrote:
JannEejit wrote:

Yes, all of the G-GAT* fleet were acquired from previous operators. Another example of life under Mr Cruz.

Delta has bought numerous used aircraft as has AA and UA getting into the mix as well as WN. Normal practice.


Maybe in the US but most legacy carriers in Europe only operate new-built planes.

I seriously doubt that.
 
IWMBH
Posts: 441
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2018 5:01 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 3:00 pm

Phoenix757767 wrote:
IWMBH wrote:
Phoenix757767 wrote:
Delta has bought numerous used aircraft as has AA and UA getting into the mix as well as WN. Normal practice.


Maybe in the US but most legacy carriers in Europe only operate new-built planes.

I seriously doubt that.


As far as I know there are no second-hand planes in the fleets of AF, KL or LH. But please correct me if im wrong.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9920
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 3:01 pm

Phoenix757767 wrote:
IWMBH wrote:
Phoenix757767 wrote:
Delta has bought numerous used aircraft as has AA and UA getting into the mix as well as WN. Normal practice.


Maybe in the US but most legacy carriers in Europe only operate new-built planes.

I seriously doubt that.

It’s actual fairly accurate. On the flip side though a lot of the euro legacy fleets (especially narrowbody) are older than many people realize.
 
uta999
Posts: 811
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:10 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 3:29 pm

Nicoeddf wrote:
uta999 wrote:
Shouldn't the pilots involved insist this aircraft is taken out of service until the source is found? The CAA or AAIB could too (hint) if it reaches them.


That may come as a surprise to you, but pilots rarely get to decide which aircraft are taken out of service.

A PIC might refuse an aircraft, that doesn't mean another PIC might accept that very plane regardless.

And on what basis anyway? A "feeling" something might occur?


On the basis that a fatal accident was narrowly averted, and unless something is 'fixed' could happen again. This event is obviously being played down by everyone for a reason.
Your computer just got better
 
IADCA
Posts: 2039
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 4:48 pm

Phoenix757767 wrote:
IWMBH wrote:
Phoenix757767 wrote:
Delta has bought numerous used aircraft as has AA and UA getting into the mix as well as WN. Normal practice.


Maybe in the US but most legacy carriers in Europe only operate new-built planes.

I seriously doubt that.


As others have said, it's pretty accurate as to the non-IAG majors and their subs. For example, LH and its subs (including OS, LX, for example) have fleets that are almost all direct from factory, with the caveat that some are inherited from predecessors that either went bust or merged (LX inherited some of its Airbus narrowbodies from predecessor SR, OS some 767s from Lauda). OS has a few A320s that are leased and flew previously for other carriers, but it's maybe 10 frames. The big exception there is the AB frames at Eurowings and OS, but that's also a little different animal than open-market purchases - many of them were leased from the LH Group in the first place.

Some of the smaller legacy carriers have fairly significant secondhand fleets, though. SK, for example, has decent sized used fleets in both the 737 and 320ceo. Their practice is a little more in line with the way the US majors have approached it, although they're largely replacing those fleets with factory-fresh NEOs.
 
JoseSalazar
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 5:23 pm

Polot wrote:
dabsen wrote:
JoseSalazar wrote:

Get a fume mask...preferably a P95 rated mask, and keep it with you. I fly in the back 8 times a month commuting on a transcon and don’t fly without one handy now.


Not an expert but I'm rather skeptical a simple P95 mask would do much against organophosphates. Presumably one would need something like an activated carbon filter, which I certainly wouldn't bother carrying around on planes…

The very fact that his “eyes, nose, throat burned the rest of the day. Had a nasty headache” despite wearing the mask is proof that the mask didn’t actually do all that much.


I have a respirator that works much better, but I'm not commuting around with that thing. The seal on a simple cheap P/N99/95 mask isn't great, so there is some leakage in the inhalation. And a P95 rated mask will filter 95% of particulates and is ok for oil based pollutants. N99 is the other option, filtering 99% but not suitable for oil based pollutants. In my referenced fume exposure, I had inhaled some fumes prior to waking up and prior to getting the mask on. Obviously some level of inhalation has to occur at the onset of fumes in the detection phase. I have heard that the organophosphates can get on your clothes/skin/eyes as well, though inhalation constitutes the bulk of the introduction of the chemicals into the bloodstream. When I'm up front or in the jumpseat I get a nice seal with a full O2 mask/goggles that covers my eyes/nose/mouth. When I'm in the back, I can't do much, so a little mask will at least provide some level of protection and filtration. It may not be 100%...but in a career of being exposed to this stuff (it's cumulative), I prefer to stack my deck as best as I can and give myself the best odds.
 
Stickpusher
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 5:49 pm

seabosdca wrote:
Fume events happen on virtually every flight I'm on... Embraers, MDs, 737s, A320s, 757s, 767s, and an A330. It's really nasty and one of my least favorite things about flying...


I've seldom noticed it but for one type, Concorde. The seats toward the back, when T/O power is first applied, can get a very acrid ozone-ish smell wafting around there for the start of the takeoff roll. Obviously the acceleration put it behind us very quickly. The cockpit crew would mention this before we launched, so I'm guessing it happened all the time. I was usually too busy grinning to care.

I've been there for a fume event on, I think, a 737 many years ago, possibly a 735 or 738. It was almost certainly hot brakes (a smell I know well) after landing and vacating early and rapidly. Not being an expert on systems I don't know how it made its way to the cabin, but I assume it was brakes and perhaps the orientation of the aircraft relative to the wind. That was probably the least pleasant of all because it was so slow to clear. I seem to remember that it was at Amsterdam, arriving from Prague, so either KLM or CSA (they codeshared on it, who you ended up flying with was a lottery, so I don't recall exactly who).

Apart from those two situations I've mercifully avoided this situation.
 
zuckie13
Posts: 227
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 8:23 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 7:15 pm

Ok, reading this - the flight was within minutes (or maybe less) of having nobody conscious at the controls.
How is this plane not being torn apart by the AAIB (or whomever does investigations in Cyprus) to determine a proper root cause and make some useful recommendation to fix it?
To me, this certainly is close enough to an actual disaster to warrant a proper investigation - an clearly this is an issue with at least this aircraft type and some useful recommendations could be applied to others as well.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Topic Author
Posts: 2825
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 7:17 pm

kiowa wrote:
Antarius wrote:
kiowa wrote:
I believe that was the one on American Airlines.


AA doesnt have any a330 neos.


The article states A330.

https://simpleflying.com/american-a330-fumes-diversion/


You're both correct, there was an AA incident but there also have bee A330neo incidents, One that involved one getting returned to Airbus,
 
smartplane
Posts: 1192
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 7:30 pm

ozark1 wrote:
Let me tell you something. Upon engine startup and pushback on Airbus 319/320/321 aircraft, the fumes are so harsh that passengers will often ring their call light and ask me what the odor is. I don't know what phase of flight this was, but with the exception of the good ole MD80's , the Airbus fleet is the only aircraft type where fumes are a normal occurrence

Modern aircraft maybe. I'm old enough to recall earlier piston and turboprop aircraft. The 737-100 could be a stinker. And BA146. Comet. VC10, BAC111. DC8/9. DC10 and Tristar. Early 747's. Dodgy APU's. The A320 family is odour free compared to these. But agree the odour bar should be raised over time, not lowered. But then we have the safety bar and the MAX..........
 
art
Posts: 3052
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 7:44 pm

zuckie13 wrote:
To me, this certainly is close enough to an actual disaster to warrant a proper investigation...


Agree.
 
NorthwestB744
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2019 4:49 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Nov 26, 2019 8:03 pm

This reminds me of Airplane! They should have gotten Robert Hays to land the plane.
 
Nicoeddf
Posts: 947
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:13 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Wed Nov 27, 2019 12:48 am

uta999 wrote:
Nicoeddf wrote:
uta999 wrote:
Shouldn't the pilots involved insist this aircraft is taken out of service until the source is found? The CAA or AAIB could too (hint) if it reaches them.


That may come as a surprise to you, but pilots rarely get to decide which aircraft are taken out of service.

A PIC might refuse an aircraft, that doesn't mean another PIC might accept that very plane regardless.

And on what basis anyway? A "feeling" something might occur?


On the basis that a fatal accident was narrowly averted, and unless something is 'fixed' could happen again. This event is obviously being played down by everyone for a reason.


Yes, on that basis an Airline might ground the plane. Certainly not the pilots.

And yeah, obviously a huge conspiracy going on.
Enslave yourself to the divine disguised as salvation
that your bought with your sacrifice
Deception justified for your holy design
High on our platform spewing out your crimes
from the altar of god
 
speedbird217
Posts: 374
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 2:27 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Wed Nov 27, 2019 7:52 am

The GAT*s were acquired, and bar GATU delivered before Alex Cruz became CEO...but let’s not have facts get in the way of things.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4038
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Dec 10, 2019 5:32 am

JoseSalazar wrote:
zkojq wrote:
A few months back I googled the registration of the Eurowings A319 I was about to board and gulped at the number of fume incidents that the aircraft had been involved in. What can you do as a passenger though?


Get a fume mask...preferably a P95 rated mask, and keep it with you. I fly in the back 8 times a month commuting on a transcon and don’t fly without one handy now. I got fumed last week by an A321. The airline has switched turbine oils to one that no longer smells like dirty socks, but rather magic markers when it gets sucked into the bleeds and pyrolized. I was sleeping (redeye) and was awoken by the overpowering marker smell. I put my mask on the remainder of the flight. Everyone else was asleep and no one had markers out. Eyes, nose, throat burned the rest of the day. Had a nasty headache. I sure hope this issue gets fixed at some point soon.


Not a bad idea at all. I guess the key is keeping the mask handy.

uta999 wrote:
Shouldn't the pilots involved insist this aircraft is taken out of service until the source is found? The CAA or AAIB could too (hint) if it reaches them.

I don't think the pilots are the decision makers here, unfortunately.

JoseSalazar wrote:
I have a respirator that works much better, but I'm not commuting around with that thing. The seal on a simple cheap P/N99/95 mask isn't great, so there is some leakage in the inhalation. And a P95 rated mask will filter 95% of particulates and is ok for oil based pollutants. N99 is the other option, filtering 99% but not suitable for oil based pollutants. In my referenced fume exposure, I had inhaled some fumes prior to waking up and prior to getting the mask on. Obviously some level of inhalation has to occur at the onset of fumes in the detection phase. I have heard that the organophosphates can get on your clothes/skin/eyes as well, though inhalation constitutes the bulk of the introduction of the chemicals into the bloodstream. When I'm up front or in the jumpseat I get a nice seal with a full O2 mask/goggles that covers my eyes/nose/mouth. When I'm in the back, I can't do much, so a little mask will at least provide some level of protection and filtration. It may not be 100%...but in a career of being exposed to this stuff (it's cumulative), I prefer to stack my deck as best as I can and give myself the best odds.


95% less of that stuff not entering your nose and lungs is a hell of a lot better than getting a full dose of all of it.

zuckie13 wrote:
Ok, reading this - the flight was within minutes (or maybe less) of having nobody conscious at the controls.
How is this plane not being torn apart by the AAIB (or whomever does investigations in Cyprus) to determine a proper root cause and make some useful recommendation to fix it?
To me, this certainly is close enough to an actual disaster to warrant a proper investigation - an clearly this is an issue with at least this aircraft type and some useful recommendations could be applied to others as well.


Unfortunately aerotoxin incidents never seem to get taken all that seriously by the authorities, which is maddening. In one of the cases where AvHerald was trying to investigating (the Spirit one where the captain died) the FAA spokesperson was straight-out stonewalling and doing all they could to obstruct:

The FAA is committed to protecting the safety and health of passengers and cabin crews on our nation's airlines. Studies have indicated that cabin air is as good as or better than the air found in offices and homes. The FAA believes that the cabin environment in the vast majority of commercial flights is safe. However, we are concerned that if certain mechanical failures occur, the cabin environment may contain contaminants. Airlines are required to report fume events to the FAA.

In total disbelief about this statement, which essentially said air in the cabin is as good or even better than the air in any home or office, we decided to deepen our research into the FAA oversight. We filed another FoIA request to the FAA now requring all occurrence reports as well as all FAA initiated supervision activities of the airline between Jan 1st 2015 and Jun 30th 2018.

On Oct 31st 2018 we received the reply to this FoIA request listing a total of 46 occurrences, however, no supervision activities were listed. We noticed immediately, all the fume events we knew about, even the fume events we had reported to the FAA, were missing in that list, only other occurences were listed. We inquired therefore: "I did notice that a lot of occurrences were not listed that we know about and even inquired with the FAA (Kathleen Bergen) about during 2018, notably all fume events are not listed. Is this outside your Data Systems Branch and tracked by some other office (and we are going to receive that list with a different mail), or what is the reason for this?"

FAA spokesman Lynn Lunsford replied: "Your request asked for occurrences, so she provided you with a list of all coded occurrences. The other events you mentioned might not have been coded as occurrences. It's possible that they might be able to find them with a more specific search. It's also possible that the information was reported through a voluntary safety information-sharing program such as ASAP. If that were the case, those records are exempt by law from disclosure."

We argued again that in particular this occurrence of Jul 17th 2015 was officially reported at least one time via the flight crew, likely was also officially reported by ATC Boston and was a serious reportable incident by the fact that both flight crew needed to don their oxygen masks with one being completely and the other nearly incapacitated and as such must have been reported by the airline.

We raised additional questions: "What does the FAA do with fume events? Are reports about such events all dismissed and thrown away? How many fume events, with or without injuries (please detail) have the FAA investigated in 2015-2017 (detail per year please) and have issued a final rule? How many of these fume reports 2015-2017 (per year) have been reported to the NTSB, how many of those were rated incidents, serious incidents or accidents?"

Lynn Lunsford replied, in reference to the FAA statement sent on May 5th 2018 by Kathleen Bergen: "After considering your additional questions, our previous statement stands. Good luck with your story."

We made a last attempt with respect to this statement essentially stating: "Studies have indicated that cabin air is as good as or better than the air found in offices and homes." and confronted both Lynn Lunsford and Kathleen Bergen with this FAA document:

Aircraft Cabin Bleed Air Contaminants: A Review by Gregory A. Day, Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, Federal Aviation Administration

This paper alone makes clear that the FAA statement "Studies have indicated that cabin air is as good as or better than the air found in offices and homes." does not hold water. On page 3 for example, and this was argued by us, the paper states, that the concentration of carbondioxide on board of aircraft had been determined to range between 519 and 4902ppm with an average of 1404ppm. In comparison, the concentration in office buildings averages at 400ppm. Many more papers to that theme are available.

Lynn Lunsford again responded: "We've said all we are going to say you on the matter. The FAA is not going to make anybody available for interviews. Good luck with your story."



http://avherald.com/h?article=4b6eb830/0006&opt=0
First to fly the 787-9
 
9Patch
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Dec 10, 2019 5:40 am

WayexTDI wrote:
ozark1 wrote:
Let me tell you something. Upon engine startup and pushback on Airbus 319/320/321 aircraft, the fumes are so harsh that passengers will often ring their call light and ask me what the odor is. I don't know what phase of flight this was, but with the exception of the good ole MD80's , the Airbus fleet is the only aircraft type where fumes are a normal occurrence

I don't know about that; I've been on many A320Family flights, and I've never experienced smoke/fume nor have I seen passengers ring the call light upon start-up.

Well a FA has probably been on a lot more flights than you.
 
StdTank80002
Posts: 31
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2019 10:42 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:20 pm

Quite surprised at the apparent lack of concern from the authorities to be honest. It feels like these were close calls that are easily warranting further investigation. Considering the investigations we go through in the UK rail industry at the smallest thing it feels very alien to me. I can't see a reason why it wouldn't be investigated? What would the reason be?

Like people say, feels like at some point the pilots may not realise and not get to their oxygen masks in time, seems unlikely but maybe a little too likely.
 
747megatop
Posts: 1750
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Dec 10, 2019 4:10 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
ozark1 wrote:
Let me tell you something. Upon engine startup and pushback on Airbus 319/320/321 aircraft, the fumes are so harsh that passengers will often ring their call light and ask me what the odor is. I don't know what phase of flight this was, but with the exception of the good ole MD80's , the Airbus fleet is the only aircraft type where fumes are a normal occurrence

Increasing your chance of cancer with every flight.

Naah. Before cancer takes us out, the ride to/from the airport has a far greater chance of taking us out. Cancer is least of the concerns here. A Swiss air flight 111 type incident is the concern here.
 
glideslope900
Posts: 155
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:27 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Dec 10, 2019 5:15 pm

The problem is the IAE V2500 engines. That is why this occurs so often on A320 aircraft. I made a thread about this in the Technical Operations section a while ago but no one seemed to want to discuss it.
 
User avatar
CFM565A1
Posts: 399
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:19 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Dec 10, 2019 8:14 pm

Every single plane in my signature has had numerous fume events in its respective history including the 787. Regards to the 787 it’s electrical fumes which are equally as bad.

What worries me is that regardless of manufacturer, there’s nothing being done to rectify it. The planes I fly smell skunk like after they start and the packs on some certainly cause me to have a cough that acts up every now and then... and oh they took out our CO detectors from our cockpits :roll:

This is not solely an Airbus trend and it’ll never be solely an Airbus thing. Will never be fixed if people assume it’s one type plane.
C172-M/N/P/R/S , P2006T, PA-34-200T, B1900D, DH8A/C ERJ-145, CRJ-100/200, DH8D, CRJ-700/705/900, E-175/190, A319/320/321, 737-200/300/400/600/700/800/900ER/M8, MD-82/83, 757-200/300, 767-300, A330-300, 787-9, 777-300ER, F28-4000.
 
abies111
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:15 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Dec 10, 2019 10:13 pm

Why this and other fume events don't prompt a systematic analysis of the air quality inside ALL types of planes? Why not sampling several hundred of planes with monitors for recording of CO levels and putting some filters inside the ducts and then search them for unwanted volatile substances, every month for a year? Then, if a trend in a low quality of the air is noted, a change in technology can be forced by authorities, as they do in many other areas (I.e car manufacturing, and exhaust emissions)

You cannot rely in cockpit subjective experiencias for managing this matter
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 1104
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:35 pm

ozark1 wrote:
Let me tell you something. Upon engine startup and pushback on Airbus 319/320/321 aircraft, the fumes are so harsh that passengers will often ring their call light and ask me what the odor is. I don't know what phase of flight this was, but with the exception of the good ole MD80's , the Airbus fleet is the only aircraft type where fumes are a normal occurrence

No, they are not the only type where startup fumes are a normal occurrence. I can't seem to remember any A320 flight I've been on where I've been able to smell exhaust fumes after startup, but I do remember more than once on a 737. To provide context, I've been on an A320 nearly 50 times and 737 only 13 times. I also live in a cold place. The point is what does one expect to happen when an engine is cold and has a lot of incomplete combustion right after start when it gets pushed back into its exhaust cloud or has the exhaust blown into it?
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T PA-28-180

2 ears for spatial hearing, 2 eyes for depth perception, 2 ears for balance... How did Boeing think 1 sensor was good enough?!
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1410
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Wed Dec 11, 2019 4:10 am

767333ER wrote:
ozark1 wrote:
Let me tell you something. Upon engine startup and pushback on Airbus 319/320/321 aircraft, the fumes are so harsh that passengers will often ring their call light and ask me what the odor is. I don't know what phase of flight this was, but with the exception of the good ole MD80's , the Airbus fleet is the only aircraft type where fumes are a normal occurrence

No, they are not the only type where startup fumes are a normal occurrence. I can't seem to remember any A320 flight I've been on where I've been able to smell exhaust fumes after startup, but I do remember more than once on a 737. To provide context, I've been on an A320 nearly 50 times and 737 only 13 times. I also live in a cold place. The point is what does one expect to happen when an engine is cold and has a lot of incomplete combustion right after start when it gets pushed back into its exhaust cloud or has the exhaust blown into it?

Remember, in the world of some very kind a.net members,
[w]ell a FA has probably been on a lot more flights than you

/s
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9695
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Wed Dec 11, 2019 4:18 am

Lol I’ve logged 22 flights on that particular aircraft as a pilot. Glad I’m no longer flying it.


Also happy that I’m now on the 787
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4183
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:08 am

CWL757 wrote:
Ryanair01 wrote:
Regular issues (including with smoke/fumes) with that aircraft:

Sept 6: Went tech overnight in Edinburgh
Oct 2: Technical diversion to Athens (smoke in cabin)
Oct 18: Technical diversion to Porto
Oct 19: Paphos crew incapacitated (fumes)

No fault found? There's definitely something

Are those all with GATL!? Surely this warrants the aircraft being taken out of service for a major check of the Avionics? Clearly something not right with that a/c. This could have had the same result as the Helios crash, albeit with a different cause.

they could test the Pressure taps for the engines as they could indicate a bleed leak from an Engine Bearing Compartment,or a "Phosphate Esther" ( generic Skydrol") leak into the left pack. which could be indicative of a leak from the Forward Cargo door control valve located under the forward cargo pit floor
In any case? They will be troubleshooting a while. I would love to see the FAA Service Difficulty report on this. I know this has been reported a number of times as I've had to troubleshoot this on more than one occasion in my last 16 years at United and I'm SURE Delta and American have Data on this as well. BA should have info on this up the Ying Yang. as Airbus engineering is virtually right down the Road!
 
DeltaConnection
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 10:16 pm

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:48 am

767333ER wrote:
ozark1 wrote:
Let me tell you something. Upon engine startup and pushback on Airbus 319/320/321 aircraft, the fumes are so harsh that passengers will often ring their call light and ask me what the odor is. I don't know what phase of flight this was, but with the exception of the good ole MD80's , the Airbus fleet is the only aircraft type where fumes are a normal occurrence

No, they are not the only type where startup fumes are a normal occurrence. I can't seem to remember any A320 flight I've been on where I've been able to smell exhaust fumes after startup, but I do remember more than once on a 737. To provide context, I've been on an A320 nearly 50 times and 737 only 13 times. I also live in a cold place. The point is what does one expect to happen when an engine is cold and has a lot of incomplete combustion right after start when it gets pushed back into its exhaust cloud or has the exhaust blown into it?


Agreed, only have a handful of "fumes during startup" experiences on the Airbus A320 family, have it on practically every flight on the 737 family, including newer -800's and -900's.
 
speedbird52
Posts: 912
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:30 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Wed Dec 11, 2019 7:01 am

Polot wrote:
dabsen wrote:
JoseSalazar wrote:

Get a fume mask...preferably a P95 rated mask, and keep it with you. I fly in the back 8 times a month commuting on a transcon and don’t fly without one handy now.


Not an expert but I'm rather skeptical a simple P95 mask would do much against organophosphates. Presumably one would need something like an activated carbon filter, which I certainly wouldn't bother carrying around on planes…

The very fact that his “eyes, nose, throat burned the rest of the day. Had a nasty headache” despite wearing the mask is proof that the mask didn’t actually do all that much.

I really think they should have went to the hospital.
 
bluecrew
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:13 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Wed Dec 11, 2019 7:46 am

767333ER wrote:
ozark1 wrote:
Let me tell you something. Upon engine startup and pushback on Airbus 319/320/321 aircraft, the fumes are so harsh that passengers will often ring their call light and ask me what the odor is. I don't know what phase of flight this was, but with the exception of the good ole MD80's , the Airbus fleet is the only aircraft type where fumes are a normal occurrence

No, they are not the only type where startup fumes are a normal occurrence. I can't seem to remember any A320 flight I've been on where I've been able to smell exhaust fumes after startup, but I do remember more than once on a 737. To provide context, I've been on an A320 nearly 50 times and 737 only 13 times. I also live in a cold place. The point is what does one expect to happen when an engine is cold and has a lot of incomplete combustion right after start when it gets pushed back into its exhaust cloud or has the exhaust blown into it?

For years here at BrandX, we have had issues with V2500 fume events on the Airbus.
The company doesn't take it seriously.
Lots of returns to JFK and BOS on the regular.
Airbus doesn't take it seriously either. I've done more than a few jobs involving inflight, and nobody seems to think there's an issue. Yet we end up with flight attendants and pilots in the hospital on many more occasions than get media attention. Lots of miscellaneous mechanical delays, or cancellations because the plane is mysteriously taken out of service and the crew is nowhere to be found, sometimes removed from trips for a few days.
(edit): worth mentioning... while you've been on the A320 series 50 times, I've been on the same plane probably 1500 times.
 
jupiter2
Posts: 1739
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2001 11:30 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Wed Dec 11, 2019 8:49 am

Some people need to remember that it's not the on ground, engine start up fume events that are the worry, it is the inflight events that are the cause for concern. This crew were close to passing out, we weren't far from having a major disaster because of the fumes affecting these people.

We know that these events can occur on all types of aircraft, but it does seem that the 320 series seem to be the one type particularly susceptible to fume events. Of course the sheer numbers of the flying fleet will skew the numbers somewhat, but the nearest contemporary doesn't have nearly as many fume events, at least not reported ones.
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 1104
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Serious fume event on BA A320 - both pilots partially incapacitated

Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:21 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
767333ER wrote:
ozark1 wrote:
Let me tell you something. Upon engine startup and pushback on Airbus 319/320/321 aircraft, the fumes are so harsh that passengers will often ring their call light and ask me what the odor is. I don't know what phase of flight this was, but with the exception of the good ole MD80's , the Airbus fleet is the only aircraft type where fumes are a normal occurrence

No, they are not the only type where startupfumes are a normal occurrence. I can't seem to remember any A320 flight I've been on where I've been able to smell exhaust fumes after startup, but I do remember more than once on a 737. To provide context, I've been on an A320 nearly 50 times and 737 only 13 times. I also live in a cold place. The point is what does one expect to happen when an engine is cold and has a lot of incomplete combustion right after start when it gets pushed back into its exhaust cloud or has the exhaust blown into it?

Remember, in the world of some very kind a.net members,
[w]ell a FA has probably been on a lot more flights than you

/s
Being there only matters so much, When someone makes a fallacious statement such as “Airbus fleet is the only aircraft type where fumes are a normal occurrence” after addressing a fume event as the intake of exhaust after start, which the most basic level of physics would tell you is something that happens on every plane, it is obviously not true. If you start your car in the cold and you get in and you smell exhaust, that is not because your car has an exhaust leak but because the exhaust from outside came in. If ozark1 had been discussing fume events in the nature we are otherwise discussing here there would be some validity to that statement but that is not the case or, at least, does not seem to be the case.
bluecrew wrote:
For years here at BrandX, we have had issues with V2500 fume events on the Airbus.
The company doesn't take it seriously.
Lots of returns to JFK and BOS on the regular.
Airbus doesn't take it seriously either. I've done more than a few jobs involving inflight, and nobody seems to think there's an issue. Yet we end up with flight attendants and pilots in the hospital on many more occasions than get media attention. Lots of miscellaneous mechanical delays, or cancellations because the plane is mysteriously taken out of service and the crew is nowhere to be found, sometimes removed from trips for a few days.
(edit): worth mentioning... while you've been on the A320 series 50 times, I've been on the same plane probably 1500 times.

Please re-read:
767333ER wrote:
No, they are not the only type where startupfumes are a normal occurrence.

Intake of exhaust after start is different that a fume event as we were originally discussing here. Flying on a plane 1500 times is great, but reading comprehension is even more important.
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T PA-28-180

2 ears for spatial hearing, 2 eyes for depth perception, 2 ears for balance... How did Boeing think 1 sensor was good enough?!

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos