Fume Events
04-15-2019, 05:13 PM
#91
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2019
Posts: 315
Originally Posted by All In
Funny you mention that no..
every time I read your posts on here. the vast majority appear to me be short little leading questions. like you are trying to get people (professional pilots, company emoployees) to admit certain things that could be later used in a lawsuit.
I actually think you have ulterior motive. maybe you're a lawyer, or maybe you want a settle meant someday yourself.
every time I read your posts on here. the vast majority appear to me be short little leading questions. like you are trying to get people (professional pilots, company emoployees) to admit certain things that could be later used in a lawsuit.
I actually think you have ulterior motive. maybe you're a lawyer, or maybe you want a settle meant someday yourself.
This made me laugh, thanks.
04-15-2019, 05:39 PM
#92
On Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2019
Posts: 22
It’s too expensive to fix.
Accident: Spirit A319 at Boston on Jul 17th 2015, fumes on board, captain died 50 days later
Accident: Spirit A319 at Boston on Jul 17th 2015, fumes on board, captain died 50 days later
04-15-2019, 05:45 PM
#93
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: Left,Right, Left, Right,Right,Left, Right, Left
Posts: 3,150
Originally Posted by MySaabStory
Look. If there’s some legitimate information on this...I’m happy to read up it, but I’m not going to believe every crazy story out there. Show me some real info.
I’m just fed up with the anti-vaxers, Me Too world we live in.
I’m just fed up with the anti-vaxers, Me Too world we live in.
04-15-2019, 06:26 PM
#94
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,132
Originally Posted by PasserOGas
If only there were an organization representing most pilots that could form a class action. If only...
That's what is truly needed. I tried fighting this battle a decade ago but legally nothing has changed. The problem is that the EPA does not have or want jurisdiction. They claim it's the exclusive domain of the FAA. The FAA is utterly useless when it comes to safety. This can be seen with the 737MAX since it took Trump to order the FAA to ground it. I can think of at least a dozen more things the FAA has sat on in order to fulfill its split mandate of promoting aviation commerce and regulation, which are opposing priorities.
I think a good civil suit that doesn't settle is what is really needed. I'm pretty confident that legislators (even Democrats who market themself as pro-people) are there just to set up laws with loopholes for corporations to exploit. What is needed is precedent. I don't know why ALPA doesn't just sue left and right until something sticks. They sure take enough of our money! Unfortunately they don't have teeth.
For us, the only real way to bring proper attention to this severe medical issue is to continue to follow documentation procedures. The QDL even states that the smell you get when flying through clouds must be documented. (FYI, this can be ozone, mildew, or residues activated by water as it gets into the bleed system). Sadly, 98% of my fellow Captains (and FOs) are all too happy to dismiss APU exhaust ingestion, dirty sock smells, cloud smells, and so on. We're our own worst enemy and this must change.
Furthermore, it is necessary to convince regulators that no amount of VOCs or other hydrocarbon products is acceptable. One common argument I see in various industries is the idea of "acceptable exposures", which is bunk. If monitoring is still an issue, I would suggest a gas chromatograph device. I used one in a former life of science. They can be used to identify VOCs. I'm sure that by now, making one much smaller is possible with today's technology.
04-15-2019, 06:28 PM
#95
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,132
Originally Posted by cashewchop
Almost like a sudden release of cleaning chemicals..... Usually that waterless hand sanitizer evaporates quickly enough that it doesn't linger and tingle the eyes and nose.....maybe a germaphobe just used the lav......or.....
Aircraft crj9
Aircraft crj9
But hand sanitizer can be deadly...
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-h...-idUSKBN17133O
04-15-2019, 06:34 PM
#96
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2019
Posts: 315
Originally Posted by queue
That's what is truly needed. I tried fighting this battle a decade ago but legally nothing has changed. The problem is that the EPA does not have or want jurisdiction. They claim it's the exclusive domain of the FAA. The FAA is utterly useless when it comes to safety. This can be seen with the 737MAX since it took Trump to order the FAA to ground it. I can think of at least a dozen more things the FAA has sat on in order to fulfill its split mandate of promoting aviation commerce and regulation, which are opposing priorities.
I think a good civil suit that doesn't settle is what is really needed. I'm pretty confident that legislators (even Democrats who market themself as pro-people) are there just to set up laws with loopholes for corporations to exploit. What is needed is precedent. I don't know why ALPA doesn't just sue left and right until something sticks. They sure take enough of our money! Unfortunately they don't have teeth.
For us, the only real way to bring proper attention to this severe medical issue is to continue to follow documentation procedures. The QDL even states that the smell you get when flying through clouds must be documented. (FYI, this can be ozone, mildew, or residues activated by water as it gets into the bleed system). Sadly, 98% of my fellow Captains (and FOs) are all too happy to dismiss APU exhaust ingestion, dirty sock smells, cloud smells, and so on. We're our own worst enemy and this must change.
Furthermore, it is necessary to convince regulators that no amount of VOCs or other hydrocarbon products is acceptable. One common argument I see in various industries is the idea of "acceptable exposures", which is bunk. If monitoring is still an issue, I would suggest a gas chromatograph device. I used one in a former life of science. They can be used to identify VOCs. I'm sure that by now, making one much smaller is possible with today's technology.
I think a good civil suit that doesn't settle is what is really needed. I'm pretty confident that legislators (even Democrats who market themself as pro-people) are there just to set up laws with loopholes for corporations to exploit. What is needed is precedent. I don't know why ALPA doesn't just sue left and right until something sticks. They sure take enough of our money! Unfortunately they don't have teeth.
For us, the only real way to bring proper attention to this severe medical issue is to continue to follow documentation procedures. The QDL even states that the smell you get when flying through clouds must be documented. (FYI, this can be ozone, mildew, or residues activated by water as it gets into the bleed system). Sadly, 98% of my fellow Captains (and FOs) are all too happy to dismiss APU exhaust ingestion, dirty sock smells, cloud smells, and so on. We're our own worst enemy and this must change.
Furthermore, it is necessary to convince regulators that no amount of VOCs or other hydrocarbon products is acceptable. One common argument I see in various industries is the idea of "acceptable exposures", which is bunk. If monitoring is still an issue, I would suggest a gas chromatograph device. I used one in a former life of science. They can be used to identify VOCs. I'm sure that by now, making one much smaller is possible with today's technology.
04-16-2019, 10:49 AM
#97
The REAL Bluedriver
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: Airbus Capt
Posts: 6,881
Originally Posted by All In
Funny you mention that no..
every time I read your posts on here. the vast majority appear to me be short little leading questions. like you are trying to get people (professional pilots, company emoployees) to admit certain things that could be later used in a lawsuit.
I actually think you have ulterior motive. maybe you're a lawyer, or maybe you want a settle meant someday yourself.
every time I read your posts on here. the vast majority appear to me be short little leading questions. like you are trying to get people (professional pilots, company emoployees) to admit certain things that could be later used in a lawsuit.
I actually think you have ulterior motive. maybe you're a lawyer, or maybe you want a settle meant someday yourself.
As for him asking other non-fume questions, that's what someone would do who doesn't want to look obvious.
Not saying that he is nefarious, but it is an interesting pattern.
04-16-2019, 11:15 AM
#98
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2019
Posts: 315
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
Very interesting observation. I thought his question pattern was strange as well.
As for him asking other non-fume questions, that's what someone would do who doesn't want to look obvious.
Not saying that he is nefarious, but it is an interesting pattern.
As for him asking other non-fume questions, that's what someone would do who doesn't want to look obvious.
Not saying that he is nefarious, but it is an interesting pattern.
ALPA needs to bring more attention to this issue. All pilots should receive an email encouraging proper documentation any time an event like this occurs.
04-16-2019, 02:45 PM
#99
Covfefe
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,001
From the other forum:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ETRZDsgjEvE
And this https://snpnc.org/system/files/artic...icsyndrome.pdf
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ETRZDsgjEvE
And this https://snpnc.org/system/files/artic...icsyndrome.pdf
04-16-2019, 03:44 PM
#100
Covfefe
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,001
And one more published today:
https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/s...nd-cabin-crew/
Don’t worry. It’s all fine. Std Deviation says it’s no worse than pumping your own gas.
https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/s...nd-cabin-crew/
Don’t worry. It’s all fine. Std Deviation says it’s no worse than pumping your own gas.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
