Using sunblock on the flight deck?
#11
Banned
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Posts: 294
I wear sunscreen, but at 30,000 uva/uvb is the least of your worrries. Most of that is blocked by the gold plating in windshield and the aircraft skin. What’s really killing us is the cosmic radiation, and nothing is going to stop that.
#12
I believe that the increased skin cancer risk for crew has more to do with lifestyle, ie lots of time off and opportunity to spend time outdoors. I and a close family member have health physics backgrounds, and have done the analysis based on known risk tables.
Some specifics...
1) Cosmic radiation at altitude will cause a very slight but noticeable increase in risk of cancers associated with hard radiation exposure. We did the math based on my exposure as a domestic pilot. It would be a bit higher for long-haul due to:
a) Higher cruise altitudes
b) More time spent there (very high percentage of block time at cruise altitude).
c) Commonly cruising at higher latitudes, cosmic radiation gets funneled towards the poles by the earth's magnetic field (ex northern lights).
2) UVB is known to cause skin cancer, especially melanoma. UVB does not really penetrate modern glass windows in a jet.
3) UVA has less risk of skin cancer, but is known to cause aging of your skin. UVA can penetrate our windows, although layers of glass probably cut it down a bit. UVA also contributes to fatigue.
4) Older planes, and GA planes, with plastic windows, don't block much UV at all... you might as well be at the beach. I have a little more noticeable skin aging on my left side, despite being an FO and having spent most of my career as an FO. But I was a CA on a turboprop with poly side windows for a few years...
I use sunblock on my face when flying (daylight). I used to use it on my neck and arms but it turns shirt sleeves and collars yellow. That's mostly so I don't edge up aged more on one side than the other. Can't stop aging, but I'd prefer it be symmetrical
The radiation exposure calculations we did years ago were based on risk tables from the medical community. Newer studies might change that data.
Some specifics...
1) Cosmic radiation at altitude will cause a very slight but noticeable increase in risk of cancers associated with hard radiation exposure. We did the math based on my exposure as a domestic pilot. It would be a bit higher for long-haul due to:
a) Higher cruise altitudes
b) More time spent there (very high percentage of block time at cruise altitude).
c) Commonly cruising at higher latitudes, cosmic radiation gets funneled towards the poles by the earth's magnetic field (ex northern lights).
2) UVB is known to cause skin cancer, especially melanoma. UVB does not really penetrate modern glass windows in a jet.
3) UVA has less risk of skin cancer, but is known to cause aging of your skin. UVA can penetrate our windows, although layers of glass probably cut it down a bit. UVA also contributes to fatigue.
4) Older planes, and GA planes, with plastic windows, don't block much UV at all... you might as well be at the beach. I have a little more noticeable skin aging on my left side, despite being an FO and having spent most of my career as an FO. But I was a CA on a turboprop with poly side windows for a few years...
I use sunblock on my face when flying (daylight). I used to use it on my neck and arms but it turns shirt sleeves and collars yellow. That's mostly so I don't edge up aged more on one side than the other. Can't stop aging, but I'd prefer it be symmetrical
The radiation exposure calculations we did years ago were based on risk tables from the medical community. Newer studies might change that data.
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 341
There’s an ALPA newsletter covering this but I can’t find it.
Here’s a study done 10 years ago: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a471609.pdf
Boeing windshield construction:http://www.ppgaerospace.com/getmedia....aspx?ext=.pdf
Notice there is no plastic which absorbs more UV..
The FDA regulates sunscreen in such a conservative way that sunscreens available in the US generally suck. I buy Japanese sunscreen that available on Amazon. Their stuff is way better than anything we can get here.
Here’s a study done 10 years ago: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a471609.pdf
Boeing windshield construction:http://www.ppgaerospace.com/getmedia....aspx?ext=.pdf
Notice there is no plastic which absorbs more UV..
The FDA regulates sunscreen in such a conservative way that sunscreens available in the US generally suck. I buy Japanese sunscreen that available on Amazon. Their stuff is way better than anything we can get here.
Last edited by lowflying; 11-09-2018 at 02:22 PM.
#18
Exactly. Had a basal cell ten+ years ago. The doctor said sunscreen was useless, because of all the other radiation exposure.
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 341
Here’s an article for those of you that think our windshields already have uv protections:
https://runwaygirlnetwork.com/2018/0...s-crew-health/
They hope to have uv resistant windshields by 2019-2020...
https://runwaygirlnetwork.com/2018/0...s-crew-health/
They hope to have uv resistant windshields by 2019-2020...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
takingmessages
Flight Schools and Training
8
07-07-2018 11:11 PM