Fume Events
12-30-2020, 11:24 AM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,016
Originally Posted by aa73
Interesting, at AA the number is 106%. Why is the number so different amongst the airlines and more importantly why do they not stick with the Boeing number of 92%?
12-30-2020, 06:45 PM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Center seat, doing loops to music
Posts: 825
Damn, that was a sobering article. Much more prevalent than I thought previously. And shorting Capt Hill's worker's comp to add insult to injury, which no doubt contributed to the tragic spiraling end.
Doesn't look like the airlines are particularly interested in admitting the dynamic. Talk about a vocational caveat emptor. From the medical literature, TCP poisoning is essentially a nerve agent attack. #oof.
Is the 787 the only transport cat airliner with electric compressors for cabin pneumatics? Seems like the way to go moving forward if the industry was interested in occupational safety.
Doesn't look like the airlines are particularly interested in admitting the dynamic. Talk about a vocational caveat emptor. From the medical literature, TCP poisoning is essentially a nerve agent attack. #oof.
Is the 787 the only transport cat airliner with electric compressors for cabin pneumatics? Seems like the way to go moving forward if the industry was interested in occupational safety.
12-30-2020, 07:33 PM
#44
Furloughed Again?!
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: Boeing 737
Posts: 4,796
Originally Posted by hindsight2020
Damn, that was a sobering article. Much more prevalent than I thought previously. And shorting Capt Hill's worker's comp to add insult to injury, which no doubt contributed to the tragic spiraling end.
Doesn't look like the airlines are particularly interested in admitting the dynamic. Talk about a vocational caveat emptor. From the medical literature, TCP poisoning is essentially a nerve agent attack. #oof.
Is the 787 the only transport cat airliner with electric compressors for cabin pneumatics? Seems like the way to go moving forward if the industry was interested in occupational safety.
Doesn't look like the airlines are particularly interested in admitting the dynamic. Talk about a vocational caveat emptor. From the medical literature, TCP poisoning is essentially a nerve agent attack. #oof.
Is the 787 the only transport cat airliner with electric compressors for cabin pneumatics? Seems like the way to go moving forward if the industry was interested in occupational safety.
The DC8 and Fokker 100 both used turbocompressors as opposed to bleed air.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
12-30-2020, 07:57 PM
#45
Gets Weekend Reserve
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,615
Originally Posted by hindsight2020
Seems like the way to go moving forward if the industry was interested in occupational safety.
12-30-2020, 09:23 PM
#46
At your mom's house
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: cpt 737
Posts: 2,663
Originally Posted by ZapBrannigan
The DC8 and Fokker 100 both used turbocompressors as opposed to bleed air.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
12-31-2020, 02:56 AM
#47
777 - ret
Joined APC: Apr 2020
Position: Waco CG-4 center seat
Posts: 863
Originally Posted by hoover
the f-27 also had root blowers that it used to pressurize the aircraft. They sucked BTW. Not literally, they actually blew. But for sure they didn't pressurize anything. Could barley keep a 10k cabin at 20k. Let's not even talk about heating or cooling. They sure were loud though.
12-31-2020, 12:36 PM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,016
Originally Posted by flensr
Too bad they don't have an idiot light that simply says "service" whenever it's either too low or too high...
12-31-2020, 05:40 PM
#49
Furloughed Again?!
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: Boeing 737
Posts: 4,796
Originally Posted by Guppydriver95
the company could program an idiot light at the level of their choosing. Or, we could just be Captains and deal with it when safety becomes an issue, rather than waiting for said light.
Maybe we could stop turning off the lower DU for a start... why do Captains do that? It's the only indication of what the hydraulic system is doing that isn't an annunciator light. Does it really hurt anything to keep it on the screen?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
12-31-2020, 06:02 PM
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,022
Originally Posted by ZapBrannigan
Maybe we could stop turning off the lower DU for a start... why do Captains do that? It's the only indication of what the hydraulic system is doing that isn't an annunciator light. Does it really hurt anything to keep it on the screen?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Cause that's how we did it on the -200.... Oh wait.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
