|
Are All Contaminated Air Events Safety Issues? ©
|
10th April 2008
|
|
by Susan Michaelis
|
Another issue of major concern is the CAA view that
many contaminated air events are not safety related. This cannot be more
clearly spelt out than in a response provided in the UK House of Lords
in 2005. The Government was asked by the Countess of Mar what it
intended to do about under-reporting of contaminated air events given
that there was evidence that a 2002 UK survey showed that 96 % of events
were not reported. The Government advised:
‘The mechanism for the reporting of contaminated air
events is well established through the Civil Aviation Authority's
Mandatory Occurrence Reporting Scheme, the purpose of which is to
receive reports of incidents affecting airworthiness. The survey carried
out by the British Airline Pilots Association included events that were
not safety-related.’ [82]
This response was unsurprising given that the CAA had
stated the same thing a year earlier:
‘The Civil Aviation Authority compared the British
Airline Pilots Association survey results with its mandatory occurrence
reports. Much of the survey data related to low level events, often with
inconclusive connections to contaminated air. Inclusion of the survey
data in the Authority's database would not have advanced or improved the
formal intervention action taken to mitigate the threat to safety posed
by impairment of pilot performance through exposure to contaminated
air.’ [89]
The CAA view is extraordinary given the following
points which will be explained in greater detail in following chapters:
Major under reporting and incomplete reporting of
contaminated air events is occurring - see Chapter 12;
Contaminated air events are reportable incidents –
see regulations in Chapter 15;
The frequency of contaminated air events is not
accurately known; however, the evidence available shows it is NOT low;
Any form of crew impairment (adverse effect) is an
aviation safety matter;
Adverse effects are occurring other than just
incapacitation – see Appendix 2;
Crews are failing to use oxygen during contaminated
air events – see Appendix 2.
The following reports taken from Appendix 2 are assumed
to be examples of what the CAA might consider are not, ‘safety related.’
Given that pilots are required to be in a fit, unimpaired state of
health to be able to deal with normal operations or any abnormal
situation that might arise, their view appears negligent and contrary to
the actual aviation regulations. The events in Appendix 2 have been
collated from various sources including but not limited to the CAA MOR
database, AAIB reports, Crew reports (ASR/MOR, FCR, direct to union…).
They are all reports that the crews felt sufficient to record in one
format or another even if they represent less than 4% of all events as
will be discovered in chapter 12.
4-Jun-2000 B757 - Fumes throughout flight - Tunnel
vision, disorientation, dizziness on arrival - engineering reported long
history of fumes - Crew declared sick on arrival and positioned back to
LHR as no medical facilities available
27-Apr-2003 B757 - Oil fumes
19-Dec-2004 A319 - Perceptible oil smell in flight
deck / oxygen not used
3-Jul-2005 BAe 146 - Complete oil loss - smelt by
several crews - P1 said ‘normal BAe 146 smell' - P2 ill still weeks
later - P1 suffered effects later - 3 engine ferry next day
4-Aug-2005 Dash8-400 - Oil vapour / chip fat fryer
smell – Oxygen - priority landing - ‘fumey on previous sector’ -
Paramedics (blood pressure and pulse only)
17-Aug-2005 BAe 146 - Flight crew effects reported
yet no apparent fumes
26-Aug-2005 A319 - ASR / MOR - Perceptible oil smell
in descent from 10,000 feet to touchdown only flight deck. Oxygen not
used.
1-Sep-2005 BAe 146 - ASR - Abnormal Air Conditioning
smells - engineer advised fumes smelt but could not find where from -
Aircraft grounded - ‘Engineering inspections found no fault’ - During
operations with the APU unserviceable, a smell, described as similar to
'damp socks' was intermittently evident in flight deck - Flight Crew
discussed going onto emergency oxygen but decided that this was
unwarranted - No defect was recorded after flight / similar
circumstances during the subsequent flight with the same crew - low
risk.
7-Sep-2005 BAe 146 - REF MOR 200507452 - same
aircraft as following day - cabin crew experienced similar symptoms
(light-headedness and slight confusion) and had found normal tasks
difficult to achieve.
15-Sep-2005 B757 - Strong oil fumes - Oxygen not used
as aircraft had a long history over several months and assumed must be
safe or aircraft, ‘would not be flying.’ Pilot advised most pilots were
not writing it up and just telling the engineers about the smells and
told all OK. Captain had headache - muscular and significant
gastrointestinal problems since event - Unaware of need to use oxygen in
all cases of contamination or suspected contamination - ASR raised to
cover medical effects.
6-Oct-2005 BAe 146 - Crew effects / no apparent
fumes.
1-Nov-2005 B757 - Transient fumes in flight deck -
Technical log signed off to report next sector.
29-Nov-2005 B757 - ASR / MOR - No Oxygen used - Cabin
crew all suffering effects even with left pack inoperative. See previous
sector.
Additionally, the CAA view is astounding given that it
is acknowledged that monitoring studies of the air quality during
contaminated air events have never taken place. Some of these important
statements include:
UK Aircraft Health Working Group - ‘Air Sampling has
never been done during a fume event.’ [90]
UK Government - ‘There is no requirement for air
quality monitoring exercises to be carried out during contaminated air
events in aircraft, and there is no record of any such measurements in
the public domain.’ [81]
National Research Council - ‘No published reports
include measurements of air quality during flights involving non routine
events such as leaks of hydraulic fluid or engine oil into the bleed
air.’ [91]
Flight Safety Aspects of Contaminated Air
References
81. Countess of Mar HL Question in the UK House of
Lords. Question number: HL 2312. 1 December 2005. ‘There is no
requirement for air quality monitoring exercises to be carried out
during contaminated air events in aircraft, and there is no record of
any such measurements in the public domain. Air quality measurements are
normally only made as part of the initial certification of each aircraft
type.’
82. Countess of Mar HL. Question in the UK House of
Lords. Question number: 2311. 23 November 2005.
89. Tyler P. MP. Question in the UK Commons. Question
number: 191638, 18 Oct, 2004.
90. Summary report of the UK AHWG RSG meeting of
13/7/05.
91. National Research Council: The airliner cabin
environment and the health of passengers & crew, 2002.