4 ms·

Several examples of fume events in the article are from Airbus planes as well, especially Jet Blue ones. I suspect because Boeing is closer to home, the journa

Several examples of fume events in the article are from Airbus planes as well, especially Jet Blue ones. I suspect because Boeing is closer to home, the journalists have more insider insight as to the internal decisions to not do anything at Boeing, thus putting them in an even more negative light. I would guess Airbus is just as bad. The actual airlines seem to be neglegent as well, fighting to not pay workers comp.

benhurmarcel 6y ago
All airliners (except the 787) use the same technology when it comes to air supply. They even buy the equipment from the same suppliers (engines, heat exchanger, ozone converter, packs…). The risk of fumes is exactly the same on all brands (again, except the 787).
- ashtonkem 6y ago
  That’s not true. The actual design of the bleed system matters a lot, as does the recommendations for seal maintenance.
  - benhurmarcel 6y ago
    The fumes come from the engine, there's nothing the bleed system can do to mitigate that. All bleed components already don't use any lubricant, they don't add any fume. Also all bleed systems across the whole industry have an extremely similar architecture. So in the end the component that really matters for this is the engine. And both Airbus and Boeing use very similar engines from the same suppliers. And the engine manufacturer defines the maintenance tasks for it.
ashtonkem 6y ago
As I said in another comment; I don’t want to put Airbus on a pedestal here, but the internal emails from Boeing are incredibly damning towards the company culture. Painting people concerned about breathing in fumes as having an “agenda” is a perfect stereotype of corporate malice, it’s almost beyond parody. I’ve never seen such emails out of Airbus, although it’s entirely possible that that’s because they’re in another language and therefore they haven’t made it to the English only media I consume.

benhurmarcel 6y ago

All airliners (except the 787) use the same technology when it comes to air supply. They even buy the equipment from the same suppliers (engines, heat exchanger, ozone converter, packs…). The risk of fumes is exactly the same on all brands (again, except the 787).

ashtonkem 6y ago
That’s not true. The actual design of the bleed system matters a lot, as does the recommendations for seal maintenance.
- benhurmarcel 6y ago
  The fumes come from the engine, there's nothing the bleed system can do to mitigate that. All bleed components already don't use any lubricant, they don't add any fume. Also all bleed systems across the whole industry have an extremely similar architecture. So in the end the component that really matters for this is the engine. And both Airbus and Boeing use very similar engines from the same suppliers. And the engine manufacturer defines the maintenance tasks for it.

ashtonkem 6y ago

As I said in another comment; I don’t want to put Airbus on a pedestal here, but the internal emails from Boeing are incredibly damning towards the company culture. Painting people concerned about breathing in fumes as having an “agenda” is a perfect stereotype of corporate malice, it’s almost beyond parody. I’ve never seen such emails out of Airbus, although it’s entirely possible that that’s because they’re in another language and therefore they haven’t made it to the English only media I consume.