6 ms·
Boeing, Bombardier, Learjet, Embraer and Airbus should be forced to clean up aircraft cabin air they poison us with. For people who don’t know how GROSS this i
by 4d4m 1mo ago
Boeing, Bombardier, Learjet, Embraer and Airbus should be forced to clean up aircraft cabin air they poison us with.
For people who don’t know how GROSS this is: on almost every modern passenger jet, the air you breathe is pulled through the engine’s Bleed-Air system before entering the cabin. As oil, hydraulic fluid, or other contaminants leak into that system, those superheated fumes can be pumped directly into the cockpit and cabin. These incidents are literally called "fume events" and are the basis of the "gym sock" smell you can detect when in airports or on a plane, especially during takeoff and landing. This is so pervasive you'll see airline attendants spraying glycol-based air fresheners during these times to COVER UP the smell of this toxic stuff.
[FAA overview](https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/cabin-air-quality-0 https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/cabin-air-quality-0)
And no, the HEPA filter people like to point to does not make this problem disappear. HEPA filtration primarily cleans recirculated particles. It does not magically remove every gas, vapor, or contaminant entering through the aircraft’s air-supply system.
[FAA research](https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/data_research/research/med_humanfacs/oamtechreports/201520.pdf https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/data_research/resear...)
The absurd part is that we already know how to avoid this architecture. The Boeing 787 is the major commercial exception: its cabin air is supplied by dedicated electric compressors rather than engine bleed air.
So this is not some unsolved engineering problem. The industry made a DESIGN choice to KEEP using a system capable of feeding contaminated engine air into a sealed tube full of passengers, pilots, and flight attendants. Zero regard for their well-being in order to save a few pounds and eck-out more miles per gallon.
Flight crews spend thousands of hours breathing this air over their careers. Passengers have no meaningful ability to know when contamination occurs or opt out. Manufacturers and airlines alike are afraid to put contamination sensors on their planes because it exposes them to liability - it shows the true extent of the problem.
That is not an acceptable health standard in 2026, and it wasn't when these decisions were made. Fix the source, stop pretending filtration alone solves it, and make bleed-air-free cabin ventilation the standard for new aircraft. Demand this from your regulator or determine who is responsible for your health effects.
- seizethecheese 1mo agoThe article specifically says flight attendants are only at increased risk of radiation related cancers, but not others.
- 4d4m 1mo agoQuite interesting. My reaction is that one of these is much more easily controlled and an input for cancer than the other. Radiation shielding is a tougher solve due to weight and other factors, where air quality is an easy, known fix. Would love both to be solved, which would lead to good outcomes. Any thoughts on why attendants have different outcomes?
- criddell 1mo agoOff topic: when did using solve as a noun take off? There are so many good nouns that work there (challenge, task, etc...) or use the verb form (is tougher to solve).
- JackFr 1mo agoIt’s no different than “a big ask” or a “tough sell”.
- bagxrvxpepzn 1mo agoIn the bay area this trend of nounifying verbs is common amongst VCs and C-level startup execs. I'm not sure if it's arisen due to peacocking or a higher incidence of ESL in those communities.
- 4d4m 1mo agoESL/clevel exec, guilty!
- Obscurity4340 1mo agoPhysicists noun-ified work
- 1mo ago
- technothrasher 1mo ago> These incidents are literally called "fume events" Your first FAA link says that these 'fume events' are rare: "The report found that the rate of cabin air quality events is less than 33 events per million aircraft departures." This is about one event every 30,000 flights.
- 4d4m 1mo agohttps://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/study-shows-toxic-air-events-happening-on-more-flights-than-faa-reports/ https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/study-shows-toxic-... If you think of the last 10 flights you were on, how many had the gym sock smell? That's the real occurence rate. I'd say in my experience across all airlines its around 7/10 flights I can detect via smell a fume event.
- raverbashing 1mo agoOf the last 50 flights I took, none had gym sock smell. If anything smelled it's usually due to a passenger. But nothing from the aircraft itself
- 4d4m 1mo agoWe're not talking about stinky passengers, those are normal, expected smells :) Politely, I don't believe you haven't noticed the smell - this statistically is impossible when at an airport with multiple planes. You can smell it daily, at any airport terminal of your choosing, impossible to ignore when closer to the gates. It's a smell powerful enough to not get eaten by the various encapulation, ozone generators, and air fresheners used in public commerical environments like airports. The smell comes through from the planes and gangways into the terminal itself. Next trip: With a clear nose, smell the air at the airport entrance and then compare this with the smell closer to your gate. The contaminated airs smell it's very similar to a wet locker room or gym bag that was left for days without cleaning. You won't ever miss it again, and your stat will flip to detected in 50 out 50 visits.
- 1mo ago
- strictnein 1mo ago> This is so pervasive you'll see airline attendants spraying glycol-based air fresheners during these times to COVER UP the smell of this toxic stuff I've never once seen a flight attendant do that. Flown hundreds and hundreds of times. You'd think something that's "so pervasive" would have been common enough that I'd have seen it dozens of times?
- 4d4m 1mo agohttps://farahandfarah.com/blog/toxic-airplane-fumes-workers-comp-claims/ https://farahandfarah.com/blog/toxic-airplane-fumes-workers-... Feels like youre defensive about this would love to know why. If you havent seen aerosols on a flight youre being disengenous or are not looking up/around. They are used for lavoratories and pest fumiagation during passengered flights regularly - and those are uses we agreed to as a society. Ive seen firsthand them sprayed during takeoff and landing at the time fume events are most noticed by passengers. Disclaimer: I am an aviation enthusiast and loves planes and their design. I am unaffiliated with any airline or manufacturer. I want everyone to breathe ok.
- pipe2devnull 1mo agoFWIW I probably 2-5 round trips per year and I’ve never seen a flight attendant spraying anything
- zahlman 1mo ago> Feels like youre defensive about this would love to know why. It couldn't possibly be that someone else has real-world experiences that differ from your own? > If you havent seen aerosols on a flight youre being disengenous or are not looking up/around. Or they just actually really weren't used on any of the flights GP was on? > Ive seen firsthand them sprayed during takeoff and landing GP hasn't, and neither have I. Your experiences are not universal and it is impolite to accuse others of being "disingenuous" simply for reporting experiences that differ from your own.
- jmpman 1mo agoI believe the pilots air source works differently than the rest of the cabin - at least on the 737. Maybe that explains the difference between the pilots and the flight attendants.
- amatecha 1mo agoThat's interesting to know (thanks for calling it out!), and makes me feel extra glad I've worn a mask during the entire flight on every flight I've been on since 2020 (not that I've been on many)... turns out I was avoiding a lot more than just COVID etc. heh >_<
- mmustapic 1mo agoThe Boeing 787 has a bleedless system. It uses dedicated electric compressors for the cabin air.
- Der_Einzige 1mo agoLike others, I have zero experience with any of the things you are mentioning, but I want flying to be more expensive, more luxurious, and far more comfortable in general for everyone so please keep giving them a hard time about this. In general, 50% or more of the people flying should not be flying, and going back to the pre-privatization era alongside much stricter regulations on seat sizes would be awesome as it would force actual economics of scale to kick in for the good seats and keep the burger king crown wearing crowd ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onib3bDo6Z0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onib3bDo6Z0 ) off these airplanes for good.
- delbronski 1mo agoOh how the middle class hates having to share with the poor. We don’t mind the rich flying private jets, but for the love of god don’t put a poor person next to us on a plane.
- Der_Einzige 1mo agoThis but unironically. The rich smell better than I do. I can learn from them.
- rmunn 1mo agoFeel free to pay extra for the fancy seats up front, known as either first class or business class depending on the airline you're flying (I've seen other names for them like "premier" or something, too). But if you keep up the "I know what's best for other people" attitude that you display in your second paragraph, don't be surprised if people start thinking... poorly of you. (I rewrote that sentence multiple times. That's the kindest way I can put it. A lot of my earlier drafts were... more unkind).
- Der_Einzige 1mo agoThe problem is that in the current world business class is overpriced because economics of scale don’t kick in and they know they can get away with far higher margins. The point is to make business class the worst class of cabin, so the average cost/profitability will look a lot closer to current economy. And yes airlines have razor thin margins. This is why privatizing them is a mistake. I the taxpayer am just fine with my tax dollars going to force the air industry to stop committing war crimes in the sky with their garbage economy seats and garbage treatment of the average flyer.
- gib444 1mo agoThe 787 in economy (as configured by most airlines) is hell in every other way so boy what a quandary
- westurner 1mo ago> oil, hydraulic fluid, or other contaminants Will safe aerospace batteries spare us from this? Recently designed a sustainable thermofluid that it says would work as hydraulic fluid and a de-icing fluid: LBGPC: Lignin, BioPG, Graphene, Phytic acid, Citric acid