ORF2, KONKRET, 2017-09-22, 18:30: Video (Interview e.g. with Prof. Scholz).
ORF2, ZIB2, 2017-09-22, 22:00: Video (Interview e.g. with Prof. Scholz),
EasyJet to go for Cabin Air Filtration in the Recirculation Path
announced already on 2016-12-05
that EasyJet would retrofit their fleet of A320 family aircraft with the latest Pall Aerospace PUREair Advanced Cabin Air Filters [in the recirculation].
Sensors have been demanded by pilots and cabin crew for years, but they are still not introduced on board.
There may be good reasons for NOT introducing air quality sensors on passenger aircraft.
However, every individual on an aircraft may decide to get informed and this can not be denied.
Therefore, immediate action could be taken without waiting for the ultimate industry solution of the problem - which may never come.
This is especially important in failure cases like fume events.
Failures compromising cabin air quality may alert people on board, but it may need some kind of objective confirmation before action can be taken.
Situations with cabin air quality problems could also pass unnoticed without sensing.
If cabin air is contaminated, it will show a mixture of many substances. Carbon monoxide (CO) will most probably be one of these substances.
Simple logic tells us that it is sufficient to trace one bad gas in an abnormal quantity to conclude that the cabin air is not ok.
CO is taken from the cocktail to be measured, because inexpensive and small CO detectors are available on the market.
Pilots (or crew in general) should read the carbon monoxide (CO) concentration from a personal CO detector
as an objective indicator in addition to the observations from their senses (nose and eyes).
It is known from CO measurements on the BAe 146 that the CO concentration will be low even in a fume event .
For this reason, the CO concentration should not be compared against the limit value of 50 ppm (CS 25.831),
but rather against values obtained under normal conditions (e.g. 2 ppm; as a frequent flyer you will find out for yourself soon).
 Global Cabin Air Quality Executive: Carbon Monoxide Database Collated on 345 BAe 146 Flights in UK, 2003-2004, 2006
Feel free to report/share your findings. E.g. take a picture of your CO detector with its reading (maybe with a fume filled cabin in the background)
and report about what happened to people during that flight. We may all learn from this collected information.
I have expressed the above view in my presentations and have been asked where inexpensive(!) CO detectors can be bought.
Looking on the Internet myself, I discovered these links:
These very affordable CO detectors are offered by the Chinese wholesale and retail online shop TOMTOP.
I found mixed online reviews about the shop. I have no stakes in these sales. You purchase at your own risk.
The main disadvantage of these inexpensive products is that they will automatically shut off if they are not operated for 10 minutes.
This is necessary, because the batteries will not last sufficiently long otherwise. The holder has to check the air for CO at regular intervals or when being suspicious.
seem to be offered at a price 10 times higher, but they are for continuous operation during several years.
Do not worry to be embarassed by the loud alarm on your CO detector going off.
The CO concentration in the cabin is much lower than the threshold. Some sensors even allow setting the threshold.
In the very unlikely event where the alarm is triggered, you should be thankful for it!
Each member of the cockpit crew is protected by one onboard oxygen mask. Oxygen comes from a bottle and is available for the rest of the flight.
Cabin crew have (at best) a smoke hood for their protection. The chemical oxygen supply in the smoke hood is intended only for short duration.
A private breathing mask can protect people in the cabin in the very rare event of air contamination.
A breathing mask filters the air and will do so for the rest of the flight.
Inexpensive are the army standard breathing masks. Buy only new masks. Germany: "Bundeswehr Schutzmaske M65" (by Dräger).
Better suited is a civil mask like the "Dräger X-plore 6300 Full Mask".
It has a standardized 40 mm threaded filter connection.
A suitable filter would be the "Dräger X-plore A2B2E2K2HGP3". This is a "combined filter" for "organic gases and vapours" (A),
"inorganic gases and vapours" (B), and other substances.
Also this information is provided here; because I have been ask for it.
Cabin crew members are increasingly concerned. Some already have a personal breathing mask in their carry-on baggage or intend to do so.
By asking cabin crew members to consider to carry a breathing mask (in order to be prepared for a very unlikely event),
I do NOT state that cabin air can be compared to the air after an attack with chemical weapons.
What I argue is only this: A breathing mask (with a suitable filter) will protect people in "harsh environments".
I do NOT consider the aircraft cabin such a "harsh environment".
Therefore, a breathing mask will give sufficient protection in such cases
where people have (claimed to) become ill in the aircraft cabin due to (potentially) contaminated cabin air.
I do not consider it right, if the employer would deny cabin crew to protect themselves
in a situation where the employer (who has a legal duty to do so) does not act.
Introduction to the Topic
The Story of the Britsh Aerospace BAe 146
The Story of Dr. Susan Michaelis -
A Young Enthusiastic Pilot Gets Ill due to Cabin Air and Starts an Academic Career on the Issue