A union that represents transportation workers is crying foul over a new reduced odor oil for aircraft auxiliary power units (APU) they say could prevent flight attendants from detecting fumes onboard. In fact, according to the oil’s manufacturer, Eastman Chemical Company, based in Tennessee, that’s the whole idea, to reduce the incidence of delay-causing fume events from minor oil leaks in APUs. In its online description of Turbo Oil 2330, Eastman says that when oil leaks into the cabin air section of the APU it can react “with heat and water to generate a foul odor in the cabin. Such events can lead to aircraft groundings, costing airlines time and money while they investigate the cause. These events can also leave passengers stranded and dissatisfied.”
When conventional APU oil smokes, it creates a powerful dirty sock smell that gets everyone’s attention. Eastman says Turbo Oil 2330’s formulation “helps mitigate this issue by reducing unscheduled maintenance related to odors. With an inoffensive odor profile, ETO 2330 keeps more planes airborne, bolsters airline operational efficiency and improves the passenger experience.”
That, says the International Transport Workers Federation, presents a unique safety hazard for passengers and crews. “If oil or its heated or degraded products enter the cabin air, cabin crew must be able to recognise and report the event,” the ITF said in a statement quoted by paddleyourownkanoo.com. “The introduction of ETO 2330 must not result in fewer reported events simply because they are harder to smell.” The union wants an investigation into the potential safety implications of the oil’s use. Although most APU odor events are short-lived, there are numerous videos and social media reports of APU smoke in the cabin, some of which led to evacuation and reported illness.
Eastman’s “point” is irrelevant. If there’s an oil leak at all, the extent of which needs to be investigated by maintenance personnel to determine whether it’s major or minor. That determination will either ground the aircraft or defer the leak in accordance with the MEL. Either way, it’s a flight delay. It’s seems that Eastman’s selling point is to mask the leak and postpone or avoid maintenance intervention altogether.
Hey Eastman, guess what, pax are also dissatisfied with injury or worse. I think they would choose the delay over the latter.
Reminds me of an old joke: if your car’s engine is making a noise, just turn up your radio.
Eliminating the smell, with no other remediation, increases risk. Period.
Yes and good comparison.
If turbine oil uses the nuero toxin TCP, it must be detectable when making it in the cabin.
Period.
That is the actual story.
Ooh, that smell
Can’t you smell that smell?
Ooh, that smell
The smell of death surrounds you
Name that tune, band.