No more O2 mask--if you act now

[B727Driver]

Boiler,

You are correct about the fuel burn. I was illustrating a visual approach, keeping the speed up throwing the stuff out just short of the marker. Keeping an eye out where the class B starts, adjusting speed accordingly is just a waste.

 

[dougdrvr]

Yes, they should. In the meantime, please go to this link and submt your comments on the right side. Try this one:

"So that I can't be disabled in an attack and so that I won't miss any radio calls, please approve this rule change."

http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#submitComment?R=0900006480a41a09

We can get this one changed and win one for the Gipper!

Why are you more prone to an attack with the mask on and why would you miss radio calls?

 

[densoo]

Why are you more prone to an attack

You're not.

But you are more likely to lose if there is one when you've got an octopus-like device pneumatically jammed onto your head.

 

[densoo]

Even at 40,000 ft where TUC could be as low as 7-10 seconds, it only takes 5-10 seconds to remove the EMR Oxygen mask from stowage and don it. If the mask was on your lap, it should take only 3 to 5 seconds, and this assume worst case of a 50% loss of normal TUC.

Then throw in the time that there has been a rapid decompression of a passenger plane at altitude

Then throw in the times that a rapid dcompression could/has occurred while a pilot was using the LAV.

The results mean that there is almost no chance of it happening, and if it did, the single pilot should still have time to don his mask. I would say the odds of all of this happening are the same as your aircraft being hit by a meteor inflight.

Just my opinion......

FNG

And the odds of terrorists attempting entry into the cockpit are probably greater.

If by some chance one succeeded, a mask on the face is the last think you want.

There are a lot of things that we'll never get a chance to change. Here is one that we do. Submit your comment to agree with the removal of this rule here:
http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#submitComment?R=0900006480a41a09

 

[densoo]

Let's focus on a real reg. to dump.
Get rid of the speed restriction flying below the class B. 250 below 10,000 should be the only speed requirement. Fuel is expensive and only going to go up.

Absolutely, let's tackle that one next.

For now, let's go to the link and submit our comments in support of getting rid of the O2 mask requirement. For safety's sake:

http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#submitComment?R=0900006480a41a09

 

[waka]

Yes, they should. In the meantime, please go to this link and submt your comments on the right side. Try this one:

"So that I can't be disabled in an attack and so that I won't miss any radio calls, please approve this rule change."

http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#submitComment?R=0900006480a41a09

We can get this one changed and win one for the Gipper!

This is a dumb excuse. An intruder can use your shirt against you. Are you going to start a shirtless cockpit campaign?

Thanks for bringing this silly campaign to my attention. I'm submitting my comments to keep the O2 rules for 121 as they are. Wear the mask.....sheesh!

 

[LJ45]

since we fly in the mid 40's lots, we pratice getting the mask to your face and start breathing, then worry about getting it on your head. You can save time by grabbing it and putting it over your mouth first, then get the harness over your head. Think about it!

 

[dougdrvr]

since we fly in the mid 40's lots, we pratice getting the mask to your face and start breathing, then worry about getting it on your head. You can save time by grabbing it and putting it over your mouth first, then get the harness over your head. Think about it!

There is a clasic case from the Air Force, of an explosive decompression in a T-39 where the aircraft commander did exactly what you suggest and ended up unconsious-reviving-unconsious-reviving, several times during the descent. The co-pilot, who put his mask on properly, saved the airplane.

 

[LJ45]

There is a clasic case from the Air Force, of an explosive decompression in a T-39 where the aircraft commander did exactly what you suggest and ended up unconsious-reviving-unconsious-reviving, several times during the descent. The co-pilot, who put his mask on properly, saved the airplane.

Do you have more info on that situation?
The EROS mask goes on you face first anyway, I just don't want to get hung up with glasses and headsets and not start breathing.

 

[dougdrvr]

Do you have more info on that situation?
The EROS mask goes on you face first anyway, I just don't want to get hung up with glasses and headsets and not start breathing.

It was so long ago, I wouldn't know where to look, but it was used by the chamber check instructors as an illustration of what can happen in the "pressure breathing" region. At those altitudes, virtually all the air in your lungs is expelled and as you grab for that mask you're starting to pass out already. If you just hold the mask to your face, when you pass out, the mask falls away, but the one or two breaths that were forced into you revive you and the cycle repeats itself. It was used as an illustration of the importantance of a secure, sealed mask .

The newest EROS full face mask should go right over glasses.

 

[densoo]

It was so long ago, I wouldn't know where to look, but it was used by the chamber check instructors as an illustration of what can happen in the "pressure breathing" region. At those altitudes, virtually all the air in your lungs is expelled and as you grab for that mask you're starting to pass out already. If you just hold the mask to your face, when you pass out, the mask falls away, but the one or two breaths that were forced into you revive you and the cycle repeats itself. It was used as an illustration of the importantance of a secure, sealed mask .

The newest EROS full face mask should go right over glasses.

Here's the FAA study. More info than you need. Bibliographic entry #8 references the T-39 incident.

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA070285&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

 

[Crucianpilot]

Did you see the date on that study? The quick donning mask we use now are called that for a reason. They can be donned in a matter of seconds, therefore, I see no need to have them on above 25000 ft. 35000 ft would be a more reasonable altitude to require it at. And yes, I have had altitude chamber training and am well aware of the consequences of a rapid decompression at altitude.

 

[densoo]

This is a dumb excuse. An intruder can use your shirt against you. Are you going to start a shirtless cockpit campaign?

So, we're not going to bother addressing one risk because there are other risks too? Getting rid of one risk is better than getting rid of none.

If an intruder can use a shirt against you, so be it. Right now they're asking us if they want to get rid of the pneumatically attached mask rule. Let's at least eliminate that risk now when we have the chance to. I'll assist you in the no-shirt-in-cockpit campaign when that one comes around.

http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#submitComment?R=0900006480a41a09

 

[densoo]

Did you see the date on that study? The quick donning mask we use now are called that for a reason. They can be donned in a matter of seconds, therefore, I see no need to have them on above 25000 ft. 35000 ft would be a more reasonable altitude to require it at. And yes, I have had altitude chamber training and am well aware of the consequences of a rapid decompression at altitude.

The FAA said as much when they announced in Dec 05 "In this direct final rule, the FAA is amending its regulation on the use of pilot supplemental oxygen" effective 9 Jan 06. They didn't run it by the NTSB and they nixed it.

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_G...64a7136de336f3e7862570d700784f73!OpenDocument

 

[dalegribble]

I have had altitude chamber training, am a newly reformed smoker and would feel confident not wearing the mask.

Back to the main topic of communicable disease. Don't underestimate this problem. Sani-wipes are NOT sufficient to kill whatever hides in the crevices etc. of the masks. Current methods of wiping off the mask do NOT comply with OSHA or HHS guidelines and rules. If you have ever taken an airborne pathogens course you will understand the concern. I don't have a better suggestion. Why is it that when I flew corporate, 135 legs required one pilot on oxygen above FL350, but 91 it was only required above FL410, why not make those standard at FL410 while they are at it? Lots of regs need a second look but in our overly litigious society I can't see any requirements being reduced.