.
minimal compliance with maintenance requirements, for example, no consideration is given to the maintenance requirements of ageing aircraft;
.
attitudes which place pressure to fly aircraft over the health of staff; and
.
the unimportance that the airlines give to staff complaints about air quality.73
4.69 However, Dr Winder admitted in evidence that he was unsure as to whether the modifications carried out on Ansett BAe 146 aircraft complied with regulatory requirements and he did not know if they had been evaluated for effectiveness.74
4.70 The Committee notes evidence from British Aerospace that the modifications are only intended in an experimental capacity and aim to reduce, not eliminate the rate of fume incidents.75
4.71 A confidential submission by a former BAe 146 Captain to the inquiry stated; “Ansett have only attempted to play down any problems due to the odours and it appears that commercial considerations rather than providing a safe working environment for staff as well as the travelling public is their prime priority.”76
4.72 The Flight Attendants Association of Australia was also critical of the modifications carried out on Ansett BAe 146 aircraft:
Since the Fox Report Ansett has made some modifications to airflow in this area, however these modifications have proved ineffective (numbers of Fume Reports have not decreased) or have proven impractical and have had to be reversed (extraction fans in the toilet caused the smoke alarm to malfunction).
It is also of note that Ansett’s modification to the cabin ventilation system; the repositioning of air vents to higher on the interior fuselage, was completed by August 99 as planned. This did not produce any noticeable reduction in fume reports.
Ansett has not done any follow-up testing to determine whether total contaminant levels are now within Safety Standard limits.77
4.73 In evidence to the inquiry on 2 February 2000 Mr Brendan Treston of the FAAA commented:
73 Submission 6, Associate Professor Chris Winder, p 2
74 Associate Professor Chris Winder, Evidence, 1 November 1999, p 5
75 British Aerospace, Evidence, 10 April 2000, p 229
76 Confidential submission C6
77 Submission 24, FAAA, p 11; see also Submission 17, Judy Cullinane, p 57.
The current system of modifications which Ansett has put into the aircraft, it must be remembered, are experimental modifications. Ansett does not know in advance that that will fix the problem. Nor does any other operator. It is trialing this as another way of attempting to fix the problem. … We will be convinced that this is a total fix when the fume reports dry up and the flight attendants no longer ring us up wanting to be removed from duty on the aircraft, and fume reports stop coming in. Then we will know that the modifications programs have been effective. Until then, as far as we are concerned it is still in the experimental.78 中國航空網 www.k6050.com 航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn 本文鏈接地址：Air Safety and Cabin Air Quality in the BAe 146 Aircraft(67)
