Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jeffrey_t_b 2011 days ago
I wouldn't say "designed to avoid this problem", because I'm pretty sure that cabin air quality didn't play much of a role in the engineering trades regarding ECS architecture.

The 787 was intended as a more electric aircraft, from the very start, even called the "7E7" during development. An electrical ECS requires special cabin air compressors with big motor drives and power electronics, but there was significant savings for the engines by removing bleed air. It makes sense as a system: Electrical main engine start, generator-optimized engines/APU, electrical cabin air compressors. But the trade criteria were the typical ones: weight, installation volume, total lifecycle cost, etc.

The choice of a lower cabin altitude _was_ a big deal though, and if I had to guess, is the main source of a more pleasant experience.

The main ECS vendors (Honeywell, Hamilton Sundstrand, and Liebherr) all have cabin air quality products, which have mostly gone without interest by the aircraft manufactures and the airlines.

2 comments

What drives the vendors to create those products if nobody is buying them?
Here's a fairly detailed article on the issue:

https://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_...

The main points are increased efficiency and decreased maintenance costs.

Well, maybe I should have said "made proposals, research projects, and demos". It takes a lot of time and money to bring an actual product to market through flight qualification, and nobody will take that on until there is sufficient interest.
> ECS

Please to expand the acronyms?

Sorry, thought that was in the story: Environmental Control System, which is the aircraft subsystem responsible for pressurizing and cooling/heating the cabin.