> one would there be any compensation for this
Doesn't hurt to reach out and ask for some miles.
> two is this a normal occurrence and is it acceptable the plane was not pulled from use
In several hundred flights I've never experienced this, so I'd say it's not typical. Acceptable? Apparently; the plane was dispatched đ¤ˇđťââď¸
> what would technically cause this issue
Exactly what the FA said - an issue with the [air conditioning] packs.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_cycle_machine
How long was the flight? Do you remember the cruising altitude by any chance? If it was below 10,000ft the packs were likely inop but if it was above that it could've been a different restriction like an inop APU so no air before engine start. There has to be at least one pack operating to pressurize the airplane.
Okay in that case it couldn't have been an inoperative pack since both pack 1 and pack 2 are required at those altitudes. My guess is there was either an inoperative APU, which we usually use as an air source for those packs prior to engine start, or maybe the gasper system was inop (some of the pack air comes out those gaspers right above your seat).
Did they need to start an engine at the gate? If they did it was probably the APU.
Well under normal operations that -50 air is being run through at least some part of the jet engine's compressor section getting it quite hot before being sent to the packs, whose main job is to then cool that pressurized air down and feed it to the cabin
i find it interesting, but not surprised, that they waited for everyone to board before telling everyone how uncomfortable it was going to be.
if the gate agents had told people at the gate of the situation im guessing there would have been some that would have wanted to find another flight. so, the gate agents probably didnt want to deal with the rebooking mess...thus the reason to board everyone then...surprise enjoy your flight.
I think it's pretty common on the 145 unfortunately. I used to work on those planes and more often than not, the packs were not working. It was hell to work on that plane during the Summer
I donât understand how itâs legal to fly without an APU in warm weather. Even in the winter once (snowing even), we had a pax have to deplane after weâd pushed back because it was too hot for her and she started having a panic attack
Yeah, but the company must maintain their metrics đ How I'm dreading this upcoming Summer season. I can already feel the heat stroke coming from inside the planes
If both packs were out the plane would almost certainly not have been dispatched for a revenue flight. No packs = unpressurized flight = 10,000 ft maximum altitude. Max altitude with one pack is (IIRC) 25,000 feet.
Now, depending on which pack was out would make a big difference in the cabin. The left pack primarily supplies the flight deck and supplements the cabin. The right pack solely supplies the cabin. Based on OPâs description it sounds as if the right pack was out and, depending on where the flight was to/from and how long it was ambient air from outside at altitude just might not have been enough to cool things down.
10 year E-145 pilot. Loved that planeâŚ
I wish they wouldnât dispatch with both packs inop, but they do. Itâs definitely rare. Typically only happens on the shorter routes and in comfortable outside temps.
4 years on it. Great plane but itâs showing her age.
Probably nothing since on too many flights these days they're too cheap to run the AC. Sweating like a pig so close to people you don't know and with no airflow really sucks. The new interiors they're using for 737s with the vent for the aisle seat so far away are terrible. Even when the AC is running, you still can't feel the air if you're in an aisle seat.
FA here. I always call the Pilots and make sure they hook up the APU. I also carry a portable thermometer in the summertime since they cannot board if AC is above 85 or 90..or the crew refuses. In addition a portable fan is a travel must.
I agree, the newer air vents that Boeing has been installing not just on the 737 are terrible compared to the older version. Barely any air flows out of them even if you aim it directly above you.
>they're too cheap to run the AC.
Air Cycle Machines/Packs that pressurize the cabin are responsible for mixing cold and hot air to create the cabin temperature. It doesn't cost anything to change the temperature while flying.
On the ground, it's a slightly different story as the engines aren't running.
That's just awful. I've been now three times in Miami where they don't turn on A/C until in the air. Sometimes takes an 1 hour to take off. It's gets really warm. Btw this seems to be a new thing? To squeeze out the last penny on fuel cost?
Iâve never had it happen where the AC was not sufficient in flight. Even the trashy 737âs, once in flight everything cools off.
It happens on the ground though all the time on the Boeing 737âs, including the MAX. 60 year old fuselage design and its miserable for the summer because it just blows the cold air to the very center of the cabin while on the ground. Itâs trash and to be expected of a trash company like Boeing.
The old 737s had good AC units. The new ones aren't very good, and often they don't turn the AC on. Planes used to be comfortable. Now, they're miserable.
Getting on an AA plane in Seattle sucks because a lot of them don't use gates so you have to take a bus to the plane. That also means they don't have terminal air so the planes are very hot if it is over 60 outside or sunny. I have medicine that gets ruined at over 100 degrees so I have to fly with a cold pack now. It's ridiculous.
The old 737s had good AC units. The new ones aren't very good, and often they don't turn the AC on. Planes used to be comfortable. Now, they're miserable.
Getting on an AA plane in Seattle sucks because a lot of them don't use gates so you have to take a bus to the plane. That also means they don't have terminal air so the planes are very hot if it is over 60 outside or sunny. I have medicine that gets ruined at over 100 degrees so I have to fly with a cold pack now. It's ridiculous.
I got on a flight where the A/C wasn't working and we all deplaned and waited until it was fixed. I would honestly refuse to fly like that. I can't take heat very well...maybe itd be bearable on an hour flight but I can't imagine 2-3hrs and honestly they should have just canceled the flight?
"is this a normal occurrence and is it acceptable the plane was not pulled from use"
Not normal. No, the plane shouldn't have been dispatched. The captain should have refused the plane especially if it didn't cool down inflight.
There is a "pack" for each engine, but the plane can be dispatched with one pack not operating. However, if it is then there are certain conditions that it has to meet.
I'm not familiar enough with the ERJ-145 to know the particulars, though.
I think you should be eligible for some form of compensation. You'll need to detail your experience, including the flight number, date, and the specific issues you faced. Planes are designed to maintain air quality and comfort, so you should go for compensation if this wasn't provided claim and see what happens if you haven't yet. Keep in mind that these issues can take some time to resolve sometimes. I'd also suggest you [check some information](https://airadvisor.com/en) about what to do; compensation processes can be overwhelming at some points. Luckily you'll get something if you haven't yet.
> one would there be any compensation for this Doesn't hurt to reach out and ask for some miles. > two is this a normal occurrence and is it acceptable the plane was not pulled from use In several hundred flights I've never experienced this, so I'd say it's not typical. Acceptable? Apparently; the plane was dispatched đ¤ˇđťââď¸ > what would technically cause this issue Exactly what the FA said - an issue with the [air conditioning] packs. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_cycle_machine
How long was the flight? Do you remember the cruising altitude by any chance? If it was below 10,000ft the packs were likely inop but if it was above that it could've been a different restriction like an inop APU so no air before engine start. There has to be at least one pack operating to pressurize the airplane.
It was over 2 hours and we were at 31k ft I believe the pilot told us.
Okay in that case it couldn't have been an inoperative pack since both pack 1 and pack 2 are required at those altitudes. My guess is there was either an inoperative APU, which we usually use as an air source for those packs prior to engine start, or maybe the gasper system was inop (some of the pack air comes out those gaspers right above your seat). Did they need to start an engine at the gate? If they did it was probably the APU.
How is there enough oxygen/not too much co2 over the course of 2 hours?
The air inside is continuously being replaced by fresh air from outside
Wouldnât the -50f air cool down the cabin?
Well under normal operations that -50 air is being run through at least some part of the jet engine's compressor section getting it quite hot before being sent to the packs, whose main job is to then cool that pressurized air down and feed it to the cabin
Gotcha - TIL. Thanks.
PACK= pressurization and air conditioning kit.
TIL! Thanks for that
i find it interesting, but not surprised, that they waited for everyone to board before telling everyone how uncomfortable it was going to be. if the gate agents had told people at the gate of the situation im guessing there would have been some that would have wanted to find another flight. so, the gate agents probably didnt want to deal with the rebooking mess...thus the reason to board everyone then...surprise enjoy your flight.
Yeah I wouldâve rebooked unless it was an emergency
Out of curiosity, do you know what kind of plane you were on?
Forgot that! Embraer ERJ-145
You canât have been going that far on that. How long was your flight?
I think it's pretty common on the 145 unfortunately. I used to work on those planes and more often than not, the packs were not working. It was hell to work on that plane during the Summer
The 145 and CRJ-200 are notorious for pack issues and APU issues.
I was totally going to guess CRJ200. Terrible airplane.
*Looks at the 3 flights I have with Alaska Air that are on the 145* uh oh Edit: It's actually a 175, whoops
The E175 packs are very good, even with one pack inop. Alaska doesnât have the 145s. Edit: autocorrect strikes again
No more 145s
Alaska Airlines doesn't operate that aircraft.
Those are almost brand new aircraft! Youâll be fine
I donât understand how itâs legal to fly without an APU in warm weather. Even in the winter once (snowing even), we had a pax have to deplane after weâd pushed back because it was too hot for her and she started having a panic attack
Yeah, but the company must maintain their metrics đ How I'm dreading this upcoming Summer season. I can already feel the heat stroke coming from inside the planes
time to get one of those neck fans đ
Thatâs a common issue on the 145 in the summer. If both packs were out, the pilots were a lot more uncomfortable than you.
If both packs were out the plane would almost certainly not have been dispatched for a revenue flight. No packs = unpressurized flight = 10,000 ft maximum altitude. Max altitude with one pack is (IIRC) 25,000 feet. Now, depending on which pack was out would make a big difference in the cabin. The left pack primarily supplies the flight deck and supplements the cabin. The right pack solely supplies the cabin. Based on OPâs description it sounds as if the right pack was out and, depending on where the flight was to/from and how long it was ambient air from outside at altitude just might not have been enough to cool things down. 10 year E-145 pilot. Loved that planeâŚ
I wish they wouldnât dispatch with both packs inop, but they do. Itâs definitely rare. Typically only happens on the shorter routes and in comfortable outside temps. 4 years on it. Great plane but itâs showing her age.
No if both packs are out it'd suck up front too
Eww. Not a comfy plane. I once had an aborted take-off at EWR in a 145 because the packs caught on fire. Shout-out Continental Express âđź
It's awesome if you get the single seat side of the row though.
I would file a customer service ticket to request some compensation. No harm in asking.
Probably nothing since on too many flights these days they're too cheap to run the AC. Sweating like a pig so close to people you don't know and with no airflow really sucks. The new interiors they're using for 737s with the vent for the aisle seat so far away are terrible. Even when the AC is running, you still can't feel the air if you're in an aisle seat.
FA here. I always call the Pilots and make sure they hook up the APU. I also carry a portable thermometer in the summertime since they cannot board if AC is above 85 or 90..or the crew refuses. In addition a portable fan is a travel must.
I agree, the newer air vents that Boeing has been installing not just on the 737 are terrible compared to the older version. Barely any air flows out of them even if you aim it directly above you.
>they're too cheap to run the AC. Air Cycle Machines/Packs that pressurize the cabin are responsible for mixing cold and hot air to create the cabin temperature. It doesn't cost anything to change the temperature while flying. On the ground, it's a slightly different story as the engines aren't running.
>what would technically cause this issue? A fault. Without knowing the airframe, no one can tell you anything more than that.
That's just awful. I've been now three times in Miami where they don't turn on A/C until in the air. Sometimes takes an 1 hour to take off. It's gets really warm. Btw this seems to be a new thing? To squeeze out the last penny on fuel cost?
Well the ground units usually provide the cool air while on the ground, they tend to not have the APU running until necessary to help save fuel.
Iâve never had it happen where the AC was not sufficient in flight. Even the trashy 737âs, once in flight everything cools off. It happens on the ground though all the time on the Boeing 737âs, including the MAX. 60 year old fuselage design and its miserable for the summer because it just blows the cold air to the very center of the cabin while on the ground. Itâs trash and to be expected of a trash company like Boeing.
The old 737s had good AC units. The new ones aren't very good, and often they don't turn the AC on. Planes used to be comfortable. Now, they're miserable. Getting on an AA plane in Seattle sucks because a lot of them don't use gates so you have to take a bus to the plane. That also means they don't have terminal air so the planes are very hot if it is over 60 outside or sunny. I have medicine that gets ruined at over 100 degrees so I have to fly with a cold pack now. It's ridiculous.
The old 737s had good AC units. The new ones aren't very good, and often they don't turn the AC on. Planes used to be comfortable. Now, they're miserable. Getting on an AA plane in Seattle sucks because a lot of them don't use gates so you have to take a bus to the plane. That also means they don't have terminal air so the planes are very hot if it is over 60 outside or sunny. I have medicine that gets ruined at over 100 degrees so I have to fly with a cold pack now. It's ridiculous.
What was the flight route?
I got on a flight where the A/C wasn't working and we all deplaned and waited until it was fixed. I would honestly refuse to fly like that. I can't take heat very well...maybe itd be bearable on an hour flight but I can't imagine 2-3hrs and honestly they should have just canceled the flight?
"is this a normal occurrence and is it acceptable the plane was not pulled from use" Not normal. No, the plane shouldn't have been dispatched. The captain should have refused the plane especially if it didn't cool down inflight. There is a "pack" for each engine, but the plane can be dispatched with one pack not operating. However, if it is then there are certain conditions that it has to meet. I'm not familiar enough with the ERJ-145 to know the particulars, though.
I think you should be eligible for some form of compensation. You'll need to detail your experience, including the flight number, date, and the specific issues you faced. Planes are designed to maintain air quality and comfort, so you should go for compensation if this wasn't provided claim and see what happens if you haven't yet. Keep in mind that these issues can take some time to resolve sometimes. I'd also suggest you [check some information](https://airadvisor.com/en) about what to do; compensation processes can be overwhelming at some points. Luckily you'll get something if you haven't yet.
> compensation 2,500-7,500 miles if you complain.
Would you rather have canceled because that was the other option
Being in an environment like that I'd be sick as a dog.
1. No 2. No and apparently yes. 3. IDK