I have a question for those who have been actively involved with commercial airlines. In view of the recent tragic event caused by some drop kick wanting to impress his girlfriend, various airlines are looking at changing their current policies so as to have two people present in the ****pit at all times.
Is the assumption made that with someone else present this may not happen or is the thinking that the second person will be able to over power the first person and thereby stop them doing something untoward or will the second person be able to unlock the door to the ****pit.
Hope this makes sense.
Larry
PS: Please don't turn this into a political issue or the master will shut us down.
Happywanderer said
05:45 PM Mar 28, 2015
I imagine it would be the copilot would be less likely to do what this fellow did if there was a second person in there with him watching.
I did read a news report yesterday which said he had not long ago converted to Islam. If this is correct it could mean an act of terrorism.
deverall11 said
05:51 PM Mar 28, 2015
Happywanderer wrote:
..... I did read a news report yesterday which said he had not long ago converted to Islam. If this is correct it could mean an act of terrorism.
The article I read was about him trying to impress his girlfriend by doing something 'he will always be remembered for'. Which everway you look at it, we are talking about it and he was a drop kick. Hope he burns in hell for his trouble.
Larry
Cloak said
08:12 PM Mar 28, 2015
Agree with all the above and will probably never fly again. Not just over this but because of the absolute vulnerability of aviation to human factors.
I suspect there is more to come.
Izabarack said
08:14 PM Mar 28, 2015
deverall11 wrote:
...... various airlines are looking at changing their current policies so as to have two people present in the ****pit at all times.
Not sure what that would do. If the second person is a flight attendant, a pilot would still have little difficulty in causing a crash. Even if sitting beside another pilot, a sudden flight control input or retarding both engines on one side, particularly when taking off or landing, would cause a crash. While we are at it, are we to now have two drivers sitting side by side in tour buses? Terribly tragic incident. I don't think anyone or method would have changed the outcome as it appears the co-pilot was determined enough.
Iza
Aus-Kiwi said
01:15 AM Mar 29, 2015
You would THINK the auto pilot would stay on to a certain point? Like turning off traction control on some cars !!
It still comes on .. Let's say the pilot turns auto pilot off .. The planes computers send info to airlines or nearest traffic tower ?
In that time the plane cannot be flown lower than safe height,, this allows for sudden cabin pressure etc..
The door could be operated in emergency from ground ??
When plane changed its flight path you would think alarm bells would be ringing somewhere on land ?
sandsmere said
08:06 AM Mar 29, 2015
Some airlines have the 2 people in the c0ckpit at all times rules.
Big Gorilla said
08:06 AM Mar 29, 2015
Certainly a very tragic event. This is the 7th type incident in last few years. Two that come to mind, Silk Air over Indonesia in 1997 and Egypt Air out of New York, forget the year. A flight attendant on the flight deck if one Pilot leaves for the toilet or whatever may be an answer, but I think it's time to change the locking system on the flight deck door, giving coded access to a Pilot outside. Shutting off the auto pilot does not cause any alarm. The answer to this potential problem, could be quite complex... Previously a flight engineer was carried on flights, but modernisation has rendered this position obsolete. Some flights carry a Second Officer which would help solve the problem. Long distance flights i.e Sydney to Los Angeles non stop carry two complete crews.
-- Edited by Big Gorilla on Sunday 29th of March 2015 08:11:31 AM
deverall11 said
12:01 PM Mar 29, 2015
Do you think the time is coming to have 'unmanned' aircrafts?
1) Would you fly with such a contraption?
2) Don't know the actual breakup, but perhaps up to 90% of airplane crashes are attributed to human error. On that basis, not sure what the % is of pilot error vs ground staff. If all crashes were pilot error, by method of deduction, 'unmanned' aircrafts would have to be safer. After all there are several drones that carry out various missions successfully. Thoughts?
Larry
Big Gorilla said
12:38 PM Mar 29, 2015
deverall11 wrote:
Do you think the time is coming to have 'unmanned' aircrafts? 1) Would you fly with such a contraption? 2) Don't know the actual breakup, but perhaps up to 90% of airplane crashes are attributed to human error. On that basis, not sure what the % is of pilot error vs ground staff. If all crashes were pilot error, by method of deduction, 'unmanned' aircrafts would have to be safer. After all there are several drones that carry out various missions successfully. Thoughts? Larry
I don't think pilotless commercial passenger aircraft would ever be viable. People would be too scared to fly, they would not have the confidence. The military drones you see on TV are actually piloted by crews on the ground, in some cases from thousands of kilometers away.
I'm not sure what percentage of aircraft accidents are due to pilot error, not 90% but quite a lot are.
Papou said
02:49 PM Mar 29, 2015
Six months of no mishaps and all will be forgotten!!, way the human factor works..
Sailortoo said
03:13 PM Mar 29, 2015
Interesting point about a negative reaction to travelling in a pilotless airliner. One safety issue that is almost never broached is that of seating configuration - I'm talking here about survivable accidents - the fact is that the safest configuration is for all passengers to be seated facing the rear of the aircraft, but this has never even been considered by the industry. I guess pilots facing the rear may be a bridge even farther to cross . . .
shekon said
07:48 AM Mar 30, 2015
Unfortunately, in most crashes, if the pilots are deceased then the crash will be blamed on pilot error, or it seems that way to me, ( and this particular one was deliberate pilot action). There by Deverall making his comment, I am not sure that would be entirely correct. The advent of simulator games also gives everyone an opinion on how "easy" it is to fly a plane in todays world. Having been married to a commerical airline pilot for 34 years believe me there is more to their vocation than meets the eye. Having sat up the front with him quite a few times, a flight attentdant that does not know what the pilot is doing is not going to stop a rogue pilot from doing what he intended. There are lots of buttons and things there, not just a joy stick and computer screen.
This is particular crash and those that BG have mentioned before, are committed by people who are unwell and are master manipulators hiding their intent until it is too late. Nobody would have been able to predict this event or stopped it probably. No different to those who decide to take a gun into a school or picture theatre. It is only after the event that noise about mental health is made. With facilities and funding for mental health closed down and taken away, it is harder for people to recieve the treatment and help they need. Of course the other thing is also these people have to request help and they do become very good at hiding their problems.
I feel so sad for the families of the victims in this circumstance and for the family of the pilot, something I have no idea how one would get over.
I have no idea what the answer is, other than to say it is a terrible tragedy, that probably could not have been prevented, there will be a knee jerk reaction by the powers that be and then all will settle down again. In a way the knee jerk reaction to 9/11 having the c***pit door locked and sealed, helped cause this tragedy. There is a cause and effect with everything.
hako said
08:49 AM Mar 30, 2015
The chances of you being part of this type of incident is extremely low - much much lower than being killed by a person who suicides by head-on collision with you. Nobody ever suggests you cease driving to avoid being part of a suicide attempt. I found these figures from a reputable site:
Suicide Car Accidents. Drivers who commit suicide while driving are often difficult to detect as most of these "accidents" are believed to be single car accident scenarios with a single driver. These crashes often involve high speed, alcohol and may not easily be distinguished from sheer reckless conduct, or unconscious, self-destructive impulses. However academic studies have concluded that about 1.7% of all fatal crashes are suicides with nearly 2.7% of fatal single-car crashes believed to be drivers with suicidal intent, and about 1% of all nonfatal crashes may be suicide attempts.
Ontos45 said
11:12 AM Mar 30, 2015
From what I heard on TV last night SBS, is that he had several doctors reports on his stability. Why isn't it compulsory for doctors to report to authorities on their patients suitability to continue their high risk jobs. When my eyesight started to fail my optometrist said she was required to report my class 3 licence failure to the dmt unless I got glasses (qld)
I have a question for those who have been actively involved with commercial airlines. In view of the recent tragic event caused by some drop kick wanting to impress his girlfriend, various airlines are looking at changing their current policies so as to have two people present in the ****pit at all times.
Is the assumption made that with someone else present this may not happen or is the thinking that the second person will be able to over power the first person and thereby stop them doing something untoward or will the second person be able to unlock the door to the ****pit.
Hope this makes sense.
Larry
PS: Please don't turn this into a political issue or the master will shut us down.
I did read a news report yesterday which said he had not long ago converted to Islam. If this is correct it could mean an act of terrorism.
The article I read was about him trying to impress his girlfriend by doing something 'he will always be remembered for'. Which everway you look at it, we are talking about it and he was a drop kick. Hope he burns in hell for his trouble.
Larry
I suspect there is more to come.
Not sure what that would do. If the second person is a flight attendant, a pilot would still have little difficulty in causing a crash. Even if sitting beside another pilot, a sudden flight control input or retarding both engines on one side, particularly when taking off or landing, would cause a crash. While we are at it, are we to now have two drivers sitting side by side in tour buses? Terribly tragic incident. I don't think anyone or method would have changed the outcome as it appears the co-pilot was determined enough.
Iza
It still comes on .. Let's say the pilot turns auto pilot off .. The planes computers send info to airlines or nearest traffic tower ?
In that time the plane cannot be flown lower than safe height,, this allows for sudden cabin pressure etc..
The door could be operated in emergency from ground ??
When plane changed its flight path you would think alarm bells would be ringing somewhere on land ?
Some airlines have the 2 people in the c0ckpit at all times rules.
Certainly a very tragic event. This is the 7th type incident in last few years. Two that come to mind, Silk Air over Indonesia in 1997 and Egypt Air out of New York, forget the year. A flight attendant on the flight deck if one Pilot leaves for the toilet or whatever may be an answer, but I think it's time to change the locking system on the flight deck door, giving coded access to a Pilot outside. Shutting off the auto pilot does not cause any alarm. The answer to this potential problem, could be quite complex... Previously a flight engineer was carried on flights, but modernisation has rendered this position obsolete. Some flights carry a Second Officer which would help solve the problem. Long distance flights i.e Sydney to Los Angeles non stop carry two complete crews.
-- Edited by Big Gorilla on Sunday 29th of March 2015 08:11:31 AM
1) Would you fly with such a contraption?
2) Don't know the actual breakup, but perhaps up to 90% of airplane crashes are attributed to human error. On that basis, not sure what the % is of pilot error vs ground staff. If all crashes were pilot error, by method of deduction, 'unmanned' aircrafts would have to be safer. After all there are several drones that carry out various missions successfully. Thoughts?
Larry
I don't think pilotless commercial passenger aircraft would ever be viable. People would be too scared to fly, they would not have the confidence. The military drones you see on TV are actually piloted by crews on the ground, in some cases from thousands of kilometers away.
I'm not sure what percentage of aircraft accidents are due to pilot error, not 90% but quite a lot are.
Interesting point about a negative reaction to travelling in a pilotless airliner. One safety issue that is almost never broached is that of seating configuration - I'm talking here about survivable accidents - the fact is that the safest configuration is for all passengers to be seated facing the rear of the aircraft, but this has never even been considered by the industry. I guess pilots facing the rear may be a bridge even farther to cross . . .
This is particular crash and those that BG have mentioned before, are committed by people who are unwell and are master manipulators hiding their intent until it is too late. Nobody would have been able to predict this event or stopped it probably. No different to those who decide to take a gun into a school or picture theatre. It is only after the event that noise about mental health is made. With facilities and funding for mental health closed down and taken away, it is harder for people to recieve the treatment and help they need. Of course the other thing is also these people have to request help and they do become very good at hiding their problems.
I feel so sad for the families of the victims in this circumstance and for the family of the pilot, something I have no idea how one would get over.
I have no idea what the answer is, other than to say it is a terrible tragedy, that probably could not have been prevented, there will be a knee jerk reaction by the powers that be and then all will settle down again. In a way the knee jerk reaction to 9/11 having the c***pit door locked and sealed, helped cause this tragedy. There is a cause and effect with everything.
The chances of you being part of this type of incident is extremely low - much much lower than being killed by a person who suicides by head-on collision with you. Nobody ever suggests you cease driving to avoid being part of a suicide attempt. I found these figures from a reputable site:
Suicide Car Accidents.
Drivers who commit suicide while driving are often difficult to detect as most of these "accidents" are believed to be single car accident scenarios with a single driver. These crashes often involve high speed, alcohol and may not easily be distinguished from sheer reckless conduct, or unconscious, self-destructive impulses. However academic studies have concluded that about 1.7% of all fatal crashes are suicides with nearly 2.7% of fatal single-car crashes believed to be drivers with suicidal intent, and about 1% of all nonfatal crashes may be suicide attempts.
From what I heard on TV last night SBS, is that he had several doctors reports on his stability. Why isn't it compulsory for doctors to report to authorities on their patients suitability to continue their high risk jobs. When my eyesight started to fail my optometrist said she was required to report my class 3 licence failure to the dmt unless I got glasses (qld)