Time to move the 380 cockpit door?

[captainsmiffy]

In light of recent incidents, would it not be a great idea to move the locking flight deck door to the bottom of the stairs? This would leave us with our own bathroom, ie no pilot has to leave the flight deck and be unable to return whilst the added benefit is that there are no longer pax right up at the door - potentially- as you enter/exit the cockpit.

Discuss.....

[fliion]

It brings up another question.

In light of the new policy issued this morning on all Flt Plans via Conotams - short sighted IMO

Which is more likely at one of the big ME airlines (granted both highly unlikely, but...)

A rogue pilot who has had intensive training and psyche evals along the way or a rogue male CC who, under far less scrutiny, is a 'sleeper fanatic' and wants to meet some virgins in the clouds...and now has literally full access to flight deck multiple times during a flight because of new rule.

Watch your six?

f.

[clear to land]

Now that, flion, is one of the best points made on this forum for a long time. :D

[Mnsthepilot]

Well let's don't mix it up here , because what happened lately had nothing to do with what you are pointing to using the words ( fanatics , virgins ) this is totally insignificant and cheap.
But I respect the main idea you mentioned about the difference between cabin crew evaluation and pilot evaluation and it makes a lot of sense.

[halas]

Chances of moving the door are as good as moving the CRC to where the showers are.

halas

[glofish]

Brace for pampers, or the good old night pot ..... :E

[BigGeordie]

Accepting that the "sleeper fanatic" scenario is unlikely, how about a cabin crew member who is just a disgruntled employee? Somebody who is overworked, jet-lagged, poorly paid and feels unappreciated by the company? Possibly with added stress such as boyfriend/girlfriend trouble, being in a load of debt and away from the support network of family and friends. This is not just a Middle East scenario, it could happen in a lot of airlines in the world.

Some airlines have tens of thousands of cabin crew. It is simple statistics that a few of those are going to be depressed and some of those will be suicidal. Thanks to the publicity of recent days they now know it is possible to bring down an aircraft with a simple turn of a knob in less than 10 minutes. And they know where the crash axe is.

It seems to me that the two crew in the cockpit rule is a knee jerk reaction which potentially could cause as many problems as it solves.

[lospilotos]

So now we have to ask the cabin crew permission to go to the lav... It´s fine on a European low-cost, you don´t have to relieve yourself on a 2 hour flight, but to counter act the total boredom on a 8.5 hour night flight we need to be able to move about... Total knee jerk reaction and just so typical...

[emratty]

The toilet outside the 380 flight deck is a disgrace and should never be allowed it's only a matter of time before there is going to be a serious incident with a pax gaining access to the cockpit. The regulators should not allow it but somehow Emirates get away with it.
Regarding having 2 crew in the cockpit it's a knee jerk reaction which potentially could be more problematic. Regarding fitness to fly and mental issues I really have a problem with professional pilots being unable to operate a sector without having to pray for 10 minutes...again never going to be addressed by the company for obvious reasons.

[Mnsthepilot]

What is your problem if a professional pilot prayed for 10 minutes during the flight, when it is time to pray in his religion " I mean it is only 10 minutes , so is going to the toilet --ok could be shorter lets say 5 minutes"

[thefoxandfirkin]

Totally agree about moving the door on the 380 but there is no way that will happen.

I reckon its only a matter of time before they think about providing a tiny portable camping loo on the flight deck. We'll no doubt have to take it in and out ourselves and empty it. The highlight of the day! We might even get paid a s*it allowance for using it :ok:

[g109]

agree with filon,

we have a ticking time bomb here, one days its gonna go off, with disastrous consequences

[TheDarkHorse]

Flion, Emratty and Geordie I agree with your posts.

One point I'd like to mention is last time I took QF F I remember there being 2 sets of doors to the front, an inner and outer. The outer door seemed to keep a set of bunks and I presume a toilet away from prying eyes before the inner door to the cockpit.

The LH 748 has a toilet within the F/D.

[SOPS]

As I understand it, the Airbus design of the A380 is for a inner an outer door for the cockpit crew. EK in their wisdom, changed this to allow passengers to use the toilet/s that were meant for exclusive crew use.

[Pointer]

just how difficult will it be..? :E all this talk about moving the toilet door or other means.. lets say there is a toilet in the flight deck.. (or a CC guarding during the flight.. same effect).. is that really going to stop a single individual that has obvious good knowledge of the a/c? What about switching it all off, and pointing it straight down? maybe a nice roll for dramatic effect? are you going to get off the crapper in time (g's) to 'safe the day'? doubt it..

But agreed, the commercially overruling design adaptations in EK are not safety enhancing.. :=

Maybe.. just Maybe some less stick and more carrot in this industry could prevent at least a few of these devastating events..

Pointer

[TwoTone-7]

Virgins in the clouds?? Fliion, what am i missing?! :ugh:

[JAARule]

the Airbus design of the A380 is for a inner an outer door for the cockpit crew. EK in their wisdom, changed this to allow passengers to use the toilet/sPG and the CPD oversaw this redesign with the CPD saying the door was entirely unnecessary. A velvet rope will do instead.

Ironically, having a CC in the cockpit whenever a pilot wants to use the lav means twice as many door openings as otherwise and twice as many opportunities for the security provided by the door to be defeated. The door is opened to admit the CC, then again when the pilot leaves and then twice more again in reverse when he returns.

If they enter/exit at the same time the door is still open for twice as long as normal as they shuffle around each other. Another kneejerk reaction in the rush to be seen to be doing something.

[Spoogie]

All of a sudden, the freighter seems like an attractive option. No cabin crew, passengers or door.

Now the only thing to worry about is the cargo and/or if it was loaded properly:ugh: Cant win:)

[Jetjock330]

110 tons of lithium batteries and no cockpit door on the B777F seems to be the safest thing now! Amazing how the wheel turns!

[kingpost]

Pointer, I think you touched on the root cause with this quote, "Maybe.. just Maybe some less stick and more carrot in this industry could prevent at least a few of these devastating events...."

[Moony123]

Don't worry. The same policy has been introduced down the road. Someone asked the question about what this does if operating minimum crew. The response - "therefore it is now even more important to plan ahead and agree the most appropriate time to take a physiological break from the Flight Deck."

Indeed. Because I know beforehand exactly when I want to take a piss. :}

[LearBus]

Well, I think they might need to rethink the policy of "planning and coordinating" breaks because with 'chicken tikka curry rogan josh chili' as the only available meal to the cockpit on the way back from COK at 9am in the morning, there's only one thing for sure....time will be of the essence or sh!t will hit the.................

[fliion]

I've asked numerous times in wash-up about Jump Seat policy and was told not going to happen for security reasons.

So now on a full flight, you could have a perfectly qualified observer who is trying to get home and who has undergone intensive back ground checks sitting there without having to interrupt Sir & Madams caviar.

Think they will do it? Well it won't be to help you and I get home ....but Sir & Madam...

Let's see if they 'walk the walk'

f.

[Snake man]

Great point, fliion.

[Alloy]

Some of the financial pressures on new FOs who have the equivalent of a mortgage just to cover their training should perhaps be considered at the same time as well. Some of the FOs I've flown with have had £120K loans just to get to where they are for a seasonal part time contract.....

[Trader]

Alloy---an article suggesting just that...
The one wild possibility missing from most of the equally baseless Germanwings speculation | PandoDaily (http://pando.com/2015/03/26/the-one-wild-possibility-missing-from-most-of-the-equally-baseless-germanwings-speculation/)

[The Turtle]

this will be an example of the law of unintended consequences....


(not the post above.....the new policy in general)

[Buckshot16]

Trader,

That's a very interesting article !

[jack schidt]

A cabin crew member in the toilet will not prevent a determined mental suicide event from happening by deliberate pilot action. Case in point, suicide pilot and cabin crew member in cockpit. Suicide pilot decides to shut down engines and turn flight control computers off as well as carrying out a rapid decompression of the aircraft. Let's see if any cabin crew member would be able to turn that lot back on while the suicide pilot has jumped out of their seat to put the dead bolt on and started attacking the cabin crew member.

The only true way to prevent this ever happening again is for 2 pilots to be present in the cockpit at all times. Financially this will never happen as many carriers think that the cost does not outweigh the risks.

How will airlines prevent the issue of a suicide pilot nose diving the aircraft a few hundred feet up during climb out off the end of the runway. What about a landing incident a few hundred feet above a highly populated City. The prevention here is not in the cockpit, it must be done "somehow" in the doctors clinic.

I am not sure how the future will play out but some test for level of mental state or craziness is no doubt going to be implemented into medicals in the future. Guys undergoing divorces, people with money debt issues or whatever might be moved up into the higher risk braket. This is an cruise issue that can "only" be resolved by having 2 pilots in the cockpit period, but will never happen due to the accountants, they are the root cause of this and many other safety issues in airlines.


J

[glofish]

How about continuously pressing the little red button on the stick and pushing?
Would the cutie in the jumpseat be able to:

a) stop the jockey doing it?
b) jump up against the negative 1g and open the door for the other jockey who was surprised with his pants down in the loo?

or, as we are at it, even in a normal scenario:

a) would the jockey in the other seat be able to react if, by courtesy of Airbus, his stick is pressed dead?
b) would he be able to disconnect the computers and, with his willie-stickie working again, be able to counteract the algebraic sum of "full down" and "full up" to stop the imminent impact?
c) would a quarter-pounded jockey be able to counteract a sumo-fighting trained colleague who pushes the yoke in an interconnected tractor cockpit?

There is unfortunately little that all the knee jerk reactions of the powers can do if there is a real malicious intent by a pilot, in any machine.
It's only to please the public and to continue with minimal cost involved.

[Officer Kite]

Alloy,

Lubitz trained at the Lufthansa flight training academy in Bremen and Phoenix. He had his training paid for him and would only have had to fund his living costs throughout (accommodation was also included by Lufthansa in Goodyear), he was living the dream as far as modern day flight training goes.

[fliion]

Living the dream?

Not according to his GF

"Maria W. told the paper: "We always talked a lot about work and then he became a different person. He became upset about the conditions we worked under: too little money, fear of losing the contract, too much pressure."

Sound familiar?

f.

[Officer Kite]

Comparing it to the £120,000 loans raked up by a very significant number of young pilots today yes, it's virtually unheard of to have your training funded by the company and you bonded for the TR.

[Craggenmore]

In light of recent incidents, would it not be a great idea to move the locking flight deck door to the bottom of the stairs? This would leave us with our own bathroom, ie no pilot has to leave the flight deck and be unable to return whilst the added benefit is that there are no longer pax right up at the door - potentially- as you enter/exit the cockpit.

Discuss.....

Why not put the bunks up front as well as moving the door; then you'd have 3 or 4 pilots all within a safe and secure environment who'll be able to detect any descent or abnormal attitude during flight.

As the 6ft 6", gym strengthened, half my age and twice my strength, male CC who chaperoned me the other day whilst the Captain was wizzing, said.....How could I tell if you were subtlety descending anyhow?

[fliion]

And God forbid you forget to take the iPad out of the Wheelie in the UK etc

That's the differentiator didn't you know?

f.

[Bus Driver Man]

As the 6ft 6", gym strengthened, half my age and twice my strength, male CC who chaperoned me the other day whilst the Captain was wizzing, said.....How could I tell if you were subtlety descending anyhow?
I guess that the banging on the door by the other pilot would be suspicious...

But the new procedure is just a typical reaction to make the public feel safe. (Not only EK, but other airlines are implementing this procedure as well now.)
Someone with wrong intentions (FCM or CCM) will always have other ways of taking over and this procedure makes us all look like a potential suspects unfortunately.

[White Knight]

ATC: ABC123 descend FL330 due traffic. report reaching

PILOT: descend FL330, wilco ABC123

ACTION: hand moves towards MCP/FCU alt selector knob (CC of course briefed poorly by CC OPS on this sinister rotary selector) and thereafter OPDES/FLCH SPD engaged..

AIRCRAFT: descent initiated

CABIN CREW: what the hell are you doing? attacks? screams? help help he's trying to kill us


Seriously????

alone with CC "guard dog" monitoring our every move?

They are NOT monitoring your every move... Just there to open the doors for us. Saves me having to reach over and toggle the switch!

male CC who chaperoned me

They are NOT chaperoning you!

Whilst I agree that this is a pointless exercise it really doesn't change much of how we operate does it? And when I need to go for a dump I will take my time - can't be rushing the good things in life...

[glofish]

They are NOT monitoring your every move... Just there to open the doors for us. Saves me having to reach over and toggle the switch!

And who decides to let in who?
If you tell him NOT to open the door, will he?
If he decides to let in his ( put in whatever you want )-buddy, can you inhibit him?

You are simply shifting the inherent problem of that friggin door from a pilot to a flight attendant.
Congratulations ......

[White Knight]

I quite agree Glofish... A pointless exercise as I said! Anyway, the remaining pilot is the one to open or lock the door as necessary; I was being facetious...

[evansb]

Who would have predicted that in 2015, the centre of discussion of airline transportation would centre around the closure of a door..? No one would of course. Absurdity ?

Yes.

Reality?

Yes.

An unintended consequence of the rise of militant Islam, which is due, in part, to a global dependence on fossil fuels sourced from a specific geopolitical area, which is due.... oh enuff said.

[aslan1982]

guys its only a company notam which i presume will be temporary.

My thinking is that its just to keep in line with other companies for the time being

As soon as this passes over I imagine things will revert to normal but i could be wrong and we get an FCI next

anyway take all the breaks u need and for as long as u need. I'm not gonna change my habbits

[fatbus]

Reality is the glamour left this career many years ago , it's just a job now . Some good articles about low cost airlines and low cost pilots.
Some people getting into it now envision the glamour days only to be shocked
It's only a job now and the pay is average.

[lospilotos]

Just waiting for the ASR:
"Go-around - Cabin not ready

A go-around was performed at almost 1000 feet due to cabin not ready. Contributing factor was the FO whom had a severe case of the ****ters and therefore Muhammed (L5, the only male cabin crew onboard and now having to sit in the flight deck for 20 minutes) could not secure his station in time."

[JAARule]

No change to the controlled rest policy then?
CC are required to guard the one pilot while the other goes to the lav for a few minutes but when one pilot checks out for up to 40min (officially) replete with eye shades, ear plugs, blanket, the other guy is left unguarded on a one man show to do whatever he likes. One swing with a crash axe while he sleeps and it's goodnight Vienna. But I'm sure it'll never happen.

[donpizmeov]

Hmm, think we should call this mountain "Mount Mole Hill".

[GoreTex]

How about airlines, especially emirates, making their staff less depressed?

[bogeydope]

JAARule,

I second your thought about this! Typical knee jerk to protect the "Brand".....
but not thinking things through:ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Am NOT Sure]

The scenarios put here are masterpieces

It scares me to know how criminal minded a human let alone a pilot can be

I , myself , have envisaged the possibility of the other crew member becoming unwillingly suicidal ( ignoring a go around call and plunging it to the ground to where he thinks is a runway !)

I will be psychologically evaluating my CM1 at the briefing to safely and efficiently plan my poop breaks

[SOPS]

I'm thinking I got out just in time.:ok:

[LongRangeNav]

Todays paper states "Sharjah-based carrier Air Arabia is NOT implementing the 'rule of two' law - yet." A spokesperson said: "Air Arabia is currently considering and evaluating the 'two person at all times' cockpit procedure that is being proposed. We will announce any changes to our operating procedures as appropriate"

Seems like a reasonable response instead of knee-jerk reaction to give appearance of doing the right thing before a well thought out evaluation and assessment of can be made.

[Capn Rex Havoc]

SOPS have you left? I wouldn't have known. :ugh:

[Schnowzer]

It's a passenger confidence building measure that seems not unreasonable to implement from a PR point of view at the present time. Probably worthless in reality, even with guidance given to the cabin crew, how do they know if the remaining pilot is about to do something dodgy. It does seem a little silly having to call the L1 when you need to go peepee!

The reality is you can probably never stop a determined mad man or woman from doing anything, particularly if they are a psychopath without empathy or remorse. A jump seating pilot would definitely have a better clue of what to do.

[Reinhardt]

Cabin crew are different, and more than often during the few occasions we have to socialize with them, we all have been puzzled by their abysmal lack of maturity, education, logical process and general knowledge. The fact that quite a few pilots are married to some is unfortunately shifting the judgment of many.
Basically they are recruited out of nowhere, stay in our companies sometimes as short as 6 months, and after resigning go back to nowhere...
You may encounter some with a little bit of extreme religious involvment - you see what I mean, and for sure I've met some of them which I found a little bit limit for that matter
To give them a function in the cockpit is non-sense.
When my colleague is out to the toilets or stretching his legs - and this last thing in a transoceanic flight is absolutely necessary, and we will continue to do it (in other words no CC is going to clock how much time we spent out of the cockpit, or how many times we go out for a pee) I will remain in charge of who is going to be admitted to the cockpit, and the total stranger who is going to be seated on the jumpseat will not have a word in my decision to open or not the door to one of his buddies...
A suggested SOP : when other pilot is out, and CC observer in, the door will be opened (by remaining pilot) only to the other pilot coming back..... and brief your crew about it, that will deflate some of their self-perceived role.
In other words, cabin crew are much more a statistical security risk than pilots...

[El Peligroso]

The "expectation" of what is required by cc in the flight deck, while a pilot is out on a p-break, needs to be carefully managed and communicated. Empowering anyone not appropriately trained (i.e. a type rated pilot) to manipulate switches on the flight deck when they "feel" something may be wrong, could be quite catastrophic.

After deliberately briefing the crew on the specifics, the day the CO-NOTAM was released (pre-flight), I was amazed at the questions being asked once cc were called to the flight deck. Some thought they were there to "fly the plane" in case something went wrong and one attempted to sit in the pilot seat when the other guy exited.

That aspiration didn't last too long...

I hope once the dust has settled, common sense prevails. After all, what does this procedure say for the confidence we have in our internal psych department?
:ok:

[Reinhardt]

And don't tell us that back-ground checks are performed during the recruitment process.... Hundreds of recruits from all over the world... We are just airlines !

Now any aspiring terr' does know that he can quite easily get access to a cockpit close to any city in the world (just have to be patient) just by passing some easy interview with group exercises and grooming test....

[Kennytheking]

[It's a passenger confidence building measure that seems not unreasonable to implement from a PR point of view at the present time. Probably worthless in reality, even with guidance given to the cabin crew, how do they know if the remaining pilot is about to do something dodgy. It does seem a little silly having to call the L1 when you need to go peepee!

The reality is you can probably never stop a determined mad man or woman from doing anything, particularly if they are a psychopath without empathy or remorse. A jump seating pilot would definitely have a better clue of what to do.

Schnowzer, i agree 100% that this is nothing more than a PR exercise. That said, I feel it is a mistake from a PR point of view. They are trying to reassure passengers that they are doing something. But think carefully......what are they really saying?

Here is The Captain of our plane. Look at him closely........he /she is the person that you cannot trust to be alone in the flight deck!

That does nothing to inspire confidence. IMHO, airlines should rather stand up to the media frenzy by re-affirming their trust in their pilots. They should rather be focusing on the root cause of the issue i.e. How to deal with depression.

As a side bar, I note that psychiatric issues are excluded from our( and presumably most airlines) loss of licence insurance. I wonder why someone would want to hide it away:ugh:

[falconeasydriver]

PR measures only; however, The National quotes the Abu Dhabi GCAA fellow plan to implement frequent psycho evaluations for pilots. Therefore, expect to be talking to a shrink on your next medical.
Imagine pilots being grounded for the slightest hint of mental distress.

So that will be about 50% of the workforce then......

[Outatowner]

I heard they're going to hire some more Filipinos on the same deal as the CSAs to sit in the cockpit for when Sir needs a crap. No hotel layovers, though, just out and back, sleep in the jumpseat.

[Praise Jebus]

Cockpit Service Attendent. ...like the sound of that.

[donpizmeov]

Midgets are of lower weight and require lower calorie intake. Stowage is also much easier when not required. This would much improve yield etc etc.

[Daniel Bernoulli]

Quote "Cabin crew are different, and more than often during the few occasions we have to socialize with them, we all have been puzzled by their abysmal lack of maturity, education, logical process and general knowledge."

Reinhardt - you must be great company on a layover! I imagine there are not too many occasions when you "have to socialise with them" as they probably leave you to your make your own fun on layovers :bored:

[glofish]

The newest FCI from EK is purely and simply sexist and discriminatory.

To require a "male" flight attendant as second crew member in the cockpit during absence of a pilot bares the question as to why it has to be of that sex.

Can only men operate the lock after being briefed?
Or is there a hidden reason not mentioned?
What if the remaining pilot is a female?

EK/GCAA please think before you write. :yuk:

[four engine jock]

Why would you need a Cockpit door on a cargo aircraft??

[ruserious]

Glofish, really, don't you understand.

Your average male cabin crew with the company will be able to play flight sim to an advanced level, have a Somalian PPL and very likely is planning to go commercial when he has saved enough money. So if anything does go wrong he will be able to leap into action and save the day.
As an added bonus he will be able to tell you how to improve the quality of the landing from the last sector, which he thought was a bit average, you know it makes sense :rolleyes:

[Fred Garvin M.P.]

You guys are missing the plot. All you have to do is look at the last NAJM award ceremony. Cabin Crew takes over for the first officer and saves the flight. Not even sure why we are still employed as pilots.


And don't forget, on re-entry, the pilot WILL use the keypad. We also have to return as soon as possible. Guess I'll be reading the IPAD a bit longer in the lav......

[MrMachfivepointfive]

Why would you need a Cockpit door on a cargo aircraft??

To protect against the nutty horse minder?

[recceguy]

Cabin crew (smartphones with legs, tabloid readers, avid shoppers, "need to sleep" on layovers, or middle-eastern dodgy individuals) are much more a safety risk than pilots !

Where do they come from ? how have they been recruited and checked ?

If they lose their job, what investment will they lose ?

How does it look (passenger point of view) to have CC checking pilots ?

Will they have priority to operate the door switch, in case of disagreement with remaining pilot ? :ugh:

[fliion]

Andreas Lubitz' first job in aviation was as a Germanwings Cabin Crew.

There

f.

[fliion]

Lol, chillax - it was tongue in cheek compadre.

f.

[glofish]

skytrax

It is not that much about existing cc. It is more about the most stupid regulation just legalised. Because it's as well not only about a depressive whacko, there are others, many more!!

If you want to organise an attack with an aircraft, it takes time, it took almost 2 years to train the morons who flew during 9/11 and they had to deceive a lot of trainers.
Now however, the airline community gives such groups a much shorter version, with cc. 4 to 8 weeks recruitment and 6 weeks training, with almost no such thing as screening for character.

One ME airline now made it even easier, by stating that the cc has to be male, what a treat!

The trained sleeper cell will wait until the crew composition predestines their cc to be the pissmaster. He will go when called, beforehand giving a little sign to his fellow sleepers as pax, the one will deal with the pilot with the pants down (easy), the other goes up and knocks on the door. The remaining pilot will want to deny access, the trustworthy safety-cc will however tell him to f#ck off, opens the door for his buddy and bingo!

Now if you accuse me of giving them ideas, you underestimate them greatly.

It's the complete knee jerk and most stupid reaction of many airlines that is only here to achieve some publicity, but in effect they just decreased safety by a good margin.

[Reinhardt]

Glofish


You are 100% spot on. Thanks you for the articulate and elaborate post.


As you say, now it will be much easier to introduce somebody in the cockpit and take control - a cabin crew male, 2 months in the company (where does he come from ? where was he before ? ) - yes, because of the majority of the crew being female, they will have to bring some of the juniors from the back to act as "cockpit marshalls"
Last month one of them was trying to argue in the cockpit with both of us pilots, in a confuse manner about Iran, Syria, his childhood under the bombs of the IAF and God knows what, he was difficult to follow, and of course none of us was trying to argue...
Last year in the galley a purser was giving hints about the war "many people in Europe" were ready to start - guess what he had in mind...


and those people are going to "monitor" Captains, some of them could even be their grandfather ?


An absolute disgrace, typical rushed decision for PR, unfortunately all over the ME region and Europe...

[Quantum of Solace]

mnsthepilot writes.

"What is your problem if a professional pilot prayed for 10 minutes during the flight, when it is time to pray in his religion " I mean it is only 10 minutes"

The 10 minute prayer time may not be a problem but turning the aircraft during the flight to face Mecca for prayers might be. ;)

[Calmcavok]

Glofish - it will certainly bust your anonymity, but your post should be emailed to JA & head of security.

[aileron droop]

"Now if you accuse me of giving them ideas, you underestimate them greatly."

I agree 100%, :D

[lospilotos]

ACI reissued now... Imagine if we pilots always required (at least) two attempts to get it right...

[Chewthecrude]

Two-person rule in cockpit fails to address mental health problem in airline industry
Date
March 28, 2015




There is no doubt something needs to be done to prevent this from happening in the future, but a rule that there must be two people in the cockpit at all times is not the answer.
There is no doubt something needs to be done to prevent this from happening in the future, but a rule that there must be two people in the cockpit at all times is not the answer. Photo: Tanya Ingrisciano
Once again in the face of tragedy, outrage and sadness have manifested themselves in irrational action.

The turn of events that led to the loss of 150 lives is undoubtedly tragic and dumbfounding. A reportedly mentally ill co-pilot taking the reins while the captain was out of the cockpit is truly terrifying. But calls for rule changes for the cockpit are emotive and knee-jerk.

Let's consider a few important facts. According to the Aviation Safety Network, since September 11, 2001, only two incidents of commercial flight suicide have been recorded. Considering that more than 2.5 billion people flew between 2010 and 2014, that is a lottery-winning low chance of encountering a similar tragedy. Moreover, the ability for a mentally ill person to destroy themselves and a multitude of innocent people is not reserved for the cockpit.


Calling for a two-person requirement in the cockpit is certainly not the answer to this tragedy. It appears to be the reaction of governing bodies who want to appear to be "doing something". Yes, there is something to be done here, but it isn't a knee-jerk rule change. It's about addressing mental health issues in an industry in which such issues are stigmatised.


For our long-haul flights, with large roomy cockpits that include a lavatory, it is already customary, and extremely manageable, to always have two pilots in the cockpit.

In fact, when on long flights with three or more pilots, it is a requirement to do so. This is an added safety measure, not to prevent someone from doing something awful, but to keep an extra set of eyes on the aircraft.

For domestic flying in aircraft such as the Boeing 737, the idea of requiring two people in the cockpit at all times is almost an impossibility. The cockpit is small - so small in fact that if a pilot wished to go to the lavatory, he or she would have to completely exit the cockpit before another crew member (presumably a flight attendant) could enter. Even then, the crew member would have no room.

The jumbling of crew members would create an enormous amount of hassle, and potentially be unsafe.

It seems that the people who suggest these ideas as solutions are not qualified to do so and ought to spend some time doing their research. Calling for this rule is like requiring that all buses have two drivers on board because one driver could drive off a cliff on purpose.

There is no doubt something needs to be done to prevent this from happening in the future, but a rule that there must be two people in the cockpit at all times is not the answer.

The solution here is obviously to address the elephant in the room - mental health. Our industry has in place an opportunity to deal with mental health issues, but culturally and otherwise, such issues are still stigmatised.

The avenues for dealing with mental health issues such as major depressive disorder are limited. Airlines are addressing fatigue but mental health still carries unjustified outcome anxiety. A pilot raising his or her hand about mental health may mistakenly fear they will never be allowed to fly again. The ability to fly is a livelihood; failing a medical is essentially becoming unemployable.

This tragedy is a wake-up call. We should learn from this. We need to learn to help mentally ill pilots to take time out, recover and fly again. We need to destigmatise mental health, and we need to remove the fear of acknowledging the issues we might face.

It is certain that we will all encounter mental health issues in our lives, if not directly then through someone close to us. It's about time we confront and manage mental health in the aviation industry.

Mark Gilmour has been an airline pilot for 10 years. He is based in Sydney.

Support is available for those who may be distressed by phoning beyondblue on 1300 22 4636; Lifeline 13 11 14; Mensline 1300 789 978; Kids Helpline 1800 551 800.

[no777]

This is absolute madness. For the first time ever I feel unsafe. Any aircraft with humans on the Flight Deck can be crashed, with or without captain/copilot/cabin crew present.
I had once a cabin crew (male) stopped by security somewhere in the East.He was carrying a replica Berretta 9mm. Few years back.Was he suffering from some mental disorder? Probably...Was he hired by the company..? Definitely.
Yes, he was fired, obviously.

[jack schidt]

Those pilots who are currently flying on anti depressants will fear being grounded in the future if you go to the docs stating you are depressed. This fact might leave a number of pilots who need medical help but who are not going to seek medical help because of the threat of being grounded! It's not a statement about the door but those who might need help and are now keeping it quiet inside the door.

j

[MFALK]

SOPS, time to cut the umbilical cord ;-)

[Mnsthepilot]

quantum-of-solace

If that is a joke then it's funny :D:D

If u mean it then I'm speechless :ouch:

[Flytdeck]

We don't have people thinking the problem through these days; we have memes. Much is driven by the airlines' fear of the legal system which would devastate the company if a similar problem occurred and they had "DONE NOTHING". The new two crew procedures are spreading and are being put in place with little regard to consequences. MEMES at their most dangerous.

As many members have pointed out the reactionary "solution" is only partially effective and presents possibly more exposure than the problem it is supposed to address. The problem in this case is not procedure, it is people. PILOTs are people (though there are many who may dispute this statement).

Mental health (and mental illness) have only been recently recognised as valid entities in our culture. Psychiatry has evolved to a professional that might be effective in pilot assessment. The doctor would likely have to extend their education to include aviation related issues. Initial screening would be mandatory along with annual "updates".

Another difficult step would be enforcing doctors to refer pilots with possible mental issues to licensed aviation professionals. This would have the effect of discouraging a pilot from seeking any help at all as few are willing to place their personal careers in jeopardy. Possibly companies could develop a "no penalty" benefit for those who sought help.

Companies would have to play closer attention to their aviators personal affairs such as finance, drinking, lifestyle choices and personal lives as these all impact on mental well being. Bank accounts could be monitored along with your internet and cellular activities. Personal lives would be placed under a continuous microscope with the objective of supplying pilots with "healthy" mental attitudes. Your career choice would immediately be questioned as what sane person would want such a job?

Which leaves us with the alternative.

No pilots at all. The completely electronic flight deck. HAL. An airline accountant's electric dream. If the customers can be convinced that pilots are dangerous and should not be on the flight deck then this is the next logical step. Keep the pilots together in a remote location where they can be employed only when needed and under constant evaluation. The new, improved aviator :rolleyes:. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/27/it-may-be-time-for-robot-pilots.html

One more article: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/07/science/planes-without-pilots.html?_r=1

Another meme is about to spawn.