Blimey! What an honour! A whole four-page thread starting with a quote from moi. Thanks
fmgc. Bit of a shame I was being thoroughly ****bagged in the process, but you can’t have everything, I suppose.
Sorry to have been so late in coming to the party, btw - have been away, and only espied the thread today.
Anyway, a bit of background, if I may. I’m a broadcast journo, and I rarely do written stuff. I was asked to do this by the BBC online magazine - and ended up being quoted out of context. If you can be arsed, here are the exact words I sent to the reporter Harry Low.
There are always unintended consequences. The secure flight deck door policy was brought in after the events of 9-11.
The concept of always having more than one person on the flight deck is probably an improvement. The best solution would be to have two pilots. But most short haul flights only have two pilots in total, so that would mean no toilet breaks on a flight lasting several hours - clearly impractical. So the other person has to be cabin crew - a flight attendant. So, do all flight attendants have to be trained to understand the myriad switches on the flight deck? And are we happy expecting unqualified crew to be able to understand when a pilot is doing something dangerous, as opposed to something which may actually be in response to an emergency?
On balance, an extra crew member on the flight deck is probably beneficial - if for no other reason than to operate the switches that unlock the door if it is clear that someone with appropriate authority needs to get into the flight deck. But that does all need training - more expense for cash-strapped smaller airlines. So, as Flightglobal said, "It is a problem that is irreconcilable at its most fundamental level."
There is another consideration. It is suggested that a pilot intent on suicide (and hence mass-murder) will be less likely to carry out his or her plans if there is someone else on the flight deck with them. That may be true, but I don’t think it can be proven.
I hope that clarifies things a bit,
fmgc. And also - thanks to the peeps who’ve come to my support, and to the ones who don’t think the way fmgc does.
But I’d like also to answer fmgc’s question
How is Sean Maffett qualified to comment on something that he is totally uneducated about:
I believe, perhaps immodestly, that I’m quite well qualified - even educated - in the subject. Although I can’t boast those magic letters ATPL, I have spent all 50-plus years of my adult life in aviation. I like to claim that aviation fuel runs in my veins. I wrote in my LinkedIn summary that I try to “bring an understanding of aeroplanes and flying to people who have not had the experience that I have been lucky enough to have had in the world of aviation.”
Since spending twenty years and several thousand hours in the RAF - nearly all on transport flying (incidentally, ‘Transport Command’ disappeared in 1967, just after I left my my first squadron) - I’ve been a freelance journo.
Over the years, I’ve become, in the public shorthand, an aviation expert or analyst. I’ve written and narrated more than a hundred aviation dvds and videos. I’ve commentated at more air shows than I care to think about, including Dubai and Farnborough - on lots of aircraft types, civil and military.
And, on average these days, I do about sixty broadcasts a year on tv and radio. They’re about aviation, civil or military, and they’re all by request from a broadcaster. They’re mostly for the BBC, but also for ITV and Sky, as well as Al Jazeera and other international broadcasters - even sometimes for the Russians.
And, although I may not be ‘current’ on anything, I try my hardest to do the appropriate research. It’s even been known for the odd PPRuNer to say something kind about my efforts - although clearly not invariably….
In short - I know that, if I poke my head over the parapet, I must expect to get shot at by people with more appropriate aviation experience than I. But I’d just like the shooters to know that I do have a background in their world. The point is, I’m actually one of the people trying to make available to the Beeb, and the rest, an authentic aviation viewpoint, rather than the view of an aviation-ignorant reporter. And I remain happy to continue poking my head over the parapet.
fmgc, if you’re so unhappy with what I was quoted as saying, why don’t you offer your view to the BBC, rather than hiding behind an impenetrable PPRuNe name? All you have to do is phone the BBC, and ask for the reporter by name. Or, if you don’t want to do that, you could contact me through a PPRuNe PM. As a reputable journalist , I would, of course, guarantee to protect your anonymity should you choose to tell me your name.
That’s it - sorry to have taken up so much space.