Continental 61 Captain dies en route

[Ricky1]

Continental flight 61 en route from Belgium to Newark, Captain passes away during flight, FAA reports. Two first officers onboard. Declared emergency and will be expected to land at approx 11.45 EST to noon. Any further information?

[Ricky1]

Not that I think there would be anything to worry about, however unnerving it would be in real life. Here are the details of the flight.

COA61 - Boeing 777-200
Brussels Natl EBBR - Newark Liberty Intl KEWR
Status En Route (3614 miles down; 88 miles to go)
247 onboard

Continental states that Captain died of natural causes, aged 61.

[Me Myself]

Continental states that Captain died of natural causes, aged 61. Rip

Now, what about retirement at 65 and all the rubbish I read about being fitter at....than 32 ???
This is one for books and certainly food for thoughts.

[BobT]

So if there are two FOs on the plane - both of which are (allegedly?) qualified to fly it in all phases of flight - why declare an emergency? Would the pax be told?

[Eboy]

The Port Authority says the co-pilot took control of the plane, along with a passenger who is a pilot.

090618_pilot_dies_during_flight_to_newark (http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/local_news/new_jersey/090618_pilot_dies_during_flight_to_newark)

[filejw]

At Continental 777 FO's would have about 10 years minimum with the company and most could hold Capt on some other Eq.

[rsavion]

Just watched it land on CNN.com Live. Completely uneventful. Let's see how much mileage the "news" networks get out of this one.

[Ricky1]

Flight has landed safely in Newark. No surprises.

I guess this will all be food for thought with the change last year in the mandatory retirement age increase from 60 to 65.

[gordonroxburgh]

No Big deal from a safety point of view

Started with 3 qualified pilots, sadly only landed with 2.

Looking at the WX on the TV, you would have suspected that this would have been an autoland anyway.

[Troy McClure]

Yes, a non-event, but:

Would I be happy if the captain died and I had to land the aeroplane? No.
Could I do it? Yes
Would I do it? Yes
Would I have checked if any other crew were on board before calling on cabin crew to read checklist etc? Yes
Would I have declared an emergency? Hell, yes.

[Ricky1]

Ghost, continental has stated they have called the pilots family already. Its horrible to have it plastered on the news like this I agree. Just situations like this are hard keep on the DL. Thoughts are with his family.

[Oleo]

The reason they declare an emergency is that it is SOP, but also to get the poor chap medical aid ASAP. Very distressing for everyone.

[bluto]

Both the co-pilots are ATP rated and Type rated in the B-777.
If you lose an engine or other crucial aircraft component a n emergency is declared. A Captain seems that important...
No disrespect.
Also it moves you to the head of the line in case he could be saved.

[Bobman84]

De ja vu? The following 2007 incident also stated "natural causes" as the cause of death.

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/260843-continental-airlines-emergency-pilot-dies.html

[habubauza]

Incapacitation of a required crew member including "death" requires declaration of emergency.

[flapsforty]

It is highly unlikely that the bereaved will peruse these pages.
If you want to express your sympathies in a way that matters, please mail Continental and ask to be included in the condolence register.

Expressing sympathies here is mawkish, states the extremely obvious and only serves to make yourself feel good.

Don't do it.
Thank you.

[racedo]

The reason they declare an emergency is that it is SOP, but also to get the poor chap medical aid ASAP.

It ain't much help if he stopped breathing hours ago. Pilots would have stated he appears to be dead as they not doctors.

[I'mbatman]

Not entirely true about the FO's having ten years with CO. During their last hiring push from 2005-2008 they had some newhires(very few) go to the 777. I personally know one.

[fireflybob]

I hardly think this is a reason for keeping the retirement age at 60!

Who knows what the cause of death is until there is a post mortem?

There have been cases over the years of pilots dieing whilst on duty at ages below 60 years.

It took the Trident accident at Staines in 1972 before incapacitation training become mandatory in the UK.

[finfly1]

Between this sad event, their connection [however tenuous] with Colgan, and their unfortunate 'misplacing' of two young children in separate events earlier this week, their legal department may be enjoying a feeling of at least some temporary job security.

[countbat]

Saying he died due to age, 61, is like someone would say: AF 447 crashed because pilots were stupid or Scarebus is a crappy plane. It shows luck of common sense and respect for a fellow human and crew member, also a lot of ME...ME....ME and only ME. After ME the hell can broke loose.
Someone gave the 2007 Continental example. The pilot was 58. Should that be taken in consideration? Or the co-pilot who died on me at only 32. Why not consider 30 years old the limit? As long as you can hold a medical you should be good to go. Once someone is born, sooner or later will die. How and when will always be an enigma. The best we can do is to try to take care of ourself and cheat the death for a longer period of time. That's another reason why there are 2 pilots on the plane.

[400drvr]

Last time I checked pilots are not super human! We suffer all the problems every one else does.

If memory serves other pilots have died on duty and they were under 60.

Can't wait to see how the media will play this one. Maybe we can finally put swine flu to rest

;)

[SaturnV]

Passengers were not told apparently, and only knew something was amiss when emergency vehicles approached the plane after it landed. There had been an announcement on whether there were any doctors on-board, and several passengers apparently responded.

Assuming these were doctors, and they pronounced him deceased, this would explain why no earlier diversion to Bangor or Boston.

[RoyHudd]

And that is it. Job done, as per training and experience. No big deal. Just unfortunate circumstances.

[Bergie]

'Natural Causes' had to chuckle. Not a bad way to go though although still relatively young. We have a retirement age of 63 and have had a number of medical boarding's amongst the older folk in the 58 to 63 year old range in recent times. I believe that the younger you can afford to go, go.
Night shift/differing time zones and working in a pressurized aluminum tube at altitude must affect your longevity. Not to mention the stress…

[SaturnV]

Excerpted from the on-line New York Times

About halfway through the flight, a call came over the announcement system asking if any doctors were on board, passengers said.....

....five people — four men and one woman — went up to the front of the plane after the call for a doctor was made. Four of them later returned.

The passengers were not told of the emergency. “We asked the stewardesses and they said ’someone fell ill',....

A Belgian cardiologist, Dr. Julien Struyven, 72, checked the pilot’s vital signs and declared him dead. Dr. Struyven told reporters that he tried to use a defibrillator on the plane, but was not able to revive the pilot. Dr. Struyven said a heart attack was the likely cause of death.
....
A medical doctor on board the flight pronounced the pilot dead, according to Les Dorr Jr., a spokesman for the Federal Aviation Administration. The pilot was removed from the cockpit to the crew rest area, he said.

Ms. King said that two other pilots — a reserve officer and a first officer — assumed the controls. “The crew on this flight included an additional relief pilot, who took the place of the deceased pilot,” she said.

[countbat]

Also, I don't know how in other places a crew is viewed or trained but here in States, for the majority of companies, there is no difference in training, qualifications between PIC and SIC. The only difference is the seniority with the company. That doesn't mean the FO has a lack of training or he is not ready to be a Captain. He is as well trained and prepaid as any other captain except the company has no empty Captain spot available. A good way for any company to save money. As far I am concerned the Continental flight had 2 other Captains available. Business as usual. Good job.

[lolopilot]

Very good point Firefly boy. Media will probably bring up the new "65 rule". Well, here's my very modest contribution to the topic, based on 15 years of research on the subject in my previous career. Sudden death affects 350.000 to 400.000 americans every year; known etiologies are cardiac problems, as well as many others. Here is the bottom line: there is no statistically significant difference between the following age groups: 45-55 and 55-65. So the media are going to tell us that pilots should retire at 45 :rolleyes: Of course, we have seen recently a lot of self-proclamed media experts after AF 447 crash and unfortunately it is likely that we are going to see the same idiots feeding the general public with stupid and medically unfounded statements related to the tragic loss of this CAL Captain.

[BlackBird]

It's a whole load of B.S. that age 65 came about due to any thing other than greed. It's amazing that this law just "popped" up over a weekend. It's the greed of the companies and the greed of those old fart captains sitting in my seat. I think this just goes to show that age 65 was too much -- law should be repealed and age 60 should return as the norm.

The average age of the F/Os at my company are: 47-48. Average age of our 777 CAs: 58-59. We haven't hired in years and still have 1985 guys walking the streets.

There's a little bit of tongue-n-cheek about the seat deal.

Those F/Os did a great job. They were required to declare an emergency, but that didn't require them to land short. BTW, I don't think the wx in EWR required an auto land so hand fly that puppy.

[fkelly]

Bluto said... Both the co-pilots are ATP rated and Type rated in the B-777

Now there's a lucky coincidence

[DMER]

I guess this will all be food for thought with the change last year in the mandatory retirement age increase from 60 to 65.


For thousands of people each year, the first symptom of heart disease is death. A significant number are under the age of 60.

[DMER]

When AA installed defibrilators on their aircraft, it was at least partly in response to the onboard death of a mid 30's male passenger who had completed a triathlon, a few days before his flight.

[BillyBiggles]

Just a thought! yes despite all the training you get etc.. Good on the F/Os for carrying on safely and getting the thing down knowing the chap they had spent the last day or so with, and sat next to for the past several hours had just died. Bound to be distracting!!

[CALDC9]

1)Age does not matter when your number is up.:bored:

2)System control would have notified the family.:sad:

3) CAL has had a few "new hires" go to the 777.:oh:

over and out

[Airbubba]

It's a whole load of B.S. that age 65 came about due to any thing other than greed. It's amazing that this law just "popped" up over a weekend. It's the greed of the companies and the greed of those old fart captains sitting in my seat. I think this just goes to show that age 65 was too much -- law should be repealed and age 60 should return as the norm.


Yep, age 65 passed both houses of the U.S. Congress without a single vote against. Not one. And, it passed during the week and was signed into law on a Thursday, not on the weekend.

Looks like all the whiners did nothing but complain in this case...

If there was any real opposition you would think they would have gotten at least one vote against. But they didn't.

[mini]

A very sad event, but I guess if you juggle the numbers there will always be a certain proportion of premature demises, so its not that exceptional.

I surmise that the SOP for declaring an emergency would be due to expecting a single pilot landing, declaring would lessen the workload a little, in this case they had two drivers which would have helped, no-doubt the crew were somewhat distracted by events.

[Juliet Sierra Papa]

It's a whole load of B.S. that age 65 came about due to any thing other than greed. It's amazing that this law just "popped" up over a weekend. It's the greed of the companies and the greed of those old fart captains sitting in my seat. I think this just goes to show that age 65 was too much -- law should be repealed and age 60 should return as the norm.


Blackbird, Personally I think you have learnt more from that "old fart captain" than you give credit for and I personally and maybe others too see your post as nothing other than a hope that someone may see fit to give you the opportunity to prove that you are a Hotdogger.

I hope you are still an Aviator at 60+

JSP

[lolopilot]

Absolutely accurate. Numbers are indeed in the hundreds of thousands just for Western Europe and North America.

[rhythm method]

Actually, I would expect you would declare an emergency even if the person wasn't crew. You want to get any possible medical assistance on arrival in case any vital signs can be revived. (I don't know the full facts... I guess if it was several hours later, that may be an irrelevance)

[lolopilot]

Blackbird, could you please educate us a little bit. What do you mean by
"I think this just goes to show that age 65 was too much" ?

[Desert Diner]

It's a whole load of B.S. that age 65 came about due to any thing other than greed. It's amazing that this law just "popped" up over a weekend. It's the greed of the companies and the greed of those old fart captains sitting in my seat. I think this just goes to show that age 65 was too much -- law should be repealed and age 60 should return as the norm.

It's not the age of the body but its condition that's important.

Note the age of the doctor

A Belgian cardiologist, Dr. Julien Struyven, 72, checked the pilot’s vital signs and declared him dead.

[keith smith]

What happens when there are only two pilots on the flight deck (third is in the loo)and the disabled pilot collapses on the yoke. Flight deck door is locked on flight deck side (as per FAA and other requirements)?
Keith

[hit_the_deck]

Actually, I would expect you would declare an emergency even if the person wasn't crew. You want to get any possible medical assistance on arrival in case any vital signs can be revived.If a doc or paramedic pronounces somebody dead ressucitation attempts cease so to keep the passengers calm I guess they just continued to Newark. They did get priority though didn't they?

[captplaystation]

Haven't read the whole thread (apologies but it's past my bedtime :zzz: ) but a lot of outwardly healthy individuals drop dead in their forties from heart attacks. I don't think therefore there is much mileage in dwelling on the upping of the retiral age, if the guy had been 59 (not unlikely, we are talking 24 mths max here ) this wouldn't even have been part of the discussion. Hell, I have seen some trim healthy guys in their sixties who I really aspire to look like in 10-15 yrs or so, and some 30 or 40 something lard-asses that I am amazed are still capable of walking to the aircraft , all of the above were resplendent in a uniform. Lets not over-generalise please.

If you must die in flight though, better in the crew rest area entwined with someone young and foxy, well you have to go sometime, wouldn't that be the "way to go" ? bit unnerving for her I guess, so how about a cardiac arrest 5 mins after she went back to her post ? :ok:

Sorry, serious post devalued by late -eve facetious ponderings. :oh:

[redbar1]

Well, in my perspective, the whole incident just shows that the system works!

Whatever any age limit, we will have pilots below this limit go lump while on duty sooner or later. So the crucial point is to have a system of safety-barriers that can absorb this. And we have just seen proof that we have!

Cheers,
Redbar1

[Airbubba]

Anyway, I'm not 60 or 65 yet but perhaps someday I will be. Or not, we'll see.

Don't know how Continental does the augmented crew on the 777. I believe they have two captains and two FO's on the EWR-PEK run but for Europe it appears they have a captain and two typed FO's.

I've been one of two FO's on an Atlantic crossing with an incapacitated captain years ago. Technically, as the right seat FO I was second in command although the relief FO was senior to me. All of our FO's were type rated except for a couple who couldn't pass the ride. The captain was having an apparent kidney stone attack and was in too much pain to fly or even sit in his seat.

We agreed that I would land the aircraft from the right seat since that was where I was proficient, with the relief pilot in the left seat. The aircraft had steering tillers on both sides so taxi was not an issue. A couple of hours out the captain's condition improved dramatically and he was able to sit in his seat while I made an uneventful landing.

I've seen and heard of almost every permutation of the three pilot augmented crew, sometimes everyone type rated, sometimes two captains, sometimes two FO's, sometimes the relief pilot is second in command sometimes he or she is not.

[ManaAdaSystem]

So, if they are all so fit to fly, and there are no greater risk with 60-65 year old pilots, why don't they allow two of them in the same cockpit?

[redbar1]

ManaAda:
Just for the reason referred to in my last post. Please be real.
Risk management - ok?
Cheers,
Redbar1

[foxile]

Last July I went to the doctors and happened to mention the occasional pain across my shoulder in the mornings. Nothing bad but was irritating me more than anything.

I was sent for a routine cardiac stress test to eliminate any cardiac problem. I was gob-smacked when, having done the 15 mins of hell, it showed up something the medics didn't like. So, off to have an angiogram. End result I was immediately admitted and four days later I underwent an emergency quadruple bypass. Never had a clue - no high blood pressure, cholesterol within norms, non-smoker, basically no risk factors. I provided a very interesting case for the Professor at the local medical school cardiology dept. who oversaw my treatment.

Apparently the narrowing of the most important artery (that later splits into two) was 60% leaving me at an unacceptably high risk of sudden death syndrome at anytime without warning. Cause? More than likely stress.

My point here is, talking to this Professor later, he said that nowadays the average age of guys suffering from heart disease requiring intervention is now heading to the low 50s, having fell 10 years over the last 20. Joking he said if you've made 60 then the probability is you're OK!

So sorry, I don't run with this 60 is too old lark, just sounds like jealousy to me. Age is becoming more irrelevant with heart disease; it is being overtaken by lifestyle...

My age? 45.

Guys don't ignore anything.

Foxile

[p51guy]

Making this an age 60 debate is like pissing into the wind. Pilots of all ages have a chance they will die on duty. This aircraft had three qualified pilots on board so losing one doesn't diminish the safety of that flight at all. The third pilot is only to allow a rest period during the 8 plus hr flight. One or both of the pilots might have flown a few minutes over 8 hrs but it did not compromise safety of flight. All had type ratings in the 777.

[cresmer]

Yes, a non-event, but:

Would I be happy if the captain died and I had to land the aeroplane? No.
Could I do it? Yes
Would I do it? Yes TRY ANSWERING NO TO THAT QUESTION!
Would I have checked if any other crew were on board before calling on cabin crew to read checklist etc? Yes
Would I have declared an emergency? Hell, yes.

[free at last]

Reaching age 60 soon, I wish you could be my FO, because you haven't learned anything in Life, as my last downgraded over 61 FO said, come On over 70 regulation. Us older Pilots have seen more than the new generation aircraft can do for you, especially the loss of the remote control !!!!!:), to fly that bird. Cheers!!!! I hope you make to the ripe old age of 60+, I will Pray for You.

[er340790]

Hypothetical question then....

If it was just you as F/O when your Capt dropped dead next to you, would you / your SOPs ask for any other Company pilots on board / military pilots / any other ATPLs etc.... even if only to keep a second set of eyes on things / help with checklists in view of the extra stresses?

[parabellum]

You are talking tosh. The retirement age WAS 65 and both the FAA and the UK CAA arbitrarily reduced it to sixty with no medical evidence to go on whatsoever, it has now gone back to it's correct position, 65, a wrong has been righted, that is all. You are probably too young to remember any of that, judging by your childish post.

[ReverseFlight]

er340790, no need to hypothesize, I recall something like that happened in the last year or so - can anyone remember ?

Age has nothing to do with it. At our FTO, a fit & healthy girl (only 21) who'd just gained her FI rating last week is now all of a sudden in hospital being fitted with a heart pacemaker. It's getting younger all the time.

[GreenEyedTraveler]

A Belgian cardiologist, Dr. Julien Struyven, 72, checked the pilot’s vital signs and declared him dead.

Question:

Would the doctor have been given access to the cockpit to check the pilot's vital signs? Since passengers are strictly forbidden from entering the cockpit, I am wondering about what happens in a medical emergency situation such as this ...

[skol]

I'm not far off 60 myself, but I fly longhaul with some f/o's who are nearly 70.
It's not the possibility of death in flight that worries me it's what happening between their ears.

[RobertS975]

The doctor (or doctors) were apparently allowed access into the cockpit. The deceased pilot apparently died in his cockpit seat. He received CPR and attempts to defribrillate and after the doctor(s) decided that he was gone, reports say that he was moved to the crew rest area right behind the cockpit.

There were clearly cockpit security issues raised during this incident. I do not know how else it could be handled, though. Nonetheless, the thought of passengers in the cockpit with electrical paddles from the cardiac defribrillator does raise some issues. There is a high probability of FAMs being aboard this flight. And I wonder what considerations were given to cockpit security during this life and death emergency from the FAs and FAMs (if aboard).

[Tankengine]

Two things bother me about this thread:

Re; over 60's : I am not concerned about the LAW and age but more about life outside the job! My airline has 65 longhaul and open ended shorthaul [some 69 year old Captains] - I intend retiring before 60 to enjoy my retirement!:ok:

The biggest issue is that some american carriers have NON-TYPERATED co-pilots!!!!!:eek::eek: [from airbubba]

[MarkerInbound]

And that matters how? They have the same initial ground school and do the same initial checkride, minus the steep turns, no flap landing and second engine failure on 3 or 4 engine planes. The F/O's paperwork goes to the company, the Captain's paperwork goes to the company and the Captain's FAA 8710 goes to OKC.

[Airbubba]

The biggest issue is that some american carriers have NON-TYPERATED co-pilots!!!!! [from airbubba]

Some of this is nomenclature. Until fairly recently, the U.S. did not have a P2 type rating (in Oz this used to be called a copilot type rating as I recall). A couple of years ago the FAA started giving P2 type ratings to FO's who had been through an approved course, usually the normal airline FO training.

Any U.S. type rating in the old days (more than a couple of years ago) was a P1 or command type rating. Only the captain on the unaugmented crew was required to have the type rating, which in airline operations would be an ATR, later ATP type rating as opposed to a commerical or Part 91 type rating.

The first officer was required to have a commercial pilot license with catergory and class endorsements but was not required to be type rated in the specific aircraft. Most airlines only typed the captain but a few, like Pan Am, went beyond and typed all pilots.

With an augmented crew at least one pilot on the flight deck had to have a type rating so for international ops, many or all of the FO's had the type rating whereas on domestic ops they usually did not.

I remember riding United ORD-NRT a decade or so ago on a B-744 with a captain and three FO's. Apparently the flight was under 12 hours and only required two FO's but a third was put on for contractual reasons 'to plot in Russian airspace'. Or so they told me.

Anyway, for international ops the U.S. now requires at least a copilot type rating for all FO's. I don't fly much domestic so I'm not sure if domestic FO's now need the P2 type rating, I don't think they do.

[filejw]

Fox your right, i just went thru all kinds of test at 57 and came out clean as a whistle with high BP and bad cholesterol and a bit fat at 57...go figure

[Tankengine]

OK, thanks for the clarification. Here in OZ Captains and First officers all have command ratings on an ATPL, Second officers [or junior F/Os] for augmented crews have co-pilot ratings on a CPL or ATPL. Basically the same, all have done "type rating" course but sims a little different. :)

[Loose rivets]

Something I posted a while back.


This is really the relevant bit.

It seems that it can become embedded in the artery walls, yet leave them appearing open on the angiogram. Inflammation starts because of the very cells that should be protecting us, and the bursting out of these warring entities is sudden and often catastrophic.

http://www.pprune.org/medical-health/265217-does-high-cholesterol-disqualify-employment.html#post3143641

[ExSp33db1rd]

With the attitude shown by Blackbird - no wonder he hasn't got a Command. Quite right, too.

[Airbubba]

OK, thanks for the clarification. Here in OZ Captains and First officers all have command ratings on an ATPL, Second officers [or junior F/Os] for augmented crews have co-pilot ratings on a CPL or ATPL.

Yep, different system, we don't have second officers, except for flight engineers. And we don't do base checks and instrument checks as such. Our training records contain all of the currency information that is listed on licenses in many other countries (i.e. base check with one date for the check, one for the signature, another for the license, whew!).

And we've gone to this warm and fuzzy AQP training system where the oral exam is often gone and the checkride is hidden in scenarios that are meant to be practical and instructive. However, since there is still the legally mandated laundry list of required items, this usually morphs into a combination of quick demos and pencil whips with little opportunity for training or proficiency. And, on many fleets, we only go once a year.

[Old King Coal]

RobertS975 - wrt flight deck 'security issues':

Federal Aviation Regulations
91.3 (b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.

121.557 (a) In an emergency situation that requires immediate decision and action, the pilot in command may take any action that he considers necessary under the circumstances. In such a case he may deviate from prescribed operations procedures and methods, weather minimums, and this chapter, to the extent required in the interests of safety.

Nuff said!

[DA50driver]

I would take a non-type rated copilot with 6000 hours any day over a 300 hour type rated one.
Type rating does not mean squat!!!!

[Old King Coal]

I want to know who is this idiot the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8107838.stm) dragged up?... one "Jim Ferguson - an aviation writer from the UK" who, during studio interview, came out with comments such as:

"the plane would have been difficult to land with only one pilot at the controls"

"You could, I gather, land a 777 single-handed - but it would require a lot of effort and it would appear [in this case there was] a very young co-pilot - so if there was another one, that would help. "

"It would be very difficult, very distressing. I don't know if this [scenario] is carried out on simulator training or not."

"it must have been "very difficult, very distressing" to land the plane safely."

Jim Ferguson, if you're reading this (and you really should be! ), I'd invite you to keep your half-baked ideas about flying a jet airliner out of the public domain. And, fwiw, I've just sent an email to the BBC asking them to desist from using you as an aviation pundit, as you quite clearly do not know what you are talking about!

[11Fan]

Clearly an Idiot. Posted BBC myself.

[Airbubba]

On flights of less than eight hours there would only be two pilots. In a real world airline, you would usually have a pilot or two deadheading internationally.

Still, the widebody single pilot scenario has happened occasionally from what I understand. I've been told of an incident at a cargo airline where the FO became miffed over the captain's instructions and refused to even operate the flaps and gear into NRT. And, a lot of Asian and Middle Eastern airlines fly with very low time ab initio FO's. No problem for the captain, he's used to doing it solo but the question of whether the FO could really land alone has been raised here often in the past.

In the U.S. we're supposed to wear a mask if only one of the pilots is left on the flight deck at altitude in case of rapid decompression. However, working overseas, the lone pilot was also supposed to lock his shoulder harness in case he passed out to avoid the slump over the controls depicted in the movie 'Airplane!'

[davidash]

What I find really distressing is the uniformed comment on the news. Sky, which I was watching, would have it that there was a major crisis happening. The innunendo was almost "here we go again" - another AF 447. Instead of emphasising that the crew was trained for such an eventuality, one would have thought that unless the additional f/o was luckily on board, there would have been a disaster. Talk about terrifying the travelling public!

[helimutt]

Not sure how much the BBC pay people like JF, but he could always go on the comedy circuit, earning money for 'talking out of his ar$e'.

Have also emailed the BBC. Unfortunately, the travelling public really do have to listen to a whole load of crap these days.

[haughtney1]

I wonder what would have happened if the accountants and Boffins had their way..and only had 1 pilot onboard:ugh:

[Just wondering]

Good old Jim - owning a nice anorak and a powerful pair of binoculars does not make you an aviation expert. Don't think he has ever held a license, certainly not a CPL.

[stiffwing]

Are the F/O's qualified LHS to be pilot flying in less than Cat 1 conditions? If not, thats a good reason for declaring an emergency..
Another is, how does anyone know what has caused the death.. could be subtle chemical/ biological sources that could affect other crew members.. priority for landing required.

[Cavitasian]

Believe it or not, you'll be an 'Old Fart' one day Blackbird. I hope you're accorded the due respect you'll feel you should be. BTW, as I write I'm a relative 'nipper' being nowhere near 65!:ok:

[angels]

Re the coverage of this, the initial stories I saw were restrained and to the point.

IE The PIC died of natural causes, the rest of the crew rallied around, did a great job and the plane lands safely. End of a sad story.

It seems that once the talking heads got involved it has gone pear-shaped.

[25F]

If it's of interest, this question was recently covered in this thread:
http://www.pprune.org/spectators-balcony-spotters-corner/371968-down-one-pilot-whats-procedure.html

I've also emailed the Beeb asking them to sack this Jim Ferguson character.

[DozyWannabe]

I wonder what would have happened if the accountants and Boffins had their way..and only had 1 pilot onboard

I can't speak for the accountants, but I'm pretty sure most "boffins" (presuming you mean engineers of the software persuasion) would agree with me that 2 crew is the bare minimum on a modern transport jet!

[ManaAdaSystem]

ManaAda:
Just for the reason referred to in my last post. Please be real.
Risk management - ok?
Cheers,
Redbar1

So the risk is higher with two pilots over 60 in the same cockpit.
Thanks for clarifying.

[redbar1]

ManaAda:

Quote: "So the risk is higher with two pilots over 60 in the same cockpit"

Obviously. And the risk of crew member incapacitation is even higher with three pilots.. or four.. or five.. :}

Cheers,
Redbar1

[Stop Stop Stop]

Jim Ferguson is clearly a self-appointed "Aviation Expert" or I suspect more a fast-replying "Rent-a-quote" when the BBC send a request for information.

This is the same Jim Ferguson (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/2091621.stm) who described TCAS as telling pilots to "Dive Dive" or in answer to a question about why the Russian and European pilots use Metric and Imperial Altimetry respectively and Jim's reply was "just as English is the international language of aviation, feet are used for altitudes" which clearly shows his lack of understanding of the industry.

Why can't the BBC use people with relevant experience to quote on these stories? Aviation has probably the most mis-reported stories seen in newspapers or on the TV. Sure they like the sensation, but the readers or viewers would surely like a balanced report of the story.

My complaint has also gone to the BBC.

[Bigmouth]

Aviation has probably the most mis-reported stories seen in newspapers or on the TV
Imagine if that is not the case. Imagine if everything you read/see in the media is as misrepresented as Aviation stories are.
But I digress.

[Philflies]

Indeed Bigmouth, I've had the very same thought recently.

Whenever you see the media reporting in an area or industry you do know about, it's shocking to see how badly and inaccurately they do it.

Scary, because we do rely on the media for things we don't know about.

[Bushfiva]

I've been "quoted" in a couple of news events over the years, and in each case the resulting news item has been abysmal. So in general I take all news-filler with a pinch of salt.

Having said that, I also work with journos who go into war zones and/or ask difficult questions in very closed countries. They have my highest respect.

Difficult to tell the buggers apart unless you've been exposed to the industry, though. And that's ultimately the problem, because most people don't understand the need to sorth the wheat from the chaff, and even more people don't feel inclined to, anyway.

[ManaAdaSystem]

ManaAda:

Quote: "So the risk is higher with two pilots over 60 in the same cockpit"

Obviously. And the risk of crew member incapacitation is even higher with three pilots.. or four.. or five..

Cheers,
Redbar1

You're the one who brought risk managment into this. In most short haul commercial aviation risk is managed partly by putting two pilots up front.
You say two pilots above 60 years don't share the same cockpit because of risk managment, so the risk must be higher with two older pilots vs two "younger" pilots in the cockpit?
Two vs two, I'm not talking about a Russian 7 crew cockpit here.

My question is still; Why don't they allow two over 60 pilots in the same cockpit? On one hand, they are fit to fly, on the other, they are not fit to fly together.

It doesn't make sense, either you are fit to fly, or you are not.

[IGh]

Is there a system "safety" weakness?

Back in slot 49, pilot contrasted aviation's "resting EKG" with an alternative:

"... a routine cardiac stress test ... it showed up something ... immediately admitted ... emergency quadruple bypass. Never had a clue - no high blood pressure, cholesterol within norms, non-smoker, basically no risk factors...."

Why pretend that the FAA's 1st Class Medical is of any good?

Maybe every pilot could demonstrate the cardiac health via a 6-minute mile, or if not that, then go do the Tread Mill with the stress test.

And next maybe the FAA could develop "cognition" exams.

[Dysag]

I don't think you need to be a doctor or a statistician to work this out: the probability of being left with no pilots alive is greater if both are over 60, than if one of them is 30.

[AnthonyGA]

The probability of either pilot becoming physically incapacitated is extremely low, even if both pilots are over sixty. Most accidents occur due to pilot error rather than pilot incapacitation. There is a strong inverse correlation between pilot experience and pilot error. Pilots over 60 are usually slightly more experienced than pilots under 60. And in commercial aviation, experience and competence with procedures and systems is more important than physical condition (beyond a general state of reasonable health).

Given all this, a cockpit with two pilots over 60 may actually be safer than one in which one or both pilots are under 60, because it is extraordinarily unlikely that they will be incapacitated, and their combined experience will have more of a bearing on any unusual situations than their state of health.

Health requirements for pilots are too strict in some ways, and not strict enough in others. A person who had a heart problem briefly twenty years earlier may be disqualified, but someone who smokes five packs a day or drinks himself into a stupor on his days off may still be able to get a medical. The regulatory requirements don't always make objective sense, and, as alluded to above, health problems are way, way down on the list of causes of accidents.

[skol]

I'm not sure the above post is entirely correct because as previously mentioned I fly with some very old pilots who are very experienced, however there are some problems developing such as;
Going to sleep with no notice:
Temporary loss of concentration:
Being given a blank stare when asked to do a non-routine task they're not expecting.

Checking out their ticker is fine but how do you check what's going on between their ears?

When these guys have their medicals it's not 0300 and 9 hours into a flight and they've had a few days off.

[ajd1]

Strangely enough, I've seen the same things when flying with "young" pilots.

[smith]

The probability of either pilot becoming physically incapacitated is extremely low, even if both pilots are over sixty.


Oh come on, everyone knows that an advanced, modern jet can be flown by remote control. If a double incapacitation was to occur, ATC can just bring it right in no problem.

[Avman]

A Captain dies on active duty on the F/D (nice way to go) and we have FIVE pages of mainly drivel. It's not the first time and it won't be the last that a crew member dies on the job. Other than for the guy's family, it's a non-event.

[barrymung]

Old King Coal wrote:
"the plane would have been difficult to land with only one pilot at the controls"

"You could, I gather, land a 777 single-handed - but it would require a lot of effort and it would appear [in this case there was] a very young co-pilot - so if there was another one, that would help. "

I raised a similar question earlier, given the level of automation on a 777, would it *really* be "difficult" to land?

I'd consider the plane was designed for a "one pilot down" type of emergency and hence would not be unduly difficult to put down?

[barrymung]

AntonyGA wrote "The probability of either pilot becoming physically incapacitated is extremely low, even if both pilots are over sixty."

That is true although obviously the probability increases with increased age.

So long as Pilots are given regular medical checks and their are emergency plans in place (ie a second pilot) then the risk is managed.

This incident simply shows that the emergency plans worked OK.

[cesarnc]

"the plane would have been difficult to land with only one pilot at the controls"

"You could, I gather, land a 777 single-handed - but it would require a lot of effort ...

Man, you should come down here in Brazil to watch the media during airplane crashes or incidents... Ours make the BBC reporter an air-genius :}

They are so freaked out that simple Go-Around events get major headlines and Breaking News in TV... Sort of "Panic on Flight XXX"

[kleerdam]

I would like to know what age have to do with the death of that captain, if you could remember some time back a first officer on BA flight pass away he was not 60, do you remember the captain on the B-727 in Africa? he was just 35, so if you would like to write think about what you are going to say.
:ouch:

[slamer.]

But what about a forgetful, unfit, slow and good natured 65 yr old..!

I cant see what the problem is here, with the retirment age out to 150 years, these events will become more and more common place.... The regulators and others made a risk assessment and found no problem (except to put a bunch of rules on them)..... get used to it....:rolleyes:

[g_attrill]

The BBC has now posted a more factually correct article with comments by David Learmount of Flight International

BBC NEWS | Americas | What happens when a pilot dies? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8109327.stm)

[604guy]

How frequently do pilots undergo health checks?

They have annual medical tests until they are 60. After that it's every six months.



Is that the case in the UK or Europe? Here in the Great White North, once you go over 40 it's every six months for a medical.

[Sailor Vee]

Under JAA regs the situation changed, it used to be the same, but is annual medical until 60, then every six months.

"Jim Ferguson - an aviation writer from the UK"Is a prat with an anorak and tatty beard, lives in Aberdeen and was the BBC's helicopter expert despite the fact that he's never held a pro licence!

[Storminnorm]

Jim Ferguson never held a Pro licence?
Did he have an amateur one then?

[Mr Optimistic]

UK life tables give the probability of death in the next year for a man aged 60 as 0.97 %. At 65 this is about 1.6%. Small numbers but still 50% raise. For info at 32 its 0.1%.

National Statistics Online - Product - Interim Life tables (http://www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/Product.asp?vlnk=14459)

[poina]

Myself, I count lucky I was able to retire at 56. I found not much desire to stay in the books and keep as up to date as I required of myself. This argument of experience doesn't cut it with me, after 15000 hrs in command how much more can you get. At 45 I was on the top of my game and slowly downhill after that. I've seen alot of guys happy with the 60+, but most of them had no retirement skills.

[sleepypilot]

In Italy, when over 40 it's every 6 months.

[barit1]

From the Learmount/BBC Q&A:
They can keep flying until they are 65, but there is a rule that if one pilot is between 60 and 65 the other pilot has to be younger than 60.

Were I writing the rules, I would require that one pilot be over 60.

The yet-unanswered question: If a deadheading pilot is called up to fill an empty seat, is he exempt from out-of-hours rules? Does he collect overtime pay? Who pays for the lawyers? :cool:

[fmgc]

"the plane would have been difficult to land with only one pilot at the controls"

"You could, I gather, land a 777 single-handed - but it would require a lot of effort ...

Yes, high workload but most modern aeroplanes are pretty easy to land on your own. We are all trained for it.

I wonder if the risk of having to guys over 60 is an worse than the risk of having only 2 engines?

[ManaAdaSystem]

2 new engines vs 2 60 year old engines?

[cockney steve]

All this senseless codswallop :rolleyes:

In Western, peacetime Civil Aviation,other than crash-induced *
When was the last time that 2 persons died on the same flight?

1-pax and 1- flight-crew?

2 flight-crew?
2 flight -deck crew?


I'd suggest....NEVER

plenty of lorries thunder along the motorways, nose to tail, day and night....accidents (other than in inclement weather) are extremely rare

I've only read, 2 or 3 times, in the last 50 years, of a driver (including coaches and buses) becoming incapacitated or dying whilst at the wheel......but i don't ever recollect a fatal accident ensuing.

The present 2-pilot setup is proven safe, statistically, NO complete flight-deck crew has died"spontaneously" , consequently crashing.

Therefore, the record in 100 years , shows conclusively that the present system works and people age 65 are no more likely to die than those over 45.

The bloke died at work, his colleagues took over his duties.....happens in all fields of human endeavour, every day.


* just trying to pre-empt all the nit-picking pedants.

[Dysag]

Your comment reminds me of my statistics teacher 45 years ago who said "most people have more than the average number of legs". It's true, so what?

Your "people age 65 are no more likely to die than those over 45" is unquestionable, since we all have a 100% probablility of dying. The question is when?

If you deny that a 65 y-o has more chance of dying tomorrow than a 45 y-o, then you're really in denial.

[chuks]

Okay, doesn't a 45 year-old have more chance of dying than a 35 year-old? And so on...

By that logic we should all be safest with fuzzy-cheeked 18 year-olds doing the piloting! Or perhaps computers rather than humans.

Personally, I'd like to see some sort of stress test developed that could show, one way or the other, who's still relatively fit, physically and mentally, and who's past it. You do have some guys who stay fit and others who are crocks in their thirties; just picking an age isn't the full answer.

Years ago there was a story, true I believe, about a pilot dropping dead at the door as he was on his way out of the Medical Centre at Gatwick with a fresh Class I in his pocket.

[Mr Optimistic]

a 45 year old man has about a 0.25% chance of dying before his 46th birthday. For a 35 year old its 0.12 % ditto 36. Roughly. On average.

[Spooky 2]

Gents, this is amazing. 118 posts about a subject that has been thrashed around for years now and nothing really new has come of it. Pilots die from all sorts of reasons and all ages young and old. Were beating a dead horse by continuing this debate IMO.

BTW, I had a 50 year old F/O in what appeared to be perfect health drop dead while landing the mighty 777 at CDG many years ago. Blood clot to the brain as it turne out. Guess what, we all survived except of course the poor F/O.:eek:

Bad stuff happens.

[slamer.]

So we may as well do away with medicals

[Spooky 2]

Never suggested anything like that.:} A blood clot is not likey to show up as a medical condition. I don't care if the medical is every four months and it's not likely to produce any precurser to a blood clot or aneruism other than perhaps high blood pressure. Not going to venture a guess because I'm not an areo medical expert. You should drop it as well IMO.:hmm:

[ExSp33db1rd]

Years ago there was a story, true I believe, about a pilot dropping dead at the door as he was on his way out of the Medical Centre at Gatwick with a fresh Class I in his pocket.


Precisely. One is only as fit as the minute the doctor signs the certificate.

I recently renewed my Class 1 med. cert ( at age 74 - no age restriction for holding a 'commercial' licence in NZ ) with a regular ECG. Fit, no problem.

ONLY because of my age was I then required to undertake a further stress ECG, purely as a precaution, but this showed up some irregularity and my licence was revoked pending further investigation, but ......... if I'd been a bit younger the extra ECG would not have been required, and the irregularity would not have been discovered - until I dropped dead at the controls.

[slamer.]

Note to self... Next time use more sarcasm

[chuks]

It's cheap and there's plenty of it around.

There are many sides to this argument but the two that really matter, in my opinion, are safety and the politics of the workplace.

There's never been a convincing safety argument for a hard age limit, given how variable each person's physical condition is, how to balance the negatives of increasing age against the positives of increasing experience... All in all, after much back-and-forth the USA just lifted the Age 60 Ban on airline pilots and that says a lot.

The politics of the workplace is against aged pilots, of course! Well, from the self-interested perspective of a young pilot the crocks should all be dragged out of that left seat kicking and screaming and never mind the state of their retirement funds or whatever. This has nothing to do with safety per se but one can easily use a safety-related argument to pursue this end.

There have been relatively few crashes due to a pilot dying or becoming incapacitated at the controls. (Google: Reed Pigman for one in particular, though.) How many are due to inexperience, though? Some I read about, I have to think, "Gee, I really think I have learned not to do THAT!"

The grumpy elders end up in the circle of wagons with the wild, half-naked yoof out there riding around in circles wearing their warpaint and screaming. So? Not a lot of learning goes on in these dialogues.

[FoxHunter]

Received a copy of this email today,

xxxxxx,
Last week, Capt. Brian McManus, a Delta 767ER pilot, landed at JFK, drove home to Conn. The next morning he was found dead. HE WAS 49 YEARS OLD. He missed passing away in flight by about 12 hours. Perhaps the mandatory age should be 49 ! By the way, Capt McManus was a staunch advocate of keeping the age at 60, since as he once told me, "60 is when you really start to become a health risk"
xxxxx

:(
Courant.com Obituaries (http://www.legacy.com/HartfordCourant/DeathNotices.asp?Page=LifeStory&PersonID=128012722)

[WhatsaLizad?]

Another issue to consider is a crew where the surviving pilot is a weak MPL First Officer.

I surely would not want to be riding as a passenger westbound at 60W with a deceased Captain, SATCOM and CATIII MEL'd, the HF at 1 x 5, and with eastern Canada in a blizzard and most of the US east coast <2400 RVR.

Enjoy the ride. Your MPL is going to decide where to land, and attempt to hand fly a CATII approach with a dead body on the floor behind him.

Great system we're setting up with commercial aviation.

[B-Mod]

Albeit I see strengths on both sides of the United States' mandatory retirement debate, the only age limit with which I'd be in complete agreement would be the implementation of a damned flight attendant age restriction! Wouldn't that be a pleasant surprise?? It'd be so nice to even have one that I'd settle for an "Age 60" restriction- but hey, if we're dreaming, here, wouldn't it be nice to finally see an "Age 30" restriction ;)

[BGQ]

Mr Optimistic said

"UK life tables give the probability of death in the next year for a man aged 60 as 0.97 %. At 65 this is about 1.6%. Small numbers but still 50% raise. For info at 32 its 0.1%."

This statistic does not apply to the pilot group which, compared to the general population the statistic applies to generally contains a group of people with considerably better health statistics who are continuously monitored on a regular basis.

It is equally stupid and misleading to quote a similar statistic "that prior to the increase in retirement age that all pilots who died on the flightdeck were aged 60 or less"

Most pilot incapacitations are not deaths but relate to food poisoning and other medical issues that are equally spread through the age groups. Death on the flightdeck is very rare.

Young pilots surprise me with their "demands" that older pilots should step aside so that they may be promoted. What other professions do this at similar ages? Surely the legal requirements to have a valid medical and be proficient as well as multi-pilot crewing means that individual pilots should retire when the time is right for them.

[chuks]

Used to be, to be a Flight Attendant you had to be a Registered Nurse. Then well into the Fifties I think it was so that you had be young, attractive and single. Oh, and "White," same as the guys in the cockpit. My, my... how times have changed!

Nowadays we have all sorts of legislation meant to ensure fairness so that you might get your coffee spilt upon you by some screaming queen, a person of colour, a woman you find sexually unattractive due to her geriatricity (what we used to call "a wrinkled old hag")... the possibilities are practically endless where once it was just variations on a theme of "Barbie."

Said beverage spillage might now be down to ham-fisted efforts on the part of just about anyone, even someone over 60, up there in the cockpit or as we now call it, the flight deck where that, too, was once the domain of just guys with "the right stuff."

[edga23]

To B-MOD:

I would allow one exception: for landing on the Hudson river I gess that in the cabin they were glad to fly with attendants who had 30+ years of training for emergency evac. rather than 'Barbies' :ok:!!!

[Cater]

Is it not time that this thread was closed, its a shame that this pilot passed away during a flight, he is not the first and I am sure he will not be the last

[B-Mod]

EDGA, I'll half-heartedly agree: while it doesn't take a geriatric to chant, "Brace for impact! Brace! Brace!", it wouldn't hurt if the chanters were mature enough to know what these words mean... in the context of an airplane emergency, of course ;).

[ManaAdaSystem]

Rubbish!
It's all about training! My colleague had an accident some years ago, the FA's were around 20 years old and did a superb job evacuating the passengers. That included carrying an old lady off the aircraft.
I'd like to see a 70 year old FA do the same.
What kind of experiece will prepare you for an evacuation after a ditching? It's not like you have done that 5 times before even if you have been flying for 30 years.

[Ex-hosti]

I have flown with the most amazing pilots who were over 60 years and reliable as ever and to judge a person by age in their capabilities is really sad....I'd sooner fly with a pilot of 60 than a new one with min experience!
I had an incident where I walked into the cockpit to find both crew sleeping!!!They were not in their 60's but were fatigued as hell!!!!Just dont judge.
If you love to fly I couldn't think of a better way t go than up there!!

As for a Hosti and her training....well I looked liked Barbie,poured a fab cup of tea and could perform CPR and try save a life to the best of my ability and I sure as hell would have pulled your butt out of a burning plane faster than the aircraft had been flying but that would be because I was in my early 20's and trained well...now at 27 I CANT fly due to pain a MEDICAL cant pick up!!I wouldnt be able to pull your butts from the burning plane should I have kept flying so I stopped on my own accorded knowing I wasnt doing my job properly.

Regardless of age dont judge on what you cant see....

If you as a young pilot feel you can do a better job than that of a pilot of 30 odd years of experience you dont deserve to be in the cockpit in the first place. Be respectful, they the ones who will teach your young but to REALLY fly!

[Tailspin45]

Just received a letter from the FAA saying, "We have received three documents dated October 24, 2007; however, we are still unable to establish your eligibility to hold a medical certificate."

I've had a heart murmur for about 10 years, and with echocardiogram every six months have always retained a Second Class Medical because no change has been observed. I don't fly commercially now (Navy but never airlines), so I go the two years before renewing these days.

Given that's it's been 20 months since they last looked at my medical I wonder if other pilots with heart-related issues have received such a letter, thanks to a sudden emphasis related to this Continental event. Or maybe I'm just lucky?