Would it happen here?
Well.... I see at least one Australian airline has been proactive and come out with a solution.... being 'relief bottles' provided 'up front' for those who can't hold on...
And before you get all politically correct, YES they come with the "Lady Teena" adapter...
And before you get all politically correct, YES they come with the "Lady Teena" adapter...
Bloggs,
Unfortunately logic or indeed, even common sense failed to enter into around 90% of the procedures that were introduced after 9-11. As far as having an FA in the flight deck when one of the pilots went to the toilet, it was to mitigate there being only one pilot in the flight deck at any point during a flight.
As far as having armed pilots, don't start me on that topic. It was a stupid f*$€ing idea, brought in to give the travelling US public the warm and fuzzies.
Unfortunately logic or indeed, even common sense failed to enter into around 90% of the procedures that were introduced after 9-11. As far as having an FA in the flight deck when one of the pilots went to the toilet, it was to mitigate there being only one pilot in the flight deck at any point during a flight.
As far as having armed pilots, don't start me on that topic. It was a stupid f*$€ing idea, brought in to give the travelling US public the warm and fuzzies.
We already have a requirement for an FA on the flightdeck if a pilot needs a pee, but that is purely because the lock is a simple one that cannot be opened from outside under any circumstances so the FA is there to open the door if the pilot flying has a heart attack or something.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PARIS France
Age: 75
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only real solution or mitigator is to build the cockpit so neither pilot has to go beyond the cockpit door. That means making the fwd toilet part of the secure flight deck environment. Unfortunately for the pilots and pax that will cost money so it won't be done.
Anyway, even with another pilot in his seat, I think it is very easy for the other pilot to crash an airplane.
Moreover, if the rule is to have always two persons in the cockpit at anytime, the certification agencies should forbid immediately operations with only one pilot, as some transportations of the kind are authorized, the risk assumed being that ANY pilot* MAY commit suicide!
The best way would be to give every pilot a pill so as to suicide alone avoiding to crash the airplane, and kill passengers, crew and some innocent other people on the ground.
Another good way would also to stop completely air transportation... No flight, no risk at all.
More seriously, as everything concerning safety for air transportation is based on probability of occurence of a failure -this is true for airfcraft and aircraft part manufactoring and also for medical rules fore the crews-, the only question is to know what is the probability of occurence of such a "failure" and is this probability acceptable in terms of air transportation...
What is that probability?
And also, I think that imposing 2 persons at anytime is totally irrelevant for the case, but even with a very low probability, there should be some medical psychiatric and psychological and neurological thinktanks about a better detecting people -pilots and, why not, attendants*- who could have such behavioural tendencies.
*One could thing of an attendant -why not- who would enter the cockpit, kill both pilots, then lock the door and commit suicide... So, may be 2 or 3 is'nt enough and let suggest... 4 (at least!)?
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
The door can be opened from the outside, just not if the person on the inside decides they don't want it open. If the person inside fails to respond to a door open request (due collapse) then the door will open automatically. Having an FA up there would be like airport security, it looks good to the public but does nothing against a committed attempt
Not anymore. The door has a mechanical latch on the inside.
The door can be opened from the outside, just not if the person on the inside decides they don't want it open. If the person inside fails to respond to a door open request (due collapse) then the door will open automatically. Having an FA up there would be like airport security, it looks good to the public but does nothing against a committed attempt
Not anymore. The door has a mechanical latch on the inside.
You are all in denial. The pilot less/remote controlled airliner is the future. To the naysayers, who rabbit on about pilots being the required defence against blundering in to Cbs etc,..hello... think about how that can also be avoided by ground control with radar and satellite imagery. Even that could be totally automatic, if need be. Ditto with traffic and terrain avoidance. So what is not to like about removing the weakest and most usual cause of accidents?
If someone had told the crowd watching the bicycle mechanics' efforts at Kittyhawk not that long ago that within 60 or so years we would be orbiting the planet in space and not long after walking on the moon, most would have said that was never likely, either.
If someone had told the crowd watching the bicycle mechanics' efforts at Kittyhawk not that long ago that within 60 or so years we would be orbiting the planet in space and not long after walking on the moon, most would have said that was never likely, either.
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 29th Mar 2015 at 23:09. Reason: Grammar
..... aahhh, what about if you've got a deranged 'drone controller' on the ground guiding the aircraft. Or are you proposing a totally automatic pilot-less/controller-less aircraft (which would probably only carry suicidal passengers)?
See earlier post on this subject. The only obstacle to overcome is the potential for hacking. However NASA have so far done a reasonable job of preventing that in their programs.
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 29th Mar 2015 at 23:08. Reason: Typo
Or a deranged computer programmer perhaps? Seriously, until they can invent a computer that NEVER EVER crashes/locks-up, I'm not too worried about the longevity of my job.
Agreed that new technology takes a while to de-bug. With anything to do with civil aviation it takes a while longer than in the military, where they can afford higher risks.
When we got the first civilian jets (Comet etc) there was a spike in accidents, but within a few years they became infinitely safer than the old clunkers they replaced. Today we would not accept the risks that were taken with those early jets, so yes, it will take maybe 25 years and so meantime we will need to deal with imperfect humans occasionally having major brain farts.
When we got the first civilian jets (Comet etc) there was a spike in accidents, but within a few years they became infinitely safer than the old clunkers they replaced. Today we would not accept the risks that were taken with those early jets, so yes, it will take maybe 25 years and so meantime we will need to deal with imperfect humans occasionally having major brain farts.
If someone had told the crowd watching the bicycle mechanics' efforts at Kittyhawk not that long ago that within 60 or so years we would be orbiting the planet in space and not long after walking on the moon, most would have said that was never likely, either.
Mach E Avelli
Genuine question, without going through your posting history I ask have you ever personally made an approach to land in a modern jet transport in Perth's windshear, or SYD 16R during a southerly change, or Newman on a 40 degree day? Having experienced these "routine" events myself and witnessed the current rate of change in our industry over my 30 year career I can't envisage a pilotless RPT jet in this country in the next 30 years....
What timeframe would you speculate?
Genuine question, without going through your posting history I ask have you ever personally made an approach to land in a modern jet transport in Perth's windshear, or SYD 16R during a southerly change, or Newman on a 40 degree day? Having experienced these "routine" events myself and witnessed the current rate of change in our industry over my 30 year career I can't envisage a pilotless RPT jet in this country in the next 30 years....
What timeframe would you speculate?
Last edited by CaptCloudbuster; 30th Mar 2015 at 01:09. Reason: After re reading your post I see you envision within 25 years... Overly optimistic IMHO
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Inside their OODA loop
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? is a Latin phrase found in the work of the Roman poet Juvenal from his Satires (Satire VI, lines 347–8). It is literally translated as "Who will guard the guards themselves?"
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This has has evidently been a problem for a long time, as Plato wrote about it. There is no feasible solution to entirely eliminate the problem.
As for full automation, all that will do is move the Human Factors / Terrorism issues to the software engineering cubical & control room.
Before trusting computers, best you read Ken Thompson's 1983 classic paper, "Reflections on Trusting Trust". The memorable quote from it is "You can't trust code that you did not totally create yourself."
In it he demonstrates how to embed nefarious code into the compiler itself, and then compile the compiler from that code, thus removing any traces of the nefarious code as the final binary cannot be validated.
A good read on the issue by Poul-Henning Kamp: The Software Industry IS the Problem
Even if it were possible to work around that problem, It could only be done over an extended period of time as the sheer cost of changing everything over at once would bankrupt the industry many times over.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: oz
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FFS filthy, opportunistic, hopeless politicians. Making ill considered stupid decisions again. This is horse ****. I wait to see the regulation mandating 2 crew on every train, ferry, bus and tram. Will the RAAF be subject to this regulation? VIP Squadron? No, I didn't think so.
Last edited by Iron Bar; 30th Mar 2015 at 01:47.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: oz
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, until we can have the appropriate sections added to the Emergency Procedures Manual, the cabin crew trained AND the pilots informed about what they can expect from the cabin crew in the event of an emergency. I will look forward to having three pilots rostered for EVERY sector and all of our employers can bill the government for it.
Also, they can put a ticket levy (lets call it a "don't trust my pilot levy") on all tickets and the panicking public can pay for the imposition.
Perhaps I will start making a reassuring PA every time one of the pilots goes for a slash. Especially in the middle of the night on a BOC PH or DN sector. Don't worry panicking public, rest easy, the no-longer trustworthy pilots are being watched. . . . . .
Also, they can put a ticket levy (lets call it a "don't trust my pilot levy") on all tickets and the panicking public can pay for the imposition.
Perhaps I will start making a reassuring PA every time one of the pilots goes for a slash. Especially in the middle of the night on a BOC PH or DN sector. Don't worry panicking public, rest easy, the no-longer trustworthy pilots are being watched. . . . . .
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: In the room next to the lift
Posts: 52
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although space flight is inherently more risky and challenging than subsonic flight, NASA might need to work on their reliability. Consider the 30 year shuttle program with 14 fatalities from 2 hull losses after 135 missions. i.e. 1.48%.
For illustration, that equates to more than 1500 fatal hull losses per day at the current daily air transport departure rate.
Mach EA,
I could have missed something, or taken your post out of context, but to suggest that this is the only obstacle to pilotless air transport is extremely naïve.
It should be remembered by anyone hoping for the premature introduction of completely automatic scheduled passenger flight, that all the hardware and the software, this wonderful place without needy, expensive and now mass-murdering suicidal pilots, is nearly all designed, assembled, maintained and directed by people for a very obvious reason.
You can't take all the people out of the loop.
You are on the wrong planet for that.
You could say that this accident was caused by the captain being locked out the flight compartment.
For illustration, that equates to more than 1500 fatal hull losses per day at the current daily air transport departure rate.
Mach EA,
The only obstacle to overcome is the potential for hacking. However NASA have so far done a reasonable job of preventing that in their programs.
It should be remembered by anyone hoping for the premature introduction of completely automatic scheduled passenger flight, that all the hardware and the software, this wonderful place without needy, expensive and now mass-murdering suicidal pilots, is nearly all designed, assembled, maintained and directed by people for a very obvious reason.
You can't take all the people out of the loop.
You are on the wrong planet for that.
You could say that this accident was caused by the captain being locked out the flight compartment.
Last edited by CaptainEmad; 30th Mar 2015 at 02:30.
