Well maybe I missed something.

Of course it could happen here, you have to admit though the Germanwings pilot was the perfect storm:

-Previous psychiatric problems
-concerns about money and the possible end of the Germanwings brand (so says the girlfriend)
-relationship breakup
-other health problems (reported as eyesight, maybe caused by mental issues)
-fear of loss of licence
-Need to be remembered (according to ex-girlfriend)

I find the most worrying aspect to this whole episode is the fact that there has been clear clues along the way that he was not right. His girlfriend knew, some of his friends admit they new he was seeking help for his depression and it was ongoing. Doctors had told him he was not fit to work and had signed him off, despite all of this though it still fell to just the pilot himself to self report. You can't rely on someone suffering from mental illness to self report.

This is a very tricky issue as the impression some people have at the moment is if you self report something like this then that is career over. Check your loss of licence and income protection, most policies specifically exclude mental illness. It is asking a lot of someone who is ill and possibly doesn't know how bad they are to put their whole livelyhood at risk by self reporting. As we have seen that doesn't always work.

25 Years ago when I was hired by a large full service airline, the recruitment process was tough. IQ and Psych tests certainly weeded out a few. The contract had full medical benefits and sick leave clauses for 3 months sick leave if required. You joined, they type rated you with no bond, expected you to perform, looked after you if you did and failed you if you didn't. They continued to develop you as the valuable asset they perceived you to be.
Wind the clock on and now we have the budget airline concept where everything is done on the cheapo and the best qualification that pilots now have is their willingness to pay for their own training and to sign a contract that has little of the above in it. Pilots are just seen as a cost like fuel and tyres, they constantly get told that automatic aeroplanes have reduced them to button pushers and the understanding of the trustworthy position that they hold has become muddied. But hey, you can fly across Europe now days for just a few quid. It's gotta be good, right? Or is it becoming a case of you get what you pay for?

No, it wasn't. It was one of a whole raft of security procedures that were brought in after 9-11.

They'll mandate that there be a CASA FOI in the jump seat on every flight at the company's expense. The FOI will be a no-go item, if he goes U/S you don't go flying today.

This will ensure that no rules are broken, and that the flight is carried out in an idealogically correct manner, just like the "political officers" on Soviet warships.

Great win for safety and even better for expanding some private empires in Canberra. Surprised they hadn't already thought of this :ok:

Bring back the engineer I say!

This will be a dream for people trying to have a crack at others.

A few well placed unnamed "concerned" letters or emails to the company alleging illicit drug use or unreported dark and depressive thoughts/statements, and the poor sod at the receiving end of the allegations is off line under a cloud for no reason other than they have had a relationship break up, cut someone off in the car park, didn't give someone a sector or whatever.

Divorce lawyers will get in on the act too I reckon..

Either way it will be a root for all pilots.

This is a total over reaction, and much like the security checking at airports that sees 80 year olds being wanded for explosives, is not sensible risk profiling.

Nothing on the day will stop a determined individual, even with a flight attendant in the cockpit.

The profiling needs to start before anyone goes near an aircraft, so the risk mitigation is addressed much much earlier.

9/11 cockpit doors have sure minimised terrorist incursions into the flight deck, but they do nothing if the problem lies in one of the pilot seats.

Maybe the locking technology needs to be revisited.

So where's the logic in having a flight attendant in the cockpit to help with "security" when you allow your pilots to be armed with handguns?? :cool:

Bloggs !!
 

Flight ATTEMBER

Who is to say that having an FA in the cockpit will stop a mentally unstable pilot from doing something stupid? Although there are some intelligent FAs out there, I believe most of the younger girls/queens/boys wouldn't have the courage to stop an older/stronger male (or female) physically or verbally. Yes, someone like me would have at least an idea of how the autopilot can be disengaged but, unfortunately for you lot, I, or someone like me, am not on every flight.

A counter argument

Two-person rule in cockpit fails to address mental health problem in airline industry

Check post to see if Wmk2 has been released from the clutches of the evil Mod/s:-):ok:

Wmk2

mate suggest you go to auntypru.com

I won't name the airline, and I won't say what in what year, but suffice to say I once worked for an airline with 3000 pilots of which 500 were on some sort of mental health medication to treat a vast array of illnesses/issues, at the same time. The amount of pressure that a Pilot endures, such as - relationship issues, health, financial, shift work, away from home travel, a company continually trying to screw you, time pressures, responsibility of caring for thousands of pax per day, etc etc.
The Germanwings co-pilot (and a couple of others over the years) are an extreme case and rarely top themselves in such spectacular fashion. The risk per flight hours globally is very very small. However the risk is there, it will always be there. So we put a flight attendant in the flight deck with us while the F.O takes a slash, fine, I'm good with that, seriously. But what has stopped the Captain bringing a sharpened plastic ruler onboard with him, it is so sharp it cuts better than a steak knife, he leans over and plunges it through the flight attendants throat. End of story, and another aircraft eats a rocky ravene. Get the point? There will always be 'the one who slips through the system', as no system is perfect. The mitigation for 9/11 has directly contributed to the Germanwings crash.
Could it happen here? Of course it could. Let's hope not.

Who's to say that the FA that you are required to allow into the flightdeck isn't the one that is the mentally unstable person about to do something stupid??

If this is to even slightly have any benefit FA's will need to be parfait or at very least be aware with pilots procedures, eg TCAS manoeuvres, stall recovery, engine issues, depress etc etc or there could be potential for interference that could be worse than what this hair brain scheme was thought out to try and avoid.

And who will pay for this additional training and to what competence level do they train the FA to? And do you train every FA? Will the FA's be required to have regular Phyc evals to perform this roll??

So then that would lead to it being Better implementing all 3 pilot crews? At least all will be qualified as pilots and competent with procedures. But again the extra cost just so you can go for a quick piss would be way to excessive.

Massive can of worms.

Maybe we just acknowledge it's happened, it's an extremely rare event, it can never be fully eliminated, we learn from it and move forward in a timely and constructive manner.

No more knee jerk reactions in this industry thanks! :ok:

Hopefully soon enough people will have thought this 'F/A on the flight deck' thing through properly, and we can stop discussing it.

On any given flight there are considerably more F/As than pilots. Those F/As have undergone less rigorous screening and ongoing examination (no disrespect to F/As, that's just how it is). Therefore, there's a higher chance of getting a psychotic F/A on a flight than a psychotic pilot. So I don't see how we solve the Germanwings scenario by shutting an F/A into the flight deck with crash axes, extinguishers, oxy bottles and an unsuspecting pilot, when statistically it seems more likely for the F/A to be a problem than the pilot.

Regardless of all this talk, there's no difference with 2 pilots up front anyway, if the other crew member got up to stretch his legs I can guarantee I wouldn't see the Crash axe spike entering my skull anyway as I would be looking the other way......Pretty simple really, and introducing a flight attendant would arguably reduce safety in my opinion...Its like regulating to prevent a bee sting while walking on clover, you can regulate but you can't stop it....

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.

True, and like any tragic event whether in aviation, rail, sea or on land, you have to be terribly unlucky to be on board at the time.

Still not a solution as the other pilot can still smash the others skull with the crash axe as they are standing behind them.....There is NO solution, that's the fact, if there are pilots with mental health issues then they need to be addressed, not window dressing like this....I see this as a non issue it has been and will be always possible, albeit infinitly rare......