Emirates A380 pilots find aircraft 'too quiet' to sleep
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OH and S issues notwithstanding, positioning the crew rest in such an exposed area would make the fight crew more vunerable to anyone looking for opportunities to disable/hyjack an aircraft.
Evertonian
Ok, I'll bite...So, you've overwhelmed the crew in the rest area, how does that mean you control the aircraft when, I believe, there's another capable individual (at least) sitting in the cockpit behind a secure door?
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok I'll reply then. Taking the commander of the aircraft hostage, may or may not give a hostile person/group enough leverage to convince junior crew to open the door. There are no absolutes here Hyman, only risk assesments.
Last edited by Setright; 5th Dec 2008 at 23:50. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A serious inflight fire doesn't even bear thinking about. Then the questions will be asked. The litigation will be ruthless. EK, Airbus and "the regulator" (what ever that means in the UAE) will be seriously on the back foot.
Let's not go near the "mandatory use of the highest level of automation at all times" debate.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To me this should be approached as a security issue. Any time a crew member has to open the cockpit door, it creates a security vulnerability, which can be exploited if planned for.
At my last airline, the crewrest was positioned behind the bullet proof cockpit door to keep cockpit door openings to an absolute minimum.
Out of site out of mind. The flight crew were never visible unless absolutely necessary.
If the media were to discover the increased risk to security with the EK crew rest configuration, I think there could be a rethink on EK's part.
Not knowing if there is an EK pilots group, these types of organisations are what bring issues like this to managemants attention.
At my last airline, the crewrest was positioned behind the bullet proof cockpit door to keep cockpit door openings to an absolute minimum.
Out of site out of mind. The flight crew were never visible unless absolutely necessary.
If the media were to discover the increased risk to security with the EK crew rest configuration, I think there could be a rethink on EK's part.
Not knowing if there is an EK pilots group, these types of organisations are what bring issues like this to managemants attention.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Umm, on a probability basis, an in-flight technical emergency is far more likely than an attempt to take over the flight deck! Or have we truly let emotion take over when we think the security aspects of all this are more important than off-duty crew proximity to the flight-deck?!
On ships they don't put Captains' wardrooms in the engine-room, for some good reason...!
On ships they don't put Captains' wardrooms in the engine-room, for some good reason...!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R and E, your assumptions maybe correct.
But if you are looking for a way to convince managemant to reverse a decision or change direction, security concerns will give you more bang for your buck, especially when it comes to news headlines and the paying passenger.
The following headline "Emirates Vulnerable to Attack", on international news systems would certainly get managements attention.
How would you explain that you are the only airline with this configeration, and on what basis was it selected. The media would have a field day.
But if you are looking for a way to convince managemant to reverse a decision or change direction, security concerns will give you more bang for your buck, especially when it comes to news headlines and the paying passenger.
The following headline "Emirates Vulnerable to Attack", on international news systems would certainly get managements attention.
How would you explain that you are the only airline with this configeration, and on what basis was it selected. The media would have a field day.
Last edited by Setright; 6th Dec 2008 at 02:02.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: KFRG
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Solution
Interesting problem with a simple solution. Earplugs. Or if you want to get real cute, we can design a noise cancellation system by nulling out the audio frequency's below say..16KHz. How do we accomplish this? By generating a audio signals of equal amplitude and opposite phase. 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: pit
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Such a system has been installed on the Saab2000. The big props had some vibrations that were uncomfortable. The sound system to counteract worked for the passengers, however it gave the standing cabin crew headaches.
So what, it's only crew.....
One more question: How do you confine the noise generation to the CRC? Why not just tear some insulation out of the 380, it's too heavy anyway.
So what, it's only crew.....
One more question: How do you confine the noise generation to the CRC? Why not just tear some insulation out of the 380, it's too heavy anyway.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: KFRG
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simple...have the system confined in the CRC. In other words mic and speaker in crew rest facility. The most difficult part of this project would be the signal processing but it's do able (and has been done in other applications...). I'll let airbus figure out the rest. Got the sytsem blocks in my head right now but that's airbus's job. Not mine
PS In my system set up, cabin crew members and pax would not be affected.
PS In my system set up, cabin crew members and pax would not be affected.
I've been told by an "expert" that Noise cancelling headsets that create white noise can cause permanent damage to your Ears if you use them too much?
So I guess the SAAB 2000 and Q system on the Dash could also cause damage over time????
Anyone else heard this info?
So I guess the SAAB 2000 and Q system on the Dash could also cause damage over time????
Anyone else heard this info?
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: KFRG
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been told by an "expert" that Noise cancelling headsets that create white noise can cause permanent damage to your Ears if you use them too much?
So I guess the SAAB 2000 and Q system on the Dash could also cause damage over time????
So I guess the SAAB 2000 and Q system on the Dash could also cause damage over time????
However, if one were exposed to 'white noise' by itself (@ reasonable db levels...), then, I could see where possible damage may occur..
noise cancellation
I've been told by an "expert" that Noise cancelling headsets that create white noise can cause permanent damage to your Ears if you use them too much?
If you amplified the white noise NC headsets produce high enough, of course it could damage your hearing. Also true if you amplified the sound of a baby breathing high enough.
But that white noise is not the way they cancel noise, but a result of imperfections in the the implementation. The moderate amounts I've heard are likely no more harmful at equal level than cabin noise from the engines. And, as in fact lower level, less harmful.
You badly need a new expert.
Evertonian
Buster do you get it now?
Taking the commander of the aircraft hostage, may or may not give a hostile person/group enough leverage to convince junior crew to open the door.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: KFRG
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The introduction of MORE NOISE into the CRC in an effort to improve rest is farcical and ridiculous. White noise, simulated engine noise, equal amplitude opposite phase noise cancellation - these wonderful ideas all miss the critical point that NOISE CAUSES FATIGUE. Click the link and read about it. What imbecile decided that MORE noise would be better?
Problem
EK crew members are experiencing random noise due to location of CRC. Mistake is already made. So, we learn from it and correct it. No? What I am trying to do hear is come up with solutions.
Possible Solutions
1. Insulate room (Already ruled out...)
2. Move CRC (Not practical at this stage)
3. Earplugs, Headsets etc...(Simple and effective)
4. Noise cancelling audio system (More elaborate but effective)
Here's how it (4) would work (from an engineering point of view):
Active Noise Cancellation (ANC) - Block Diagrams, Reference Designs and Recommended Products
With this system audio levels will be reduced (LOW db levels). You won't be HEARING anything! The idea isn't farcical or ridiculous. It's the engineering/scientific solution to the problem.
Regards,
Bradda G (Engineer/Rec. Pilot) aka the imbecile one
Last edited by Bradda G; 6th Dec 2008 at 13:55.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it's not too late
perhaps EK could modify their order for the next 45+ A380's they have on order and ask for the crew rest to be in the usual position directly behind the cockpit? Since other airlines have it here the engineering issues would be minor, and I wouldn't have thought having a "mixed" fleet would cause any training/SOP issues etc etc......
could finally show the lose face mentality has gone.....
Of course, having crew rest at the far end of the plane does force the flightdeck to mix with the stewardesses and customers, which might be a good thing. The worst thing in customer service is to never go face to face with the people you are serving, think of call centers... totally remote..
G
could finally show the lose face mentality has gone.....
Of course, having crew rest at the far end of the plane does force the flightdeck to mix with the stewardesses and customers, which might be a good thing. The worst thing in customer service is to never go face to face with the people you are serving, think of call centers... totally remote..
G
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: KFRG
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The other consideration is whether or not the active equipment will have a blocking effect on the noise the pilots need to hear. (The cabin inter-phone chime and any emergency messages or signals.)
. Don't wanna give away my ideas tho' without some compensation 
. Airbus gotta figure it out. As for the spatial and source capture issue, I have my own creative approaches but again I will leave it up to airbus.
Have a good one...
Last edited by Bradda G; 6th Dec 2008 at 15:28.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have thought that at the levels we're talking about, noise as such does not really cause fatigue.
If anything, a bit of low-level, expected and familiar noise will help you to go to sleep.
When you're asleep, you're not totally unconscious.... Sudden unexpected noises, or even the sudden stopping of a familiar noise (dare I mention engine noise?) are quite capable of waking you up.
Active noise cancelling becomes relevant when the noise level is such, that it actually causes fatigue, or otherwise interferes with the work you're doing.
It seems to make little sense in a CRC.
I would far prefer the iPod idea, with an under-pillow loudspeaker so you're not bothered by the earpieces or the wire.
Put on something you like, something relaxing you enjoy. Listening to it will then drown out your perception of other noises, and should send you to sleep in no time.
Maybe I am underestimating the problem, since I rarely have trouble going to sleep? At one time, a few years ago, I did, so I just listened to one or the other of my favourite cassettes.... I never heard them to the end.
CJ
If anything, a bit of low-level, expected and familiar noise will help you to go to sleep.
When you're asleep, you're not totally unconscious.... Sudden unexpected noises, or even the sudden stopping of a familiar noise (dare I mention engine noise?) are quite capable of waking you up.
Active noise cancelling becomes relevant when the noise level is such, that it actually causes fatigue, or otherwise interferes with the work you're doing.
It seems to make little sense in a CRC.
I would far prefer the iPod idea, with an under-pillow loudspeaker so you're not bothered by the earpieces or the wire.
Put on something you like, something relaxing you enjoy. Listening to it will then drown out your perception of other noises, and should send you to sleep in no time.
Maybe I am underestimating the problem, since I rarely have trouble going to sleep? At one time, a few years ago, I did, so I just listened to one or the other of my favourite cassettes.... I never heard them to the end.
CJ
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 50
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if airlines can link their entertainment to their PA to override IFE audio with announcements, presumably it wouldn't be too much harder to rig the noise reduction system with a similar override.
as for senior fd crew being used as leverage by bad guys - surely the principle should be that once the cabin has been compromised the door should not open until the aircraft is on the ground on any pretext? Even if not, if the relief crew can't handle a situation of this kind adequately it calls the use of such crew into question except in situations where crew rest is in the secure area and thus the commander remains available to take charge.
as for senior fd crew being used as leverage by bad guys - surely the principle should be that once the cabin has been compromised the door should not open until the aircraft is on the ground on any pretext? Even if not, if the relief crew can't handle a situation of this kind adequately it calls the use of such crew into question except in situations where crew rest is in the secure area and thus the commander remains available to take charge.