NTSB investigating possible nodding off of Northwest pilots
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To safely maintain separation of air traffic absolutely depends on the cooperation of pilots with ATC. TCAS notwithstanding, if radio contact is lost for any reason the alert and responsible pilot, whether professional or neophyte IR, should (1) fly the plan as filed, (2) set the relevant code on the transponder.
If I were an enroute controller and an airliner stopped responding to my call, horrible memories of 911 would arise. At what point does ATC have to make the decision to ask the National Guard to take down a possibly hijacked aircraft? This whole scenario is no joke. Reckless endangerment of passengers certainly is present if by inattention to the vital work one neglects this basic duty of the professional pilot.
If I were an enroute controller and an airliner stopped responding to my call, horrible memories of 911 would arise. At what point does ATC have to make the decision to ask the National Guard to take down a possibly hijacked aircraft? This whole scenario is no joke. Reckless endangerment of passengers certainly is present if by inattention to the vital work one neglects this basic duty of the professional pilot.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Belgium
Age: 62
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Watching a movie on a notebook would be a frolic, lost in scheduling would be negligent.
Frolic or negligence? It is plain dereliction of duty and undoubtedly one of the most idiotic reported episodes in aviation history. Consequently the FAA has shown leadership by acting swiftly to revoke their certificates.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll admit to not having read every post in this thread but the one thing that seems to be missing is the lack of common sense shown by these 'professional' pilots who are employed to safely operate the aircraft and promote a safe environment for the passengers.
The pilots are paid for their integrity, judgement and above all, presumed intelligence. Notwithstanding any other issues, why did two highly trained professional pilots, charged with the safety of an airframe and it's contents, ever think that it was acceptable for both of them to be so distracted from their main task at the same time?
No element of Capataincy seems to have been displayed during this episode of the flight.
Are we to believe this was a one-off incident and they were just unlucky they got caught the first time they did this, or is this indicative of their normal attitude?
Either way, they do not da the industry any favours - fortunately, apart from in 'specialist' fora such as PPrune, the story will fade into obscurity very quickly.
The pilots are paid for their integrity, judgement and above all, presumed intelligence. Notwithstanding any other issues, why did two highly trained professional pilots, charged with the safety of an airframe and it's contents, ever think that it was acceptable for both of them to be so distracted from their main task at the same time?
No element of Capataincy seems to have been displayed during this episode of the flight.
Are we to believe this was a one-off incident and they were just unlucky they got caught the first time they did this, or is this indicative of their normal attitude?
Either way, they do not da the industry any favours - fortunately, apart from in 'specialist' fora such as PPrune, the story will fade into obscurity very quickly.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Africa
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fail to understand the difference.
A frolic, as suggested by others, indicates that their attention was diverted by something that had nothing whatsoever to do with their jobs.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Europe
Age: 54
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
frolic?
Etymology: From Dutch vrolijk (“‘cheerful’”), or from German fröhlich (“‘blitheful, gaily, happy, merry’”), frohlocken (“‘to rejoice, to exult’”).
(source wiktionary.com)
Reminds me THE scene from Brokeback Mountain. Something frolic might happened upthere...
(source wiktionary.com)
Reminds me THE scene from Brokeback Mountain. Something frolic might happened upthere...
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Belgium
Age: 62
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree they failed in their duty, but a "frolic" as mentioned by the lawyer is something you do that has nothing to do with your job.
By your definition if a frolic has nothing to do with your job, then frolic it was for the reasons outlined above.
exactly, xcris! The only thing that shuts male brain off completely for a sufficient time begins with an s and ends with ex. Can be shown on notebooks or played live.
By the way: frolic is also a brand for dog food. In the ads (havent seen them for a while now) you could see a dog singing and dancing when he or she gets it.
By the way: frolic is also a brand for dog food. In the ads (havent seen them for a while now) you could see a dog singing and dancing when he or she gets it.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The fact that no one wants to elaborate on the distraction, seems as if the pilots might have taken a years suspension in return for not revealing they were watching a movie.
Anyway, looks like the feds are playing hardball on this one. Emergency license revocations are the opener and fines and jail time may be threatened next to 'protect the traveling public'.
Since ALPA is a 'party' to the NTSB investigation, they can't say much about the case while the FAA grandstands with photo ops and press releases.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IF the scheduling methods at NWA are that tough...OUCH
No one has mentioned that a scheduling system/software/etc that can so engross two pilots is obviously to tough for practical use.
I touched the good old days 20 years ago. Scheduling systems are all about reducing staff now.
;-)
And ATC really should have had other planes attempt contact via past radio frequency much earlier in the adventure.
Let's face it folks...if the crew had been heads down for an hour and didn't get caught by the PRESS...they wouldn't have lost their tickets. No one would have cared.
The PRESS didn't cover the loss of our pensions to such a degree!
I touched the good old days 20 years ago. Scheduling systems are all about reducing staff now.
;-)
And ATC really should have had other planes attempt contact via past radio frequency much earlier in the adventure.
Let's face it folks...if the crew had been heads down for an hour and didn't get caught by the PRESS...they wouldn't have lost their tickets. No one would have cared.
The PRESS didn't cover the loss of our pensions to such a degree!
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Isle Dordt
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's face it folks...if the crew had been heads down for an hour and didn't get caught by the PRESS...they wouldn't have lost their tickets. No one would have cared.
What would have prevented this crew from flying "heads down" during cruise of the next flight? How often have they been flying heads down before?
(I realise that asking for 100% attention from both pilots during cruise is not realistic. One pilot doing regular instrument scans and keeping a lookout for traffic during the entire cruise is something "the payload" expects.)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SoCalif
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While the pilots were negligent, I am troubled that ATC did not take more drastic action. I see negligence on that side, too.
It apparently wasn't VHF comm from another fright that got their attention, but the FA. Did they have the speakers turned down, and were they relying on one pilot's headset, which he may have removed to facilitate conversation between them? They had to be in a no radio reception environment, whatever the cause.
To make the ATC system more robust and idiot-proof, ATC needs another means of comm to the flight deck. An uplinked bit on the Mode S transponder data could be used to trigger a TCAS Alert or Warning that would signify "Call ATC." As you know, the TCAS speakers can't be turned down, so would provide completely redundant backup comm to the pilots.
GB
It apparently wasn't VHF comm from another fright that got their attention, but the FA. Did they have the speakers turned down, and were they relying on one pilot's headset, which he may have removed to facilitate conversation between them? They had to be in a no radio reception environment, whatever the cause.
To make the ATC system more robust and idiot-proof, ATC needs another means of comm to the flight deck. An uplinked bit on the Mode S transponder data could be used to trigger a TCAS Alert or Warning that would signify "Call ATC." As you know, the TCAS speakers can't be turned down, so would provide completely redundant backup comm to the pilots.
GB
ALPA says punishment was premature, among other things:
Union Fumes Over Punishment of Northwest Pilots - WSJ.com
Union Fumes Over Punishment of Northwest Pilots - WSJ.com
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mary meagher
If I were an enroute controller and an airliner stopped responding to my call, horrible memories of 911 would arise.
At what point does ATC have to make the decision to ask the National Guard to take down a possibly hijacked aircraft?
At what point does ATC have to make the decision to ask the National Guard to take down a possibly hijacked aircraft?
Their duty is to simply advise the military authority that one airliner is not in radio communication anymore.
At that time, fighters should go and meet the airliner just to see what’s happening …
A big question is why interceptors have never been scrambled during all that time ?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: this side of the hill
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To make the ATC system more robust and idiot-proof, ATC needs another means of comm to the flight deck. An uplinked bit on the Mode S transponder data could be used to trigger a TCAS Alert or Warning that would signify "Call ATC." As you know, the TCAS speakers can't be turned down, so would provide completely redundant backup comm to the pilots.
EUROCONTROL - CONTROLLER-PILOT DATA-LINK COMMUNICATIONS
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
If anything, ATC made the mistake of trying to cover for these guys. Unfortunately, some ATC heads will have to roll due to the media frenzy.
I agree with earlier posters that airliner lost comm incidents occur over the continental U.S. many times during the day. But for this long? This one is kinda egregious.
I agree with earlier posters that airliner lost comm incidents occur over the continental U.S. many times during the day. But for this long? This one is kinda egregious.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Europe
Age: 54
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Union Fumes? No way!
Now, on the serious side. I assume reasons for suspending the two pilots are solid and indisputable. Further, I think something wrong and VERY embarassing for the industry happened upthere. Why FAA revoked so fast and brutal their ATP licenses instead of waiting for the conclusions (even if I am convinced the result would be the same) is the result of the attitude of the two pilots IMHO in front of the public and investigators.
I'm quite sure things have occurred slightly different if they've presented a more realistic (why not the truth?) "story". Sincerelly the story they came up with (at least what's officially presented to the media) sounds at least odd. No one can believe that two highly experienced and routined airmen were "distracted" for more than one hour from their regular duties by discussing companies' trends. (If so, they should be awarded - post-fire, of course - the NWA's employees of the year!).
Not a SINGLE, occasional, tiny, shy, mistakenly glance on the instruments? From one point on that panel it was hard NOT to find a spot telling you that something wrong happens! To say nothing about the radio traffic.
And you are selling the cuccumbers to the gardner that you were perfectly positively-healthy-awake but just a bit "distracted"?
I'm sure that not sincere/defying attitude doesn't helped them in front of the investigators.
Hard to say what happened (eventually some slick news reporter will find out!) but, on a quick view:
- Fumes in the cockpit? Now that would been their best story! Nobody would fire or even punish someone for being incapacitated by leaking substances! (Substances I assume have been ruled out by medical investigation).
- Notebook usage? C'mon! +60 minutes? Not even Doom 3
can be so adictive!
- Taking a good afternoon nap? A better story than the one presented. But BOTH of them??
Regarding to this line: FAA critics, for example, point out that the agency hasn't taken any public action against the pilots of a Delta Boeing 767 widebody jet that landed on a taxiway in Atlanta last week. The incident could have resulted in a crash if other aircraft had been moving down or crossing the taxiway.
I really don't find what this "example" is trying to prove?!
I'm quite sure things have occurred slightly different if they've presented a more realistic (why not the truth?) "story". Sincerelly the story they came up with (at least what's officially presented to the media) sounds at least odd. No one can believe that two highly experienced and routined airmen were "distracted" for more than one hour from their regular duties by discussing companies' trends. (If so, they should be awarded - post-fire, of course - the NWA's employees of the year!).
Not a SINGLE, occasional, tiny, shy, mistakenly glance on the instruments? From one point on that panel it was hard NOT to find a spot telling you that something wrong happens! To say nothing about the radio traffic.
And you are selling the cuccumbers to the gardner that you were perfectly positively-healthy-awake but just a bit "distracted"?
I'm sure that not sincere/defying attitude doesn't helped them in front of the investigators.
Hard to say what happened (eventually some slick news reporter will find out!) but, on a quick view:
- Fumes in the cockpit? Now that would been their best story! Nobody would fire or even punish someone for being incapacitated by leaking substances! (Substances I assume have been ruled out by medical investigation).
- Notebook usage? C'mon! +60 minutes? Not even Doom 3
can be so adictive!- Taking a good afternoon nap? A better story than the one presented. But BOTH of them??
Regarding to this line: FAA critics, for example, point out that the agency hasn't taken any public action against the pilots of a Delta Boeing 767 widebody jet that landed on a taxiway in Atlanta last week. The incident could have resulted in a crash if other aircraft had been moving down or crossing the taxiway.
I really don't find what this "example" is trying to prove?!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: this side of the hill
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In what way were they trying to cover for these guys?
In the light of this incident the one which took place over Hollandlast week seems very interesting and shows the differnce in handling the same occurrence. Post 11 links to the newspaper article.
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/3...s-estuary.html
In the light of this incident the one which took place over Hollandlast week seems very interesting and shows the differnce in handling the same occurrence. Post 11 links to the newspaper article.
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/3...s-estuary.html
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The term ‘on a frolic of his own’ is not uncommon and has been referred to in a number of recent cases in the English courts, both at first instance and on appeal. I do not know how this applies to US Law.
I refer particularly to Cadogan and another v Sportelli and another and other appeals from 2008.
Reference was made in the above case to Regina v Gateway Foodmarkets Ltd, heard in 1997.
In this case it was stated, amongst other things, that ‘[T]he further question is whether this includes all those persons for whose negligence the employer is vicariously liable to third parties for the purposes of the law of tort. If it does, then the employer is not able to rely on the statutory defence when any of his employees has been negligent, ie failed to take reasonable precautions, 'in the course of his employment'. That phrase has been widely defined, and if the same test applies here, then the statutory defence is limited to the rare case where the individual employee was on a frolic of his own, and where there was no failure to take reasonable precautions at any other level. It is possible that some narrower test should be defined, but as stated above we do not consider that it is necessary to decide this for the purposes of the present appeal.’ (emphasis added).
As stated, to avoid liability the employer was limited to the statutory defence in the rare case where the individual employee was ‘on a frolic of his own’.
It seems that FAA regional counsel Eddie Thomas has been careful in his choice of words.
FOK
I refer particularly to Cadogan and another v Sportelli and another and other appeals from 2008.
Reference was made in the above case to Regina v Gateway Foodmarkets Ltd, heard in 1997.
In this case it was stated, amongst other things, that ‘[T]he further question is whether this includes all those persons for whose negligence the employer is vicariously liable to third parties for the purposes of the law of tort. If it does, then the employer is not able to rely on the statutory defence when any of his employees has been negligent, ie failed to take reasonable precautions, 'in the course of his employment'. That phrase has been widely defined, and if the same test applies here, then the statutory defence is limited to the rare case where the individual employee was on a frolic of his own, and where there was no failure to take reasonable precautions at any other level. It is possible that some narrower test should be defined, but as stated above we do not consider that it is necessary to decide this for the purposes of the present appeal.’ (emphasis added).
As stated, to avoid liability the employer was limited to the statutory defence in the rare case where the individual employee was ‘on a frolic of his own’.
It seems that FAA regional counsel Eddie Thomas has been careful in his choice of words.
FOK
Last edited by FlyingOfficerKite; 29th Oct 2009 at 17:23.
Could one of the lawyers following this thread explain the reason why the FAA lawyer carefully inserted "approximately" in front of all the times quoted in the revocation letter?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know the answer to that question other than to suggest that messages are normally quoted in hours, minutes and seconds.
Maybe, for the press, they have stated the time in hours and minutes only.
Therefore, being pedantic, 07:15:20 would be approximately 07:15 for example.
Just a thought?
FOK
Maybe, for the press, they have stated the time in hours and minutes only.
Therefore, being pedantic, 07:15:20 would be approximately 07:15 for example.
Just a thought?
FOK