NTSB investigating possible nodding off of Northwest pilots

[rottenray]

Wes_Wall writes:
No way any justification what so ever can excuse away their conduct. Sad.

(SLF, not a pilot, and not a frequent flier)

Agree 100% with you.

I have always been the type of pax who took the time to thank the pilot and 1st for getting me safely up, over, and back down. It's harder now as one almost never sees the flight deck folks. (I also thank cab drivers, bus drivers, and friends I ride with when they deliver a pleasant, non stressful ride.)

I've been keeping a close eye on this thread, and I'm amazed at some of the responses from supposedly "real" and gainfully employed pilots who have defended these two slackers.

There is, frankly, no excuse for not being fully engaged in one's job. There is no excuse for being out of contact for "approximately 91 minutes" and there is no excuse for overflying a destination.

None. Period. Not even being sleepy and taking a nap.

SOMEONE should have been in control of the flight. NOBODY was.

Let me write this in a better way. You are not employed to do anything less than deliver your pax on time to their destination. Period.

You are paid for your skill in getting them there, and you are paid for your skill in getting them somewhere alive should the destination be impossible.

You are not paid to have discussions or web surfing sessions which take away your time from flying the aircraft. Period.

You are paid to fly the plane. If doing so has become too boring to put your all into, then get a different job.


On an average leg, a Greyhound bus driver here in the US has about 50 souls under his or her care. Drivers are paid up to $25 per hour (ave. seems about $14) and work 8 to 10 hour days. As I enjoy sightseeing, I frequently travel Greyhound, and have never "enjoyed" so much as an incident. No baggage lost, no white-knuckle holding on hoping the bus doesn't crash. (Greyhound could work on their terminals a bit, but otherwise they have a system which works nicely and safely.)

Thinking back to the mid 1970s, when I first remember taking a flight to go somewhere, it seems that about 1/4 of my flights have had some kind of idiotic problem. Delays, tech issues, clearance issues, and, of course, after 9/11, absurd security issues.


Having said all this, I'd like to ask:

How is it possible that one of mankind's best creations - a modern transport airframe - can be captained by someone who isn't completely "in love" with what the machinery represents and what it can do?

Whenever I fly, I'm completely enthralled by the technology which makes a comfortable flight possible, and completely in awe of the sheer human effort it takes to make it so.

As far as these two high-time pilots... Well, honestly, a city bus driver would also be fired for spending that much time not paying attention to his job.

Some of you "professional pilots" who have been defending this pair really need to think about the image you're putting forth, and how seriously you take your profession.

If it's become so routine that you can actually sympathize with a flight crew who became so detached from the "aviate, navigate, communicate" golden rule, perhaps you should seek some other career.

You're certainly someone I wouldn't fly with at the pointy end, knowing you were up there on a flight I was boarding.

Someone in this thread mentioned something along the lines that SLF have no reasonable expectation of hearing anything from the CVR for this flight.

I'll take that person to task at this point.

What was once a respectable group of professionals now has in their midst people who certainly don't take their responsibilities seriously and don't command the "my life in your hands" respect that the previous professionals were very much entitled to.

Don't flame me on that statement - I know there are many skilled folks in both seats who save lives every day by avoiding complacency and doing their tasks to the very best of their abilities.

But it's time we stopped accepting second best, whether they have 15,000 hours or 1,500.

And now that air travel has become a commodity, and sadly, staffed by people who consider it a commodity, perhaps we need more information from the flight deck so trends can be identified.

...

Again, I am not speaking badly of dedicated pilots. I have a great respect for pilots who are truly captains, whether they're PIC or PNF - those men and women who have respect for the concept of flight and take their positions seriously.

Those who don't share the same fascination, the same love, well, they shouldn't be in the front seats. If it's just a job, go get another one. No shortage of pilots these days.


..

bitch directly to ray [at] rottenray [dot] com if you want to

[SDFlyer]

Rottenray,
As a non-pro pilot and someone who has been critical of the two pilots as well as supportive of meaningful sanctions, I think many of your points are, well, Motherhood and Apple Pie. By which I mean - yes, we all agree with what you say in a sense - I'm quite sure the two pilots would agree vehemently as well. They probably love flying as much as the average pilot (just a guess but IMO there's no reason not to think so), but how many 1000's of hours will love persist when it comes to determining cockpit behavior in fighting off tedium and helping with ever-changing corporate systems like stupid scheduling stuff?

Have you been married for a while by any chance
[As the Judge declared, "strike that last remark from the record and put it out of your mind, jurors"] I'm sure you know why I ask.

Those pilots likely agree with all the earnest stuff about the solemn duty of the profession to passenger safety etc etc. It's more complicated than that, is what I'm trying to say (on behalf of the pros, many of whom I sense are biting lips). Again I'm only a lowly Part 91 piston person (who likes to mix with the pros a bit in the clag Lord help them ...) but this business has to be a bit of a balancing act on a long flight (or a shorter but very monotonous one) - bring on the budding CBs in the field of view .... You're monitoring the instruments and listening for the good word but you also have to keep your mind active in a small dark (at times) and all-too-familiar space. Otherwise you may not fall asleep but you might fall into a sort of stupor that is no bally good to anyone, including your trusting pax. Talking about the silly new scheduling system would have served nicely to keep them occupied and fully alert - wish I could hear that conversation. I want my pilot up there really THINKING, not necessarily about flying every blasted second (that's what computers and servo systems are for), and for sure not someone slumped down in the chair dully staring at the screen for hours on end monitoring every 20 ft deviation .... not good. One pilot could even have struggled for a while with the annoying new scheduling system on the laptop while the other flew the plane and gave verbal encouragement to #1. Excellent scenario IMO but others here can judge better. Pity they both got too engrossed in it for so long, if that's what really happened.

I don't have an answer. The more I think about it the more I like the idea of stimulating, well-designed short-term diversions in the cockpit such as - yes - computer games, as suggested earlier. Sort of hair of the dog that might bight you later if you get my meaning ...... Designed by safety-conscious pilots for safety-conscious pilots, with all the built in pop-ups, audio reminders, links-to-motherboard-data type of stuff that a clever techie can dream up.

You are preaching to the converted, is what I'm also trying to say. How to change the sermon a bit is the question. One thing I would NEVER do to these pilots is go on about stuff to them that they knew all too well already, long before this unfortunate business messed up their lives. Patronizing, to be blunt, and it wouldn't do anyone any good really. They screwed up, they will pay for it, but it doesn't neceesarily make them anything like the sort of person you seem to be suggesting in your post - a person totally uncaring about the safety of his passengers, uncaring about his calling and, yes, unfit to fly. I refuse to believe that and I see no reason to on present evidence.

There but for the grace of *** go many, many excellent pilots (and other professionals, in their own way). It's a very unforgiving profession in more ways than one, yet isn't payed as it if were in many cases is it now? (but ignore that remark as well - it's for other and never-ending threads).

[snaproll3480]

Rottenray, if you want any credibility on this board, don't compare the job to driving a bus. For one, it's insulting and two, it shows how little you know about the job and the profession as a whole. I know you are not a frequent flier and perhaps you should remember that before you judge these guys.

Sorry but I can't stand when industry outsiders start judging pilots whenever something hits the media. Yeah, I think these guys messed up, but I guarantee they wouldn't ever do it again.

Let me just mention that no one was hurt or even in danger for that matter, and everyone got safely to the destination. I don't know the fuel status but the otherside of the coin is not the aircraft falling out of the sky. If they had burned too much fuel, they simply would have diverted to another airport, fueled up and gone back. Also, it's not as if the plane was out of control. It was on auto pilot. It was flying in the exact same manner as every other flight on every other airline in the world. If something had gone wrong, they would have been alerted. So by your definition, they did what they were paid to do. Did they do it as well as they could have? Obviously not. But to use your bus driver analogy, they missed an exit, they didn't run off a cliff.

Don't misunderstand me, I am not defending these guys but I am also not picking up stones to throw. Yes, they should have been watching the screens and listening to the radio, but (read my previous post on this thread) it may not be that simple. What bothers me is the media fueled sensationalism that accompanies anything with aviation. This shouldn't even be a story. People didn't almost die. There should be discipline but it should be internal and confidential.

All this story accomplishes is to undermine the public's confidence in the industry by inviting anyone who has ever seen a plane to comment and to publicly execute the long careers of two men (human beings) who had a lapse in judgment that didn't directly endanger anyone.

As for all of you self righteous judgmental pilots out there, this is an anonymous board so no points for a$$ kissing You aren't making yourself look better to anyone.

Where was the outrage and news on this one? YouTube - China Airlines 737-800 nearly overshoots runway at takeoff

[lomapaseo]

rottenray

There is, frankly, no excuse for not being fully engaged in one's job. There is no excuse for being out of contact for "approximately 91 minutes" and there is no excuse for overflying a destination

I had thought that the great majority of posts in this thread had implied that the pilots were wrong. That said, nobody expected themselves to repeat the same error.

Now the rhetoric gets into the words in these posts with a great deal of emotion. As soon as the posts start placing blame against the individuals and calling for immediate punshment, then others chime in in their defence. as expected. THis goes downhill after that.

As you might surmise I like to be a moderate and look beyond blame, punishment and/or excuses. Instead of excuses I look for reasons, instead of blame and punishment I look for corrective actions, however severe they might be.

I can understand the reason offered to date being a distraction from expectations of duty. To me it was an excessive distraction. Many of us accept a degree of distraction driving a car, hopefully very few of us accept a level of distraction likely to lead to a significant increase in risk over time. The idea is what degree of management is necessary to minimize distractions that significantly increase risk. Don't kid yourself that you will eliminate all distractions.

I don't recall posts that implied the level of distraction was acceptable, albeit it did result in a safe landing in spite of the increase in risk. I wonder if there is room in this discussion to put away the black and white paint brushes and search for answers.

Of course we can just stay the course, continue our chalenges, and watch what our governments will screw with about this

[xcris]

@snaproll3480: Yeah, I think these guys messed up, but I guarantee they wouldn't ever do it again.

that's the idea, but you, knowing the industry better, should remember in this industry merely you mess things up...

[snaproll3480]

that's the idea, but you, knowing the industry better, should remember in this industry merely you mess things up...

I think what you are saying is that when we mess up people die. This is a good example of how that isn't always true. I think that if you asked most pilots, they would say they learned more from making mistakes than from reading a manual. How many of you remember the first time you got a little lost at night trying to scud run home while building cross country time?

I don't know what the aversion is to admitting that we are human and do make mistakes. Pilots, next time you go fly, try to count every mistake that is made. I think you will find that there are a few but we have systems and SOPs in place to catch and mitigate those mistakes. Not all mistakes are fatal errors. In fact, it takes a series of mistakes to lead to a crash barring some catastrophic mechanical or structural failure, but even that could probably be traced to a series of errors elsewhere.

They made a mistake. Actually, I would say they displayed a serious lapse in judgment but no one got hurt and they are less likely to repeat that behavior ever again. Unfortunately, they will probably never have the chance to redeem themselves. A little training and discipline would straighten these guys out completely but because the media have a hold of it we have to crucify these guys to satisfy the masses.

Nothing good will come from this. All we will see is increased scrutiny over the other 99% of pilots who are solid professionals and don't need it. Complacency is a killer but hanging these guys won't prevent it.

[protectthehornet]

airliner vs. street bus

I may be the only person on the forum who has actually driven a bus and been an airline pilot.

there is no comparison...driving a bus on the streets of chicago is tougher than flying an airliner.

but things happen at a different rate, and the ultimate safety valve on a bus is the brake...things go wrong and you STOP...if you STOP while in the air...you die.

rottenray said there isn't an excuse for being out of radio contact for 91 minutes.

Well, there are excuses. Radio failure for one. Now, most pilots get into sort of a rhythym and get suspicious when they haven't been talking on the radio for awhile...those folks usually use the term: RADIO CHECK and get an answer from center.the good ones will even use their call sign.

BUT UNLESS you are positive that there was not one chance of a stuck microphone, a simultaneous/blocked transmission then wait for the NTSB to do its work.

Don't get me wrong. IF a pilot on my plane wanted to use a laptop for something other than a wifi look at wx...I wouldn't allow it.

[SDFlyer]

I stumbled into an airfield (untowered) once with trafffic in the pattern and was completely NORDO because I had tuned in the wrong blasted frequency. Must have made at least four position calls into the ether before entering (I'm real big on radio communications, that's what the IR does for you .... ), didn't hear a sausage.

A profoundly embarrassing experience I can tell you. I finally figured out my stupid blunder after entering downwind behind some surprised aviator, got on the blower and apologized profusely to Traffic In the Pattern. Nobody said anything, prolly because I'd beaten myself up enough already on CTAF ......

"Radio check" is the way to go if you aren't sure, clearly. It probably didn't happen like this here but stuff like this does happen a lot and in commercial operations there are deep checks and balances, unlike in GA where I might have killed someone other than myself that day. Should I have lost my license for a month or something? I dunno, but I learned a heck of a lot on that day and thank everyone in the circuit for keeping me alive to benefit from it. Sometimes even professional pilots need to be reminded of certain matters - question is how big of a stick to use. The stick being used by FAA is too big IMO.

[CONF iture]

Originally Posted by SaturnV

Pre 9/11, it took about 80 minutes for ATC to vector fighters to intercept an aircraft that was not communicating

0927 EDT
N47BA is climbing through FL230
N47BA acknowledges the clearance to climb to FL390. It’s going to be the last radio transmission from N47BA

0938 EDT
N47BA has failed to respond to the multiple radio calls from the controller since 0933

1052 EDT
One F-16 is vectored to within 8 nm of N47BA which is around FL460

But what’s happening between 0938 and 1052 ?

• The Learjet is not on its flight plan
• The Learjet is busting altitudes
• The Learjet is not in radio contact

I find that NTSB report a bit too quiet on these 74 minutes !?

[WestWind1950]

I have to agree with rottenray. There is absolutely NO excuse for inattention in the cockpit! What did the pilots do before laptops were available and flights took longer? They kept track with the flight, the radios, etc.

Over the years there was a lot of talk about fully automated cockpits, or single pilot ones at least. Luckily the necessary human factor remained. But this incident could make people wonder if human pilots are still needed.... after all, the autopilot still flies the bird.

snaproll348 wrote:

I don't know the fuel status but the otherside of the coin is not the aircraft falling out of the sky. If they had burned too much fuel, they simply would have diverted to another airport, fueled up and gone back.

Do you really think they would have been allowed to fly the return flight? I seriously doubt it!

I am not an airline pilot, but have a cpl and am in other ways an insider.

I think a very easy solution for preventing such events like sleeping pilots from happening would be once again to allow the cockpits doors to be unlocked!!

Just my $.02 worth.....

[Ditchdigger]

Reference any "rush to judgement", as more facts are revealed, the number of possible explanations narrows.

As I pointed out in my first post in this thread, if they were NORDO, for whatever reason, but were situationally aware and flying the airplane, they had procedures to follow to land at their filed destination. The fact that they didn't, renders moot any speculation about the root cause being radio related. The explanation lies elsewhere.

As far as whether firing them is the best remedy or not, while I'm sure they'd never make the same (alleged), mistake again, what air carrier could afford to employ them, from a liability standpoint? Here's what the bean counters are thinking--if Sully himself had a black mark like this one on his record, the first questions that would be asked would have been, "Isn't that one of the guys that flew 150 miles past his destination? What was he distracted by this time, so that he didn't see those birds?"

The lawsuit happy nature of today's world is what it is. Deservedly so or not, (and of course barring some stunning, and heretofore unrevealed mitigating circumstances), I think these guys have poisoned any chance they have at meanigful employment in any passenger carrying mode of transportation.

[John47]

CONF iture

At 0933:38 EDT (6 minutes and 20 seconds after N47BA acknowledged the previous clearance), the controller instructed N47BA to change radio frequencies and contact another Jacksonville ARTCC controller. The controller received no response from N47BA. The controller called the flight five more times over the next 4 1/2 minutes but received no response.

About 0952 CDT,7 a USAF F-16 test pilot from the 40th Flight Test Squadron at Eglin Air Force Base (AFB), Florida, was vectored to within 8 nm of N47BA.8 About 0954 CDT, at a range of 2,000 feet from the accident airplane and an altitude of about 46,400 feet,9 the test pilot made two radio calls to N47BA but did not receive a response. About 1000 CDT, the test pilot began a visual inspection of N47BA. There was no visible damage to the airplane, and he did not see ice accumulation on the exterior of the airplane. Both engines were running, and the rotating beacon was on. He stated that he could not see inside the passenger section of the airplane because the windows seemed to be dark. Further, he stated that the entire right cockpit windshield was opaque, as if condensation or ice covered the inside. He also indicated that the left cockpit windshield was opaque, although several sections of the center of the windshield seemed to be only thinly covered by condensation or ice; a small rectangular section of the windshield was clear, with only a small section of the glare shield visible through this area. He did not see any flight control movement. About 1012 CDT, he concluded his inspection of N47BA and proceeded to Scott AFB, Illinois.

DCA00MA005: Aberdeen, South Dakota, October 25, 1999

[CONF iture]

John,
I'm afraid you fall in the same trap than myself when I initially read the report, and I really find it a bit ... peculiar, the NTSB decided to mix the time zones EDT and CDT !?

[finfly1]

What concerns me, and I have not seen it specifically addressed, is that none of the three stated possible causes of this event come close to explaining being out of radio contact for an hour and a half.

Much is made of the fact of a safe landing at proper destination, but it seems that in this instance, it was sheer luck, not skill. I have seen no mention of the quantity of fuel on board upon landing.

Dialing the wrong frequency in the radio is a 'mistake'. Ignoring it for over an hour and a half is seemingly grounds for losing a license. Apparently it is now felt that a portion of this blame may spill over onto ATC for failure to notify the military in anywhere near a timely fashion.

[protectthehornet]

the only

the only people on this forum who should even consider passing judgement in a professional way are those who are real airline pilots flying jets.

IF you are outraged and you are a passenger or not an airline pilot...you can judge BY NOT BUYING TICKETS ON NORTHWEST/DELTA

Now, I've seen some pretty crummy pilots in my 34 years since my first solo. Some are just enormously lucky (and luck outranks skill anyday). Some should lose their ticket.

but I've seen crummy mechanics, air traffic controllers who put me head on at 800 feet with a DC10 at KPHL...me cleared for approach on runway 9R, the DC10 cleared for takeoff on 27L...YOu do the math!!!!

I've also seen doctors prescribe the wrong drugs causing problems. Auto mechanics not tighten the steering wheel and having the wheel come off in my hand.

And lots of other professions.

But, the captain had 20k hours of accident free time up till now. Let's wait just a bit and get the whole story.

[FlyingOfficerKite]

protechthehornet

Yes I agree with you about the comparison between bus drivers and pilots.

A large degree of snobbery here in my opinion.

Frankly I have the greatest respect for anyone in whose hands I place my life and/or wellbeing - whether that be bus driver, taxi driver, surgeon or pilot, for example.

We all have our loyalties to our professions - not to do so would suggest we somehow had made a mistake in chosing it!

So I'm just as grateful to bus drivers for avoiding low bridges when I'm on the top deck as I am for pilots avoiding making similar unforced errors such as the one in question.

KR

FOK

PS: In respect to the 'punishment' for the 'crime' - do you punish a man equally for an action which may have caused an accident as opposed to a man actually causing an accident in similar circumstances?

Whilst my Posts have generally been (in my view reasonably) 'anti' the pilots, the flip side is that, if they are reasonable human beings, in future they might be some of the safest (and experienced) pilots around.

It reminds me of the old joke about a man in a bar. The man says: 'I have built 1000 houses but do they remember me as a great builder? NO!
I have looked after a 1000 acres farm but do they remember me as a great farmer? NO!
I s**g one sheep ...'

I suppose it proves you're only as good as your last flight.

[Pugilistic Animus]

bus driver, train conductors plumbers etc have their own professional resoponsibities/procedures---say busses are easy well that IS a snobbish thing to say If I drove a bus in NY I'd purposely crash

anyway since one thing that is a FACT is that airlaw is adminstrative in nature it is NOT civil law based on preponderance of the evidence nor criminal law based on resonable doubt,..these cases are heard before an adminstrative law judge and in an emergency you can be found guilty until you prove your self innocnet do you you the FAR that destroys the most careers {14 CFR 91.13}---okay---so now let these guy have their due process

PA

[SDFlyer]

I understand where you're coming from hornet and partly agree, but I do believe that non-comm pilots, and even non-pilots, can and should judge to some extent. But but but, it requires a high level of discriminatory thinking and the application of a highly developed and sophisticated imagination - to allow meaningful comparison between a pilot's actions to those of some other professional that you know a lot more about. Not easy, since if you aren't a comm pilot how do you know how good the comparison is with your own Gold Standard as it were?

As an IR pilot who interacts with you guys getting vectors to the localizer etc etc (and tries not to cause you a second's anxiety on the radio as I get given a 360 to let you come on through) and listens to channel 9 whenever possible, I see/hear/understand a fair bit about your working lives but obviously don't see anything like the full operation picture, with proper personal context. I try because I care about the industry (Pan Am connections back to the 50s) and I greatly respect what you do and how you got to where you are. I know I get it wrong to some extent but maybe not as much as others on the outside who judge.

People are very judgmental about my own industry (drug discovery/development), most people don't have a blasted clue what really happens in Pharma - the various pressures that exist and make people do what they do. And the accidents that can happen totally unintentionally, that involve very good, highly educated and dedicated people doing their best in a collapsing industry. There are b*s***ds in the industry and the sooner we get rid of them the better but the great majority are not. I don't think people should not judge our industry at all, they certainly have a big stake in what we do as they do in what you do, but I give them credence only to the extent that they demonstrate a high level of understanding of a very complex situation in an unfamiliar environment. I'm sorry but the earlier poster completely failed to do that IMHO which is why I chimed in as I did. 'Nough said.

[Pugilistic Animus]

most people don't have a blasted clue what really happens in Pharma - the various pressures that exist and make people do what they do. And the accidents that can happen totally unintentionally, caused by very good, highly educated

I do[perfectly] and it ain't pretty

Good post but most non-pilots could not even begin to say something intelligent here except there are a rare few

PA

[dweeks]

"I am required to note the w/v, the TAS, the ISA Deviation, the time I pass my wpt and the fuel on board, to name but a few!"

At my carrier, we're supposed to note the time and fuel passing fixes, but that's all.

Just what exactly do you DO with the wind, ISA deviation, etc?

I see no point to logging that stuff if you don't put it to some use.