NTSB investigating possible nodding off of Northwest pilots
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
From msnbc.com:
More posted now on msnbc.com:
Pilots who overflew airport to forfeit licenses - News- msnbc.com
BREAKING NEWS: Pilots who overflew Minneapolis Airport agree to give up licenses, NBC reports
Pilots who overflew airport to forfeit licenses
Northwest fliers were out of radio contact for more than an hour
msnbc.com news services
updated 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
The two Northwest pilots who overflew their Minneapolis destination and were out of radio contact for more than an hour last October have agreed to forfeit their pilots licenses, NBC News has learned.
The Federal Aviation Administration and the Department of Transportation reached an agreement with the pilots, according to NBC's Tom Costello.
The two men — Richard Cole of Salem, Ore., the first officer, and Timothy Cheney of Gig Harbor, Wash., the captain — will likely reapply for new licenses in early 2011. However, they would have to start the process at the beginning — including flight simulator training — at the carrier’s expense...
Northwest fliers were out of radio contact for more than an hour
msnbc.com news services
updated 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
The two Northwest pilots who overflew their Minneapolis destination and were out of radio contact for more than an hour last October have agreed to forfeit their pilots licenses, NBC News has learned.
The Federal Aviation Administration and the Department of Transportation reached an agreement with the pilots, according to NBC's Tom Costello.
The two men — Richard Cole of Salem, Ore., the first officer, and Timothy Cheney of Gig Harbor, Wash., the captain — will likely reapply for new licenses in early 2011. However, they would have to start the process at the beginning — including flight simulator training — at the carrier’s expense...
Last edited by Airbubba; 15th Mar 2010 at 19:04.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not entirely sure if this achieves anything. Demoting the Captain to F/O and some re-training for both would have been enough. Yes, it was a p/p show but there was no emergency and no one was hurt. Maybe I'm too soft.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Right there...
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have a look at the way Air India deals with a similar issue
DGCA admits AI pilots dozed off in cockpit - India - The Times of India
DGCA admits AI pilots dozed off in cockpit - India - The Times of India
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a travesty that doesn't address what happened on the day in any way, shape or form; the news reports are all partial accounts, and in no way describe what seems to have happened.
Clearly Atlanta FAA has not heard of "no blame" cultures from which to learn.
Clearly Atlanta FAA has not heard of "no blame" cultures from which to learn.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, please excuse me if the answer has already been provided but I don't feel up to scanning 34 pages to find out.
Can somebody who knows the A320 FMC (or whatever they call the thing) tell me what happens when it comes to the end of the programmed route?
I am assuming that the crew had programmed in the destination and that the aircraft was flying on LNAV and VNAV (or, again, whatever it is called) and that without the crew dialling in a lower altitude the aircraft would have continued on to Minneapolis, but then what?
Does the thing give a Gallic shrug and say, "...it is all to hard..." and head for Toulouse? Does it wander in circles? Does it revert to heading and altitude hold mode and wander off into the distance?
Despite my pitiful attempt at levity it is a serious question.
Can somebody who knows the A320 FMC (or whatever they call the thing) tell me what happens when it comes to the end of the programmed route?
I am assuming that the crew had programmed in the destination and that the aircraft was flying on LNAV and VNAV (or, again, whatever it is called) and that without the crew dialling in a lower altitude the aircraft would have continued on to Minneapolis, but then what?
Does the thing give a Gallic shrug and say, "...it is all to hard..." and head for Toulouse? Does it wander in circles? Does it revert to heading and altitude hold mode and wander off into the distance?
Despite my pitiful attempt at levity it is a serious question.
Guest
Posts: n/a
PLovett, NTSB:
According to FDR data, at about 2001 CDT, the Flight Mode Annunciator (FMA) on the pilots’ PFD indicated a lateral mode degradation from navigation (NAV) mode to heading (HDG) mode. This occurred about the time the airplane passed over the last point of its flight plan and maintained present heading in heading mode on the autopilot.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can somebody who knows the A320 FMC (or whatever they call the thing) tell me what happens when it comes to the end of the programmed route?
Not necessarily the facts, but here's what I think happened:
NWA had just switched to DAL policy re: who programs the FMC. Normally the FO flies the hub inbound legs, so I assume FO was flying. The arrival starts at RWF, 100+ miles SW of MSP. Since DL never trained FO's how to program the FMC, once the 320 hit RWF it reverted to heading mode, otherwise it would've turned once over MSP.
Not necessarily the facts, but here's what I think happened:
NWA had just switched to DAL policy re: who programs the FMC. Normally the FO flies the hub inbound legs, so I assume FO was flying. The arrival starts at RWF, 100+ miles SW of MSP. Since DL never trained FO's how to program the FMC, once the 320 hit RWF it reverted to heading mode, otherwise it would've turned once over MSP.
.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Midlands
Age: 78
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not really relevant, but this discussion reminded me of an amusing experience many, many years ago when I was FO on a DC-10 flying overnight from Miami to London. The INS on that aircraft could only hold ten waypoints which, with Freeport the first, took us into the middle of the Atlantic. Lets say that, by the time we got to waypoint 9, the two of us up front were not quite as awake as we should have been and the aircraft started turning to the next waypoint, number 1, which was still Freeport. Luckily the Flight Engineer was watching, in fact with some amusement, and, after we had started the turn, tapped me on the shoulder and suggested I might like to do something about it, preferably without waking the Captain.
Unfortunately, I never did get to buy that man the beer I promised him.
Unfortunately, I never did get to buy that man the beer I promised him.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Oh well... I'm sure Cole and Cheney will be welcome back to the folds of DAL after they make applications to regain their ATPs.
There are precedents, notably NWA pilot Lyle Prouse who regained his certificates after a prison term for an egregious alcohol incident years ago and retired in the left seat of a B-744. Captain Prouse has been kind enough to contribute here on PPRuNe in years past.
Person Of Interest
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbubba...EXACTLY...Cap't Prouse admitted his misdeeds, paid the price, and became a model of rehabilitation for all pilots...
So where's the "mea culpa" here???
What really happened? Fell asleep...I'll but it, but just admit it...
So where's the "mea culpa" here???
What really happened? Fell asleep...I'll but it, but just admit it...
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Posts: 735
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Odd..
There are so many furloughed pilots who didn't screw the pooch who could be invited back to work - why the defense of these two?
There are several degrees of bad judgment:
"I made the wrong decision by misinterpreting the situation."
"I made the wrong decision because I had never thought-through the scenario."
ad infinitum
But the worst?
"I was too distracted to [fly the plane, drive my car safely, notice the house was afire, et cetera] hence showing poor judgment."
Again, with so many pilots furloughed purely economic reasons, why is this pair deserving of a return to their jobs when so many others have been made redundant through absolutely no fault of their own?
Several posters have mentioned that the probability of either of these guys ever showing the same disinterest in their flight again is virtually zero
I agree with that, but I stay with my opine.
Others who have lost jobs have not shown the same disinterest, and they should be hired before.
In other threads on other sites, some have gone so far as to exclaim that the flight was lucky to have landed safely because it could have A) run out of fuel or B) collided with another flight.
Hogwash.
But, speaking purely, missing one's destination because one is not paying enough attention to land at the destination is an indicator of really, really not paying attention to one's job.
It represents an unacceptable attention to duty. I don't hold with the folks spouting "incredible danger," but you must admit that not being fully engaged in the flight does pose some risk.
I think most pilots are far more professional than this.
I understand that in an emergency when workload goes through the roof and pilots are presented with the need to make a decision based upon things outside their experience, things can go horribly wrong.
In those cases, you can second-guess them, but if they even tried to do the right things, you have to give them credit.
The pilots in this case, had they been driving a cab in New York, would have been in an accident caused by their inattention to task at hand.
We just don't need folks at the pointy end who don't consider the job important, don't need folks who feel that piloting the aircraft can take a "back seat" to anything else.
A flight can turn into an absolute nightmare instantly - many have - and the one factor which tends to save a flight experiencing a severe problem is the alert condition of the pilots and their ability to react quickly.
If it takes the F/D crew a half a minute to get "back into" the aircraft to begin figuring out what is wrong, sorting out checklists, et cetera, that time is time they have completely wasted.
Times are hard, and there are many pilots out of work who have never made the same mistake.
Bringing them back to work will give them the same feeling of renewed vitality, of having been given another chance, that bringing these two pilots back will - so let's bring back someone who hasn't made the horrible error of being too busy with "something else" to land at the destination.
Other pilots should be given a chance to go back to work first - and the folks who have been suspended should be given the same chance, after all the other furloughed pilots have been placed back on the flight deck.
Would I feel comfortable flying with either?
At this point, yes. I'm pretty sure, based on professional behavior, that neither will be less than completely engaged with the flight.
But, the bottom line is this. They screwed up, and they deserve another chance, but there are other good pilots out of work at the moment who didn't screw up, and they deserve to go back to work first.
just saying...
There are several degrees of bad judgment:
"I made the wrong decision by misinterpreting the situation."
"I made the wrong decision because I had never thought-through the scenario."
ad infinitum
But the worst?
"I was too distracted to [fly the plane, drive my car safely, notice the house was afire, et cetera] hence showing poor judgment."
Again, with so many pilots furloughed purely economic reasons, why is this pair deserving of a return to their jobs when so many others have been made redundant through absolutely no fault of their own?
Several posters have mentioned that the probability of either of these guys ever showing the same disinterest in their flight again is virtually zero
I agree with that, but I stay with my opine.
Others who have lost jobs have not shown the same disinterest, and they should be hired before.
In other threads on other sites, some have gone so far as to exclaim that the flight was lucky to have landed safely because it could have A) run out of fuel or B) collided with another flight.
Hogwash.
But, speaking purely, missing one's destination because one is not paying enough attention to land at the destination is an indicator of really, really not paying attention to one's job.
It represents an unacceptable attention to duty. I don't hold with the folks spouting "incredible danger," but you must admit that not being fully engaged in the flight does pose some risk.
I think most pilots are far more professional than this.
I understand that in an emergency when workload goes through the roof and pilots are presented with the need to make a decision based upon things outside their experience, things can go horribly wrong.
In those cases, you can second-guess them, but if they even tried to do the right things, you have to give them credit.
The pilots in this case, had they been driving a cab in New York, would have been in an accident caused by their inattention to task at hand.
We just don't need folks at the pointy end who don't consider the job important, don't need folks who feel that piloting the aircraft can take a "back seat" to anything else.
A flight can turn into an absolute nightmare instantly - many have - and the one factor which tends to save a flight experiencing a severe problem is the alert condition of the pilots and their ability to react quickly.
If it takes the F/D crew a half a minute to get "back into" the aircraft to begin figuring out what is wrong, sorting out checklists, et cetera, that time is time they have completely wasted.
Times are hard, and there are many pilots out of work who have never made the same mistake.
Bringing them back to work will give them the same feeling of renewed vitality, of having been given another chance, that bringing these two pilots back will - so let's bring back someone who hasn't made the horrible error of being too busy with "something else" to land at the destination.
Other pilots should be given a chance to go back to work first - and the folks who have been suspended should be given the same chance, after all the other furloughed pilots have been placed back on the flight deck.
Would I feel comfortable flying with either?
At this point, yes. I'm pretty sure, based on professional behavior, that neither will be less than completely engaged with the flight.
But, the bottom line is this. They screwed up, and they deserve another chance, but there are other good pilots out of work at the moment who didn't screw up, and they deserve to go back to work first.
just saying...
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Here's the NTSB report:
DCA10IA001
And conclusions:
DCA10IA001
DCA10IA001
And conclusions:
DCA10IA001
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident as follows:
The flight crew's failure to monitor the airplane’s radio and instruments and the progress of the flight after becoming distracted by conversations and activities unrelated to the operation of the flight.
The flight crew's failure to monitor the airplane’s radio and instruments and the progress of the flight after becoming distracted by conversations and activities unrelated to the operation of the flight.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it my imagination or is there a growing trend of crashes and incidents due to:
Just for starters I am thinking of the Buffalo, Lexington and the other CJ crash recently where the crew neglected take off flaps and aborted the take off. IIRC they all had an element of non-essential conversation at critical times as a factor.
If correct there would seem to be a need for sterile cockpit rules to be extended and enforced.
Yes, I know that they are not meant to apply to an aircraft at cruise altitude but a bit of crew self-discipline would not go astray.
The flight crew's failure to monitor the airplane’s radio and instruments and the progress of the flight after becoming distracted by conversations and activities unrelated to the operation of the flight.
If correct there would seem to be a need for sterile cockpit rules to be extended and enforced.
Yes, I know that they are not meant to apply to an aircraft at cruise altitude but a bit of crew self-discipline would not go astray.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: memphis, tn
Age: 66
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Both of these aviators are well respected among their peers. They found themselves buried in a mountain of changes by virtue of a merger, that neither had anticipated, and were simply trying to get a handle on SOME of it. Wrong time/wrong place? Absolutely. They've said as much--not publicly, because of lawyers (...whatever you say can and WILL be used against you...). They were not asleep, as some have suggested. I was not in the cockpit (obviously), and cannot state emphatically (as some have) as to what they were doing. However, this I do know. Neither of these fellows are bold face liars. They are men of integrity, and capable of error, like any man. I understand the issues of what is expected of airmen, so don't school me on such lectures. These gentlemen are not slackers, second-rate, or bottom of the barrel aviators. If they were such, I would not go "out on a limb" for either. It is my sincere hope to see both of them back on the line ASAP, and wish each of them the very best in this most stressful time.
Regards,
Chuck
Regards,
Chuck