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
B777 has the "Pilot Respond" EICAS message popping out after 20 minutes of inactivity; at 22nd minute activates the Master Caution and at 23rd minute activates the Master Warning (same aural warning like for the Auto Pilot disengagement)... Quite effective way to prevent prolonged nodding...
Other glass Boeings have it as an option, it works as advertised (or, so I'm told
).
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: usa
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it interesting that the media is describing this as a Northwest event when in fact NWA is now Delta albeit they are a month or so away from a SOC (Single Operating Certificate).
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Great White North
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NTSB investigating possible nodding of
Ditchdigger
Spot-On !
150 miles of “overshoot” into IFR controlled space with no clearances or communications . . . immediately adjacent (and more or less centred on) to a major airport. The area of, typically, the densest traffic patterns.
There must have been a lot of very busy controllers flipping other (coming “the other way”) folks to a new flight level and track. And, at the same time co-ordinating with your home-land-security I suspect? Thankfully, they were evidently high enough to look like an “over-flight” . . . until they came out the “other-side” of course.
As Lazerdog suggests . . . Hypoxia sounds like their best defence . . . good luck lads!
Should they even build “commercial transport aircraft” with pullout beds on the flight deck!?
They usually only get used for the “Mile(s)-High-Club” anyway. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ?????
I have professionally (meaning my “job”) watched this “stuff” from the sidelines (ground-side) for over 35-years. Some eventually screw up and get caught . . . most don’t !!!!
Spot-On !
150 miles of “overshoot” into IFR controlled space with no clearances or communications . . . immediately adjacent (and more or less centred on) to a major airport. The area of, typically, the densest traffic patterns.
There must have been a lot of very busy controllers flipping other (coming “the other way”) folks to a new flight level and track. And, at the same time co-ordinating with your home-land-security I suspect? Thankfully, they were evidently high enough to look like an “over-flight” . . . until they came out the “other-side” of course.
As Lazerdog suggests . . . Hypoxia sounds like their best defence . . . good luck lads!
Should they even build “commercial transport aircraft” with pullout beds on the flight deck!?
They usually only get used for the “Mile(s)-High-Club” anyway. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ?????
I have professionally (meaning my “job”) watched this “stuff” from the sidelines (ground-side) for over 35-years. Some eventually screw up and get caught . . . most don’t !!!!
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Allow me to state my opinion here on what may have happened. Please hear me out. This "theory" (and that's all it is, so please, moderators of this "rumor" forum, do not erase my post, I have something valuable to say here) has not been proposed here in this thread. But it is a far more feasible theory than the "sexual tryst" one that has been floated (and not deleted).
We are a society nowadays where 90% of the population and the workforce are virtual mindless, robotic slaves to one handheld electronic device or another (iphones, blackberries, etc.). Nowhere is this more evident than in the Transportation industry (Planes, Trains, Automobiles). No sooner than does an airplane pull into the gate than the hundred-fifty plus sheep on-board reach for their cell-phones as if their very lives depended upon it. It's instinctual anymore - it's not even a product of actual thought. Out in California earlier this year it was documented that the train conductor was "texting" on his phone prior to the accident. On the roads in this country, driver after driver cannot seem to last 15 minutes without "texting" or talking on their cell-phones, non-stop. "Distracted driving" is now the number one cause of accidents on the road in the U.S. Moreso than weather, or than drugs/alcohol. People display an irrational, compulsive "need" to be constantly texting, phoning, or checking the internet, when they should be giving full attention to their driving responsibilities.
Our society is an "Attention-Deficit-Disordered" one, where people cannot simply FOCUS on the task-at-hand. They cannot BE or LIVE in the PRESENT anymore. As a result, I witness, on a near-DAILY basis, automobile drivers who are so consumed with the "conversation" (or texting) they are having on their e-device, that they narrowly miss plowing me or someone else down with their Yuppie Urban Assault Vehicle. I - as a full-time pedestrian - have come within INCHES of being seriously injured or killed, on so many occasions that I am pretty much counting on it happening to me in my lifetime. Many times, these same individuals are carrying small children in the front/back seat. While they're texting/yapping/internet-surfing...
My "theory" on this incident is that pilots are now exhibiting the same "distracted flying" characteristics. Passengers in the U.S. may not be allowed to use their "personal mobile electronic devices" while in-flight, but European passengers can now. And it's possible that U.S. pilots do, despite the passenger restriction. One or both of these pilots may have been so absorbed in their particular "electronic device", that they paid no attention whatsoever to overshooting the MSP destination. Based upon what I have observed EN-MASSE in car-drivers ... based on the news accounts about mass-transit conductors ... it would not surprise me in the least to find out that airline pilots are now spending a dangerous amount of their cockpit time (and IMO, any time more than 0 seconds qualifies as such) absorbed in "texting" or any other such dumbing-down-device activity. If the rest of the general population exhibits such a mass-addiction to these devices - and as has already been exhibited by other elements of the Transportation industry - then it stands to reason that this infestation of mindless e-device compulsion has now permeated the cockpits of commercial airplanes.
It's fine and dandy for currently active commercial pilots to respond by stating that they do not use their "mobile electronic devices" while in-flight, but that doesn't necessarily mean that one or both of these two pilots in question did not.
Just my opinion. And the general public, the flying public, the industry's employees, and anyone else reading this post, would be wise to consider it. Because it is entirely feasible, nowadays. Sadly.
We are a society nowadays where 90% of the population and the workforce are virtual mindless, robotic slaves to one handheld electronic device or another (iphones, blackberries, etc.). Nowhere is this more evident than in the Transportation industry (Planes, Trains, Automobiles). No sooner than does an airplane pull into the gate than the hundred-fifty plus sheep on-board reach for their cell-phones as if their very lives depended upon it. It's instinctual anymore - it's not even a product of actual thought. Out in California earlier this year it was documented that the train conductor was "texting" on his phone prior to the accident. On the roads in this country, driver after driver cannot seem to last 15 minutes without "texting" or talking on their cell-phones, non-stop. "Distracted driving" is now the number one cause of accidents on the road in the U.S. Moreso than weather, or than drugs/alcohol. People display an irrational, compulsive "need" to be constantly texting, phoning, or checking the internet, when they should be giving full attention to their driving responsibilities.
Our society is an "Attention-Deficit-Disordered" one, where people cannot simply FOCUS on the task-at-hand. They cannot BE or LIVE in the PRESENT anymore. As a result, I witness, on a near-DAILY basis, automobile drivers who are so consumed with the "conversation" (or texting) they are having on their e-device, that they narrowly miss plowing me or someone else down with their Yuppie Urban Assault Vehicle. I - as a full-time pedestrian - have come within INCHES of being seriously injured or killed, on so many occasions that I am pretty much counting on it happening to me in my lifetime. Many times, these same individuals are carrying small children in the front/back seat. While they're texting/yapping/internet-surfing...
My "theory" on this incident is that pilots are now exhibiting the same "distracted flying" characteristics. Passengers in the U.S. may not be allowed to use their "personal mobile electronic devices" while in-flight, but European passengers can now. And it's possible that U.S. pilots do, despite the passenger restriction. One or both of these pilots may have been so absorbed in their particular "electronic device", that they paid no attention whatsoever to overshooting the MSP destination. Based upon what I have observed EN-MASSE in car-drivers ... based on the news accounts about mass-transit conductors ... it would not surprise me in the least to find out that airline pilots are now spending a dangerous amount of their cockpit time (and IMO, any time more than 0 seconds qualifies as such) absorbed in "texting" or any other such dumbing-down-device activity. If the rest of the general population exhibits such a mass-addiction to these devices - and as has already been exhibited by other elements of the Transportation industry - then it stands to reason that this infestation of mindless e-device compulsion has now permeated the cockpits of commercial airplanes.
It's fine and dandy for currently active commercial pilots to respond by stating that they do not use their "mobile electronic devices" while in-flight, but that doesn't necessarily mean that one or both of these two pilots in question did not.
Just my opinion. And the general public, the flying public, the industry's employees, and anyone else reading this post, would be wise to consider it. Because it is entirely feasible, nowadays. Sadly.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
moist: "GlueBall: This is company SOP, major UK budget airline, proper twin jets in the 150 seat category! Please check your facts a little better. I have been flying for 20 years in this business, don't you think you might have a little more to learn, if you think this is ****"
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I say again: they are MURCAINS.
Do as I say, not as I do.
The astonishing arrogance they manage to sustain in the face of commonsense is manifested in Glueball's post.
Do as I say, not as I do.
The astonishing arrogance they manage to sustain in the face of commonsense is manifested in Glueball's post.
Would it be possible to pull the CVR circuit breaker for a few minutes - so they could agree on a cover-up story between them, for instance - and then push the c/b back in, without anyone noticing?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: london
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I work for a major Australian Airline and we also have a requirement as C/C to check on the flight crew every 20 minutes when out of our sterile flight deck period. In fact often, if the twenty minutes passes the pilots will call the cabin crew. I work on our ultra long haul services and even then this rule applies ALWAYS. It is also required that any service items be removed before landing. I am amazed that for over an hour towards the end of a flight there was no reason for communication between flight deck and cabin. I am also surprised not one of the cabin crew didn't just wanted to see why the flight was an hour late.
Bottom line, if this was caused by human error then there is a MAJOR COMPLACENCY ISSUE that has no place in the air. SCARY STUFF!
Bottom line, if this was caused by human error then there is a MAJOR COMPLACENCY ISSUE that has no place in the air. SCARY STUFF!
Join Date: May 2009
Location: A whole new world now!!
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cabin crew to Pilot comms.
Hi all I've just been reading this thread as my friend has just told me about this incident and I just knew there would be a thread on PPrune 
Glueball......no sh!t I'm afraid. Some of the more enlightened airlines do have SOP's which require the CC to contact the pilots every 20 minutes (ish) or as soon as practible depending on the wording of their Part E manual. I work for one of them.....a major budget carrier within the UK.
In addition I am also required to do this by interphone initially so as to minimise the time the flight deck door has to be opened. When I do have to open the door (drinks/meals etc) I have to have a "guard" present to stand between me and the cabin. A real pain in the neck sometimes but necessary to try and reduce potential risk whilst the door is open. You know the stuff recognised post 9/11??
As far as I'm aware I'm supposed to contact the flight deck this frequently for the following reasons
My friend has left my carrier and now works for another UK carrier. Their SOP is that you visit the F/D every 30 mins if you have time and there is no requirement for a guard. If you don't have time (pax service commitments) nobody seems to care and the F/D are contacted when the CC feel they do have time......could be another hour.
Would be really interesting to know which procedure you guys feel is the most workable particularly as one of you (can't remember who) said they would "slap" somebody who contacted them every 20 mins by interphone......why???
Yes I'm aware of the critical stages of flight. I'm also aware of your workload in the descent. This is why I ring you at the top of descent and then don't bother you again other than to hand the "cabin secure".
So what happened on this flight then and why do some of you think CC comms are not an important SOP routinely anyway???
Glueball......no sh!t I'm afraid. Some of the more enlightened airlines do have SOP's which require the CC to contact the pilots every 20 minutes (ish) or as soon as practible depending on the wording of their Part E manual. I work for one of them.....a major budget carrier within the UK.
In addition I am also required to do this by interphone initially so as to minimise the time the flight deck door has to be opened. When I do have to open the door (drinks/meals etc) I have to have a "guard" present to stand between me and the cabin. A real pain in the neck sometimes but necessary to try and reduce potential risk whilst the door is open. You know the stuff recognised post 9/11??
As far as I'm aware I'm supposed to contact the flight deck this frequently for the following reasons
- To check you Guys are still alive/not incapacitated
- To maintain effective communication and CRM
- To ensure both pilots "welfare" on long sectors.....I do visit on these occasions as instructed by our manual.
- To see if you need anything at all.....drinks, meals, loo breaks or even just a chat....normal human teamwork things. You guys are shut in a box barricaded by a door. Need I say more?
My friend has left my carrier and now works for another UK carrier. Their SOP is that you visit the F/D every 30 mins if you have time and there is no requirement for a guard. If you don't have time (pax service commitments) nobody seems to care and the F/D are contacted when the CC feel they do have time......could be another hour.
Would be really interesting to know which procedure you guys feel is the most workable particularly as one of you (can't remember who) said they would "slap" somebody who contacted them every 20 mins by interphone......why???
Yes I'm aware of the critical stages of flight. I'm also aware of your workload in the descent. This is why I ring you at the top of descent and then don't bother you again other than to hand the "cabin secure".
So what happened on this flight then and why do some of you think CC comms are not an important SOP routinely anyway???
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Antonio, TX USA
Age: 62
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CNN talks to FO (video)
A classless interview IMO, but might be helpful.
Co-pilot: No sleeping or arguing in cockpit - CNN.com
Co-pilot: No sleeping or arguing in cockpit - CNN.com
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rottenray -
Thank you for your kind words, but.....
All the public needs to know is, if required after all the facts are presented, the crew is properly diciplined. The actual content of the CVR should remain in the hands of the investigators ONLY. But, in this day and age, I'm sure the content will come out anyway.
Thank you for your kind words, but.....
All the public needs to know is, if required after all the facts are presented, the crew is properly diciplined. The actual content of the CVR should remain in the hands of the investigators ONLY. But, in this day and age, I'm sure the content will come out anyway.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Brazil
Age: 71
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is the worst case?
IMHO the pilots were "instructed" by the company to tell the "distracted by a discussion" story.
This "story" would give to the public the impression that, even though they overshot their landing point, no risk to the passengers was involved.
If the pilots admit they fell asleep, the "damage" to the company would be enormous and the crew rest policy would be raised vigorously.
To the company's point of view, it is better to have "kinda distracted" pilots than to have tired pilots flying around...
No one falls asleep at the controls of anything purposely. People fall asleep because they are VERY tired.
If the pilots got "distracted", this is their (the pilot's) problem. But if they are excessively tired, this is a company's problem...
On a second thought, I believe these pilots are being "pressured" by the whole airline "universe", and I would include the FAA.
Of course, this is just my opinion.
Rob
This "story" would give to the public the impression that, even though they overshot their landing point, no risk to the passengers was involved.
If the pilots admit they fell asleep, the "damage" to the company would be enormous and the crew rest policy would be raised vigorously.
To the company's point of view, it is better to have "kinda distracted" pilots than to have tired pilots flying around...
No one falls asleep at the controls of anything purposely. People fall asleep because they are VERY tired.
If the pilots got "distracted", this is their (the pilot's) problem. But if they are excessively tired, this is a company's problem...
On a second thought, I believe these pilots are being "pressured" by the whole airline "universe", and I would include the FAA.
Of course, this is just my opinion.
Rob
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lzerdog has suggested, Hypoxia, the only rational explanation so far that accounts for both the incident and the crew's statements. The problem is that had it occurred we would have already heard that the oxygen system had dropped the masks, or at least that some in the back had lost consciousness.
This one is so newsworthy because it is sooo bizarre. A taxiway landing is much easier to comprehend.
This one is so newsworthy because it is sooo bizarre. A taxiway landing is much easier to comprehend.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SoCalif
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hypoxia could explain it, save for the fact the ATC comm (after the NORDO) I heard on tv had the pilot coming right back with clear and professional acknowledgements and repeats of clearances.
I presume the aircraft was in HDG?
Just as well they were carrying a bucket load of fuel and not planning on laning with CNR!
What were the CC doing?? There always always always ask me for our ETA and god help us if we are a few minutes late!!!
But no checks that FD are ok, every 20 mins?
There is a lot more to this than meets the eye!
Just as well they were carrying a bucket load of fuel and not planning on laning with CNR!
What were the CC doing?? There always always always ask me for our ETA and god help us if we are a few minutes late!!!
But no checks that FD are ok, every 20 mins?
There is a lot more to this than meets the eye!
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPrune at its best again!
We have:
'hypoxia' - despite the fact that the c/crew and pax appear to have been unaffected
'they forgot to programme the arrival into the computer' - heavens above can these guys not FLY? Good job they programmed the computer to taxy out at departure AND take off
One US operator (or is it just one US pilot?) appears ' not to care' about post 9/11 security issues.
What we have not yet had is that the A320 would not LET them descend or turn and also shut down their radios - or was it aliens?
CNN - "The lead flight attendant told officers she was unaware there had been an incident aboard, the report said." - classic! He/she was probably asleep as well.
We have:
'hypoxia' - despite the fact that the c/crew and pax appear to have been unaffected
'they forgot to programme the arrival into the computer' - heavens above can these guys not FLY? Good job they programmed the computer to taxy out at departure AND take off
One US operator (or is it just one US pilot?) appears ' not to care' about post 9/11 security issues.
What we have not yet had is that the A320 would not LET them descend or turn and also shut down their radios - or was it aliens?
CNN - "The lead flight attendant told officers she was unaware there had been an incident aboard, the report said." - classic! He/she was probably asleep as well.