Cockpit Video Recorders to become mandatory
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what was that crash a while back when they think the PIC may have put his foot up on the central console and tripped the autopilot off accidentally... you could see that on CTV
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Royal Leamington Spa
Age: 78
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally believe that cockpit video recorders can only enhance safety.
Regarding crew privacy this needs to be protected in that anything of a clearly personal nature (such as picking one's nose [which was mentioned] etc.) remains private upon pain of penalty payable by whoever makes public the breach of privacy.
When it comes to collecting cockpit data in the form of video footage related to an incident I believe there should be no contest, this data will, I am certain, prove invaluable.
Regarding crew privacy this needs to be protected in that anything of a clearly personal nature (such as picking one's nose [which was mentioned] etc.) remains private upon pain of penalty payable by whoever makes public the breach of privacy.
When it comes to collecting cockpit data in the form of video footage related to an incident I believe there should be no contest, this data will, I am certain, prove invaluable.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is indeed old news, and I have posted something similar before, but since repetition is the very purpose of the Internet, here it is again:
Some years ago I did participate in a "camera in the cockpit" experiment, which as a previous poster suggested was aimed at creating training material. Whilst it is possible to "act" a scripted scenario with grand thespian gestures at instruments to draw attention to what is going on, a much more telling video was recorded during a real high-workload incident which was not scripted at all. I and my copilot would later agree that our effort had been 100%, we were working at the peak of CRM performance, and a tricky situation was well managed. Watching the video however, all you see is two statues! Movements were so economical that you might think we never even twitched a muscle, let alone operated controls and switches (but we did). In a heightened state you can draw your colleagues attention to an instrument with the tiniest nod of the head or flick of the eye, and in the real world that is how it works. As a record of the incident, the video was therefore completely useless. For detailed operational metrics, the FDR is much more likely to explain what was going on.
Having said that, there have been some accident reports recently that would have benefited from cameras - but they are ones that have such major unknowns as "Who was sitting in which seat?". It is surprising how often an accident chain starts with someone leaving/entering the cockpit, and the reports end up with lines like "Unknown Voice Number 7"! These are questions that can best be answered with cameras; hoping for insight into detailed operation may be hoping for too much.
Some years ago I did participate in a "camera in the cockpit" experiment, which as a previous poster suggested was aimed at creating training material. Whilst it is possible to "act" a scripted scenario with grand thespian gestures at instruments to draw attention to what is going on, a much more telling video was recorded during a real high-workload incident which was not scripted at all. I and my copilot would later agree that our effort had been 100%, we were working at the peak of CRM performance, and a tricky situation was well managed. Watching the video however, all you see is two statues! Movements were so economical that you might think we never even twitched a muscle, let alone operated controls and switches (but we did). In a heightened state you can draw your colleagues attention to an instrument with the tiniest nod of the head or flick of the eye, and in the real world that is how it works. As a record of the incident, the video was therefore completely useless. For detailed operational metrics, the FDR is much more likely to explain what was going on.
Having said that, there have been some accident reports recently that would have benefited from cameras - but they are ones that have such major unknowns as "Who was sitting in which seat?". It is surprising how often an accident chain starts with someone leaving/entering the cockpit, and the reports end up with lines like "Unknown Voice Number 7"! These are questions that can best be answered with cameras; hoping for insight into detailed operation may be hoping for too much.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK...next contract, we demand a makeup person take care of the bald spots on the back of our heads and any shiny spots on our nose prior to flying cockpit video recorder equipped aircraft.
I'm ready for my closeup CB. Gear UP
I'm ready for my closeup CB. Gear UP
Watching the video however, all you see is two statues! Movements were so economical that you might think we never even twitched a muscle, let alone operated controls and switches (but we did). In a heightened state you can draw your colleagues attention to an instrument with the tiniest nod of the head or flick of the eye, and in the real world that is how it works. As a record of the incident, the video was therefore completely useless.
I'd suggest then that there needs to be a camera that reveals facial expressions on each crew member.
This could be used to track (roughly) where they are looking.
One camera for each crew member and a third wideshot to show their arm movements.
View of engines, cargo hold and control surfaces is more useful!
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: FR
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This seems another hamster wheel.
The idea is from accident investigators. To them, a cockpit video could answer some questions, and that is useful (far more than what you suggest, Sir, in the case of an accident investigation).
As said by CJ Driver: Who is in the cockpit? Who sits where?
But also (with appropriate resolution & point of view): What were the instruments indicating (*)? Was this fault acknowledged, leaving place for the next one to be displayed on the ECAM/EFIS/whatever you call it?
(*) the data fed into if may be correct, but if the screen display itself is out of order/unreliable, the video will positively show it, when a FDR may not.
My 2 cents
The idea is from accident investigators. To them, a cockpit video could answer some questions, and that is useful (far more than what you suggest, Sir, in the case of an accident investigation).
As said by CJ Driver: Who is in the cockpit? Who sits where?
But also (with appropriate resolution & point of view): What were the instruments indicating (*)? Was this fault acknowledged, leaving place for the next one to be displayed on the ECAM/EFIS/whatever you call it?
(*) the data fed into if may be correct, but if the screen display itself is out of order/unreliable, the video will positively show it, when a FDR may not.
My 2 cents
For general reference,
Multicameras in cockpit
Frankfurt - Los Angeles Boeing 747 Cockpit View [HD] - YouTube
View of instruments only
FIRST OFFICER IN ACTION! (APPROACH SBEG) - YouTube
Pilot view landing in poor weather.
Bad Weather Landing Brussels Cockpit B737-500 - YouTube
I was inferring they were useful to view other parts of the aircraft, ie cargo and engines, as mentioned in an earlier post.
Multicameras in cockpit
Frankfurt - Los Angeles Boeing 747 Cockpit View [HD] - YouTube
View of instruments only
FIRST OFFICER IN ACTION! (APPROACH SBEG) - YouTube
Pilot view landing in poor weather.
Bad Weather Landing Brussels Cockpit B737-500 - YouTube
To them, a cockpit video could answer some questions, and that is useful (far more than what you suggest, Sir, in the case of an accident investigation).
Last edited by mickjoebill; 16th May 2012 at 14:16.
This seems another hamster wheel.
Just remember that everything you add into a cockpit to aide interpretation only works when it does as proven and intended.
likewise hidden failures and confusion are also part of our lives among technological improvements.
but all this has been covered in earlier threads, so there is nothing new to discuss
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: East of West and North of South
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cockpitvisit:
Why does a pilot's job require more privacy than e.g. a flight attendant?
...
Every cashier's office with a just few thousand bucks at stake is equipped with a camera recorder today, but a pilot's office with several hundred lives at stake isn't???
...
In my opinion as a cowardly paying pax, pilots willing to sacrifice safety for a little bit of their own privacy simply don't belong in the cockpit.
...
Even though I personally fail to see any reason for pilots to expect some super privacy. Isn't a cockpit camera (with discipline use allowed) similar to riding with a check pilot every time?
...
Paying passengers on some airlines are routinely observed by a video camera from the cockpit door - should I expect my nose picking onboard the plane to appear on youtube too?
Why does a pilot's job require more privacy than e.g. a flight attendant?
...
Every cashier's office with a just few thousand bucks at stake is equipped with a camera recorder today, but a pilot's office with several hundred lives at stake isn't???
...
In my opinion as a cowardly paying pax, pilots willing to sacrifice safety for a little bit of their own privacy simply don't belong in the cockpit.
...
Even though I personally fail to see any reason for pilots to expect some super privacy. Isn't a cockpit camera (with discipline use allowed) similar to riding with a check pilot every time?
...
Paying passengers on some airlines are routinely observed by a video camera from the cockpit door - should I expect my nose picking onboard the plane to appear on youtube too?
From what you are suggesting, the pilots should be recorded because possible misconduct could be revealed (like a cashier stealing from the register), and hence every flight would be like a check flight. That would require someone to actually watch every recording. Big news for you, that is not done with voice recordings either, nor is it the purpose of those. However, we are being "watched" already with data recordings that a being stored on every flight and reviewed if anything is out of the ordinary. That is actually quite enough (combined with the semi- and annual-checks) to catch someone who regularly disregard the operating procedures.
Flight attendants and passengers are not being observed by means of cameras. The entry door to the cockpit is, however. There are no cameras in the cabin, and the there are no cameras that are directed at Flight attendants work places in particular. If a Flight attendant or a passenger passes by the area of the cockpit entrance door, they will briefly appear on a monitor in the cockpit (when/if switched on, mostly not), and this will not be recorded or stored in any way. The purpose of these cameras, are to allow the pilots to identify persons standing in front of the door without having to leave their seats to look through the peephole, not to observe what the Flight Attendants are doing nor to observe what's going on in the cabin. These cameras are not suitable for either.
So let's get back to the point, post-accident use (not check ride or to catch undisciplined pilots scratching their belly and picking their nose). Let's talk the real interesting, economical feasibility vs. achieved increase in safety. To equip every airline in the world with such system would cost an astronomical amount. Safety benefit? Close to none. First it would not prevent accidents from happening. You would have to wait for an accident, that would be unsolvable by any other means but such a camera system. How many accidents have we had in, say, the last 20 years of such kind? Secondly, the recorded evidence would have to be of such kind, that lesson could be learned that would increase safety. We are in this case talking a microscopic chance that anything revolutionary could come from such recordings. All at a gigantic cost which could have been used elsewhere to enhance safety.
When someone with a profile like yours (registered for 10 years, obviously not a professional and only 15 posts) make controversial posts like this, I get curious and click "find more posts by user". I see that you are also disgruntled that pilots don't like to go through body scanners (with unknown health effects when done every single day for an entire career) or being "felt up" by security personnel every day before going to work. Ending up in a absolutely disrespectful comment like this one:
Now you may argue that pilots are essential to flying a plane - but so are paying passengers! So there is absolutely no reason why pilots should be trusted any more an ordinary pax, sorry.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 79
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cosmo kramer
The authority of command comes with responsibilities. The travelling public will not put their lives in the hands of blind trust anymore.
The Coster Concordia accident is a good example of the great public displeasure that follows an accident.
Cockpit video, routine CVR monitoring and rigorous drugs and alcohol screening are the sort of compliance monitoring tools that the public will demand.
Or
They will insist that crews face the full weight of the law for endangering aircraft when accidents of near misses occur and treat errors as grounds for manslaughter charges.
Your call.
The authority of command comes with responsibilities. The travelling public will not put their lives in the hands of blind trust anymore.
The Coster Concordia accident is a good example of the great public displeasure that follows an accident.
Cockpit video, routine CVR monitoring and rigorous drugs and alcohol screening are the sort of compliance monitoring tools that the public will demand.
Or
They will insist that crews face the full weight of the law for endangering aircraft when accidents of near misses occur and treat errors as grounds for manslaughter charges.
Your call.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cockpit video, routine CVR monitoring and rigorous drugs and alcohol screening are the sort of compliance monitoring tools that the public will demand.
Or
They will insist that crews face the full weight of the law for endangering aircraft when accidents of near misses occur and treat errors as grounds for manslaughter charges.
Your call.
Or
They will insist that crews face the full weight of the law for endangering aircraft when accidents of near misses occur and treat errors as grounds for manslaughter charges.
Your call.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: new jersey
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cosmo kramer
The authority of command comes with responsibilities. The travelling public will not put their lives in the hands of blind trust anymore.
The Coster Concordia accident is a good example of the great public displeasure that follows an accident.
Cockpit video, routine CVR monitoring and rigorous drugs and alcohol screening are the sort of compliance monitoring tools that the public will demand.
Or
They will insist that crews face the full weight of the law for endangering aircraft when accidents of near misses occur and treat errors as grounds for manslaughter charges.
Your call.
The authority of command comes with responsibilities. The travelling public will not put their lives in the hands of blind trust anymore.
The Coster Concordia accident is a good example of the great public displeasure that follows an accident.
Cockpit video, routine CVR monitoring and rigorous drugs and alcohol screening are the sort of compliance monitoring tools that the public will demand.
Or
They will insist that crews face the full weight of the law for endangering aircraft when accidents of near misses occur and treat errors as grounds for manslaughter charges.
Your call.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: For me to know, and attractive women to find out.
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
20 years time we'll have Airline bloopers instead of 10 year old traffic cops repeated over & over again
Always wanted to be a star anyway
Always wanted to be a star anyway
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Thailand
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There will no doubt be an option on the pax console to select the cockpit video, and why not? I foresee Captains sporting their Breitlings on their right wrist, checking the time every five minutes, the FO his Rolex likewise on his left wrist. iPads, Samsung Galaxies, et al will be on prominent display. We can make it a revenue stream for pilots instead of for the company. Bring it on!
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: On the ground too often
Age: 48
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is however a fact of life that every London underground and bus passenger is being filmed. Coach drivers in the UK are also filmed - there was even a case recently when one lost his job as he was caught out eating on the job. (I am not saying that is necessarily a good thing but it is a fact of life).
One advantage of cameras in the cockpit is that junior crew members will find it easier to raise concerns about behaviours of more senior colleagues if they have evidence to back their claims. This may not seem so important in the UK, but in countries where the culture often places rank and hierarchy over safety this could make a big difference.
Golf-Sierra
One advantage of cameras in the cockpit is that junior crew members will find it easier to raise concerns about behaviours of more senior colleagues if they have evidence to back their claims. This may not seem so important in the UK, but in countries where the culture often places rank and hierarchy over safety this could make a big difference.
Golf-Sierra
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As mentioned before, future cockpit video recorders are NOT about filming seat occupants. Nobody's interested in seeing anybody pick one's nose. Tiny video cams would be beamed only on instrument panels, pedestal and overhead switch positions. Eventually this is how it will be played out; maybe not next month, maybe not next year, but soon. So we might as well get a grip on practical techno reality that's coming our way.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 79
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FDRs record instruments. Cockpit video of the crew will vastly enhance the value of CVRs and show how the crew were acting in the critical moments.
These rally need to be on every safety top 10.
These rally need to be on every safety top 10.
quote]
FDRs record instruments. Cockpit video of the crew will vastly enhance the value of CVRs and show how the crew were acting in the critical moments.
These rally need to be on every safety top 10.
[/quote]
Really ??
Then what do we drop off from the top ten?
FDRs record instruments. Cockpit video of the crew will vastly enhance the value of CVRs and show how the crew were acting in the critical moments.
These rally need to be on every safety top 10.
[/quote]
Really ??
Then what do we drop off from the top ten?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Goodwood, Sussex, UK
Age: 70
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what was that crash a while back when they think the PIC may have put his foot up on the central console and tripped the autopilot off accidentally..
I foresee Captains sporting their Breitlings on their right wrist ..
From what I've understood, video recorders are on the way in (whether we want them or not). I believe they will form part of the 'investigation package' ie. FDR, CVR and now CVR2.