AA Flight 93 cockpit recording

[Bubbette]

United Flight 93 cockpit recording

Do you have any thoughts on the airing of this tape? It doesn't seem like such a good idea to me.


"Plan to play Flight 93 tape assailed

Precedent feared in FBI decision to let victims’ families listen

By Don Phillips and Dan Eggen
THE WASHINGTON POST

WASHINGTON, April 16 — Many airline pilots and aviation experts are upset by the FBI’s decision to allow victims’ families to hear the cockpit voice recording from hijacked United Airlines Flight 93, fearing it could set a precedent that would allow such tapes to be used in a variety of ways after future airline crashes, officials said. "



http://www.msnbc.com/news/739277.asp?pne=msn

[Buster Hyman]

I don't have a definitive thought either way, but maybe some families feel the need to hear it. Perhaps for closure or other reasons.

I don't see any advantage to the general public hearing it, except morbid curiosity. Aircrew & airline staff may have some use in hearing it, if only to reinforce their own diligence to the prevention of such disgraceful events.

[Raas767]

The only people who should EVER hear cockpit transcipts are NTSB accident investigators and later, if applicable, as a training aide in CRM instruction.
It should never under any circumstances make it to the general public, no matter who they are.
It's the same reason why I strongly oppose cockpit video cameras. If the Government could give a 100% guarantee that it would never be shown outside of accident investigation cirlcles I might consider it, but we all know it's going to end up on CNN or some other so called "news" orginization.

[virgin]

I know 'what interests the public' isn't the same as 'in the public interest', but it's very telling that although there have only been a couple of replies, this thread has had 306 hits in less than 3 hours. I suspect that most people (like me) were expecting a link to a transcript of the tapes.
Generally, I agree tapes/transcripts should not be released outside the NTSB / AAIB or other official body. But I think what happened on board those aircraft on 9/11 is of legitimate interest to the public and they are entitled to know even if they are not part of our industry.

[RadarContact]

I think the only ones to have access to the voice rocorder itself should be the NTSB and FBI or local equivalents. Even other pilots should never (have to) listen to the actual recording. Did it once and was most disturbed for quite a while thereafter! A transcript shoul suffice for CRM and other training purposes!

[hatsoff]

I wonder if the tapes could throw some light on this
http://www.flight93crash.com/second-...crash-site.htm

[Tin Kicker]

Listen to the flight recorders here:

American flight 11 CVR

United Airlines flight 93 CVR

Just MHO but as long as "the public", as they are often dismissively called here, are paying to fly with airlines and trusting their lives to us, and until pilot error is completely eliminated as a contributory element in accidents then I think that they damn well have a right to know.

By all means protect our irrelevant personal comments in the cockpit - the technology exists to do that. But I personally think the idea that we're due a Godgiven right to secrecy when we're given responsibility for people's lives is b*llsh!t. What have you got to hide? If you want secrecy go to Singapore. And incidentally if you clicked the links above (surprise) then ask yourself why - and I'm sorry but "I'm a pilot" isn't good enough.

[Capt Pit Bull]

What about the history of these things. CVRs are there for accident investigation, and are accepted by the pilot workforce largely because of assurances that these details are not used in criminal proceding against the crew or released to the general public.

We know why these aircraft crashed. I'd also support criminal investigators attempting to gather evidence or intelligence against the terrorists. But thats as far as it goes.

Tin Kicker, your point is well made. However, its not as though we are the only people holding others lives in our hands, or making safety critical decisions.

But by logical extension, I will accept that any individual can have CVR details of my flight, if and only if they agree to carry a recorder of all their work activities and allow me access to that.

For example, I might reasonably expect to see a transcript of all the design meetings of the engineers who designed the aircraft I fly, or the company trainers when they discuss the changes to operating procedures, or CAA staff discussing regulatory changes, or intelligence agencies assessments of terrorist threats, etc etc..

As per usual, the cockpit is perceived to be the place where accidents are caused, and as such the centre of interest for the public. And yet we all know that the cockpit just happens to be the place where the final link in the safety chain breaks.

If the general public is really interested, then they need to go and get a scientific, technical and operational education about airliners. Say by getting a pilots licence, at which point they might actually understand what was on the transcript.

Anything else in just sensationalism.

CPB

[GlueBall]

If you are troubled by CVR tapes going public, then be careful of what you say. Any accident involving death, injury or substantial property damage will involve insurance litigation and wrongful death lawsuits in a court of law. Court proceedings are in the public domain, so are NTSB reports. CVR data, including sounds other than conversations, are an intregal part in establishing an accident sequence.

And soon to follow are high tech cockpit cameras which will record not the pilots's faces, but the instrument panel, glareshield, overhead and pedestal views.

The object is to learn why airplanes crash and how to prevent recurrence. With hundreds of millions of dollars at stake in property damage and wrongful death lawsuits, the flying public has a right to know why airplanes crash, whether mechanical, pilot, or controller error. Therefore, the cockpits of $100+ Million Dollar jets are necessarily not "private offices."

[RadarContact]

Just MHO but as long as "the public", as they are often dismissively called here, are paying to fly with airlines and trusting their lives to us, and until pilot error is completely eliminated as a contributory element in accidents then I think that they damn well have a right to know.

The object is to learn why airplanes crash and how to prevent recurrence. With hundreds of millions of dollars at stake in property damage and wrongful death lawsuits, the flying public has a right to know why airplanes crash, whether mechanical, pilot, or controller error.

And listening to the last minutes of the cockpit crew trying to handle the situation and to prevent the, from our side of things, inevitable gives "the public" the knowledge of what exactly caused the event, right?

As stated above, this is pure sensationalism, the term not even coming close to what I would call it. There are trained experts to gather the little facts and pieces that eventually come together as the whole picture. I don't see where making the CVR recordings public helps anyone in doing that...

Would you like half the country listening intimately to your last minutes? (not that you would care much at that point..., granted)

[Tin Kicker]

No, I daresay the public won't be able to piece together what happened. It's not their job -- although I know that there are members of "the public" who are a damn sight more perceptive and intelligent than you might imagine.

I'm simply arguing that things shouldn't be kept secret. That way you can't claim to the public, which is already nervous enough about flying, that you're hiding anything.

Make the truth accessible and people will see it, then lose interest. Keep it hidden and the rumours will take over -- and even if the truth finally comes out, no-one will believe it. No-one wonders who killed Lincoln. Everyone wonders who killed JFK.

If I'm flying an aircraft I'm not doing passengers a favour. I'm taking responsibility for their safety. I think people have a right to know about my actions in their proper context. If I was flying Air China next week you can bet your @rse that I'd want to hear the CVR.

Incidentally, I notice on the Air China 767 thread that someone appears to have 'inside information' on corporate pressure, but somehow thinks they're performing a service by haughtily telling journalists not to bother enquiring. Talk about giving the impression of a cover-up. Talk about giving a bloodhound the first whiff of a scent.

If I'm considered responsible enough to be given command of a $100m jet and 200 people then I should also be mature enough to accept that I'm accountable to everyone who is thinking of getting on board a commercial aircraft. And I shouldn't be whinging about CVR tapes as though I'm part of some privileged society club member.

[Carnage Matey!]

What a load of rubbish Tin Kicker. If the public want to know what caused the accident then they can access the edited transcript of the recordings, but my voice is my business and they've no more right to hear it than they have to hear my conversations down the pub. They can have the pertinent facts and thats all. The CVR tapes should not be released as the purpose of this is to satisfy the ghoulish voyeurism of the public and the networks clamour for ratings. Perhaps you expect to be given a tour of ground zero just so you can be sure what really caused the tragedy? Or maybe you want to check out an execution close up, just to make sure that murderer's really fried! Thats in the public interest isn't it? The only right the public have is to an explanation of the accident, not the grizzly details of someones last moments in full stereo glory for their own entertainment.

[Max Angle]

Carnage Matey!,

Well put sir. CVR was introduced to aid in accident investigation and for no other reason. If the families want to hear them then I would just about go along with that, although it's not why the tapes where made. If the public want to hear them, then tough, they should not be allowed to. People nowadays moan on about "everyone has the right to......." and "it's my right to see....." and so on and so on. Everyone nowadays seems to have a right to everything, well you havn't, some things are still private and confidential and CVR tapes should be one of them.

[Tin Kicker]

You're right, Carnage. What could I have been thinking?

(i) When I'm in the pub I have the same responsibility to the travelling public as I have when I'm in the cockpit. The scenarios are, of course, perfectly comparable in every sense. My mistake.

(ii) You're absolutely correct. I should have known instinctively what happened at the WTC...you and everyone else were obviously imparted with divine knowledge on the whys and wherefores. Alas, I wasn't so gifted and had to rely on being shown via TV. I'm reassured to know that you stood your moral non-voyeuristic ground by refusing to watch any of it. That goes for the JFK assissination footage, the Holocaust evidence, every CVR recording ever made public, car accident caught on camera...etc...etc...you're a stronger man than I, Gunga Din.

(iii) The public have a right to an explanation to an accident, but don't need to hear/see any evidence for themselves. I agree completely. After all, when you've professional investigators taking charge (like the Egyptian CAA or the Silk Air team) there's certainly no need to worry about their version of events.

(iv) Edited transcripts and the printed word are perfectly adequate for putting over timing, context and meaning. Nice emoticon you've got there, by the way.

As for you Max Angle...you'd "just about" go along with the relatives being let in on it? Well how decent of you old chap. I'm sure if you were every unfortunate enough to find yourself responsible for an accident, the families would be forever indebted to your act of generosity. I personally wouldn't. If your "private and confidential" actions had caused one of my loved ones to suffer, I'd want the whole world to know what you were doing and why.

[Carnage Matey!]

Initial reports of the content of the tape alluded to the hijackers retreating to the flight deck and barricading themselves in when the passengers revolted. They also alluded to the hijackers arguing amongst themselves before what was interpreted as a decision to crash the aircraft. Given the scenario of a noisy 757 flight deck, a heated exchange between hijackers, a thick flight deck door and the pounding upon said door, it would seem unlikely that discernible individual voices would be detected by a single cockpit area microphone, which is probably all they had in the flight deck. If this is the case then allowing the families to listen to the tape is pointless. If it is not the case and voices can be discerned then I'm sure the highly skilled CVR experts of the NTSB, backed up by linguistics experts, would be in a much better position to analyse the tapes and reveal the information stored upon them. In the extremely unlikely event that a family member was required to identify the voice they can be played excerpts of the tape with non-pertinent sounds filtered out. I may be wrong but I don't see how the families will be helped by listening to a noisy flight deck, hijackers shouting in arabic, a thudding door, lots of engine noise and GPWS warnings.

I don't know much at all about the legal system of the USA but I believe in the UK it's is possible for judges to order that evidence presented in court is not reported by the media. Perhaps this part of the evidence could be presented in a closed court? Its also possible that a transcript could be provided and only excerpts pertinent to the prosecution and defence cases could be played. There's more than one way to skin a cat and I suspect the various legal teams could make there points without replaying the whole unedited tapes to the nation.

As for your points tin kicker

1) My voice is still my business, nobody elses. Transcripts will suffice. If you've argued with your wife that morning does that mean they should have a recording of that? What if thats what caused your heart attack which started the chain of events? Your key word was trusting. You are trusted to fly the aircraft. The accident investigators are trusted to reveal the truth to the best of their understanding (and the NTSB do). Thats how the system works. Or perhaps you would like all the passengers to sit on the flight deck just to make sure you don't mess it up? Remember CVRs are only in place because we trust that they won't be aired on TV. If you're so big on trust, next time I fly with you I ask that you reel off the contents of your medicine cabinet, just in case there's something prohibited in there that might impair your performance and jeopardise my safety. Its my right.

2) I heard all about Sept 11th on a crackly BBC radio and believed it, even though the information was unclear and nobody really knew what was happening. I also saw the White House being blown up by a giant UFO on TV, but that was just a film and I didn't believe that. Airing the tapes will not reduce the speculation, conspiracy theories or 'cover-up' claims. Those who chose to believe will believe, those who don't won't. Few, if any, minds will be changed, little will be gained but many will be distressed. A pointless exercise. I don't need to hear a recording to tell me that 4 suspiscious arabs were on board that plane and it crashed, I can draw my own conclusions.

3) The investigation bodies are independent, if you don't trust their interpretation, hire your own expert witness. If the police hold DNA evidence against you do you want to analyse it personally, or would you get an expert? I'll wager you don't speak arabic, none of the jurors speak arabic (or they wouldn't be on the jury) and the judge won't speak arabic. Only the expert witnesses will understand the tape, only they should listen to it. You're not the judge, it's none of your damn business.

4) I'm glad you agree with me. Edited transcripts and the printed word are perfectly adequate for putting over timing, content and meaning. Ever see the NTSBs video reconstructions of the 737 hardover incidents? They were animated videos showing the aircraft flight path, control inputs, cockpit instrument data with subtitles of the CVR recordings. Ideal for the job. I refer you to point 3. Unless you speak arabic, the CVR will only reveal timing, some content and a hotly disputed interpretation of meaning. Thats an interpretation you can't make, so why your need to hear them? Nice sarcasm you've got there by the way.

[Raas767]

I can't believe what I am reading here! Airline pilots actually advocating the publics right to listen to aircrew performing thier duties just prior to death! Unbelievable!
In the U.S. we have something called "The freedom of Information Act". Unless it is classified as secret by the Government there is access to the information. Like someone said before, if you dig for it you will find the transcript but under NO circumstances should CVR conversations be aired to the public because, if nothing else, it does not serve a purpose. The reason for CVR and FDR is for accident investigation. PERIOD.
Anything else is pure sensationalism weather it's 911 or SR 111.

[N380UA]

Carnage Matey!

I wholeheartedly, absolutely agree with all of your points. Under normal circumstances; But these are not! We investigate such accidents to - 1. bring closure to the relatives and friends of those that passed away. – 2. to further improve the safety and quality of air travel. On both occasions, the public at large does not need to be confronted with the details, a summary of the results and if applicable any actions to prevent such incident should be enough information.

However in this case the scope is reaching much further than in any other case ever - it’s global. Not just the United States has felt the impact but for the first time in the history of NATO, the 5th amendment has been called into effect calling an attack on one – an attack on all. Now a coalition force is in Afghanistan (again in the news today, Canadian troops killed due to friendly fire). International Navies are patrolling the Arabian Sea and Air forces are flying sorties a half a world away. As it seems today, it won’t get any better for another while.

In the meantime though, I would like to know exactly what exactly my friends and countryman are fighting for. “Fight global terrorism” - I know! But that is too superficial, I want intelligence, I want to know who the enemy is and how he does what he does. (Whoever the enemy might be in consideration of all of the conspiracy theories.)

Again Carnage, I’d agree with you any other time but this calls for a more open and global view of the events of September 11. Therefore, I’d say yes, I’d like to hear the tapes or at lease have an unedited written transcript.

[RadarContact]

So now it's "I need to know all the facts, what they did, said, what they had for breakfast and what underwear they were wearing so that I can fully and heartily agree to my country's military forces taking action against the terrorists of this world..."

Yeah, it's your f.... right!

Just to prevent most of the inevitable responses to this: Yes, that was very upfront, and certainly not of best style...

But where do some people gain the implicitness of having a right to anything?

... 10 mins and a cup of coffee later ...

by Tin Kicker(iii) The public have a right to an explanation to an accident, but don't need to hear/see any evidence for themselves. I agree completely. After all, when you've professional investigators taking charge (like the Egyptian CAA or the Silk Air team) there's certainly no need to worry about their version of events.

I deny noone the access to the truth given by a source they can trust. I do deny people's (and I include myself here) access to the raw data, where it compromises the personal rights of privacy of those involved.
For this there are institutions and authorities that have been put in charge by your representatives.

Regarding the allegation of feeling somehow "elite". Yes, we are an elite! Not in the way you mean it, perhaps. But very few people are so closely looked upon, so regularly examined regarding their capabilities and skills, and so closely monitored by everybody and their neighbour who fancy to give their comment to every action we do.
Are there any CVR's in public buses? In trains (don't know here, honestly)? On cruisers (probably yes, coming to think of it...)?

CVR's were originaly meant to:
a) facilitate incident/accident analysis
b) enable designers to re-evaluate their concepts of the working environment
c) be used as a source for constant improvement of skills (learning from other's mistakes)

Recently, this list has received some additions:

d) Try to blame the pilots (come on, they MUST have said something suspicious)
e) satisfy the morbid interests of many and therefore the media
f) ... on second thought, I don't want to continue at this point...

[stagger]

Raas767

I can't believe what I am reading here! Airline pilots actually advocating the publics right to listen to aircrew performing thier duties just prior to death! Unbelievable!

As I wrote before this case is very unusual - it's not about the public's right to listen to "aircrew performing thier duties just prior to death." It seems likely that final minutes of the tape contain the voices of, not the aircrew, but the hijackers who had taken control of the aircraft and perhaps also the voices of the passengers who tried to regain control from them. It's a unique situation.

If it is to be used in the prosecution of Zacarias Moussaoui then it may very well have to enter the public domain in the courtroom. The hijackers may very well say things that could be used to establish that he was indeed a co-conspirator.

This is not a case of the CVR tape being used to discipline or prosecute aircrew so I don't think its use in open court would set a dangerous precedent.

The reason for CVR and FDR is for accident investigation. PERIOD.

I know this is unlikely but what if the CVR in this case was absolutely crucial for the succesful prosecution of Moussaoui?

[N380UA]

Radar my friend, don’t let yourself be caught with your pants down.

Be it pro or con to this subject, one ought to be able to have a critical look at it.

BTW, no problems with being up front and straight.

If a country is being attack then it should defend it self, if a country is being attack and in part, relies on others to fight the war for it, I must say that a critical look at the situation is justified.
To pre-empt any confusion, I am not afraid to stand up to terror or any other form of threat, and please don’t confuse crowdedness with pacifism.

It has nothing to do with their underwear and I couldn’t care less if they had a cup of regular or decaf for breakfast. What I do want to know – rightfully so me think - is the total picture of the situation. It is no longer a question of commitment to fight terror (nor should that ever be), we are far beyond that. Of course, a swift reaction was necessary as well, BUT as I alluded to earlier, the world, who has committed it self in fight against terror, must know all the details as they become available. After all, we call it a war! So please let me have all the details of reasoning any justification to call this a war.

Again, no professional member here wants to second guess what the “real” flight crew did nor are any other CVR’s of interest other then already mentioned. And I don’t think that people have any morbid desires to listen to the plane going down.