Jump seat pilot tries to shut down engines in-flight?
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: one country, one system
Age: 55
Posts: 505
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe Mahogany is right, pilot-less aircraft will come, and rather sooner than later.
Initially, driver-less/ semi-automated cars will become a normal sight, and tear down mental barriers of passengers with it. Pilots will then be degraded to some sort of tube driver: monitoring a more or less fully automated and fool proof system. In solitude, for mediocre pay. Complete replacement will follow, but doesn't really matter anymore, the job scope will be so boring it will come as relief.
Nobody entering this industry today in his 20's will retire as a pilot.
Initially, driver-less/ semi-automated cars will become a normal sight, and tear down mental barriers of passengers with it. Pilots will then be degraded to some sort of tube driver: monitoring a more or less fully automated and fool proof system. In solitude, for mediocre pay. Complete replacement will follow, but doesn't really matter anymore, the job scope will be so boring it will come as relief.
Nobody entering this industry today in his 20's will retire as a pilot.
Last edited by Sam Ting Wong; 3rd Nov 2023 at 02:28.
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: north of Harlow and south of Cambridge
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
I disagree
I believe Mahogany is right, pilot-less aircraft will come, and rather sooner than later.
Initially, driver-less/ semi-automated cars will become a normal sight, and tear down mental barriers of passengers with it. Pilots will then be degraded to some sort of tube driver: monitoring a more or less fully automated and fool proof system. In solitude, for mediocre pay. Complete replacement will follow, but doesn't really matter anymore, the job scope will be so boring it will come as relief.
Nobody entering this industry today in his 20's will retire as a pilot.
Initially, driver-less/ semi-automated cars will become a normal sight, and tear down mental barriers of passengers with it. Pilots will then be degraded to some sort of tube driver: monitoring a more or less fully automated and fool proof system. In solitude, for mediocre pay. Complete replacement will follow, but doesn't really matter anymore, the job scope will be so boring it will come as relief.
Nobody entering this industry today in his 20's will retire as a pilot.
Military drones, UAVs, a few trains on fixed tracks between terminals at airports.
Will there be doctor-less hospitals? Cook-less restaurants?
Perhaps the best places to start "driverless" would be the House of Reptiles and House of Snakes in Washington and the House of Penquins and House of Lards in London.
How else will they be able to make "idiot" movies like "Plane"? (that just came out on Sky TV).
Last edited by 70 Mustang; 3rd Nov 2023 at 04:16.
You are advocating for what is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Just out of curiosity: is Cathay Pacific deliberately driving their pilots into the ground, and driving them away, in order to make way for a pilotless service for their paying passengers?
Just out of curiosity: is Cathay Pacific deliberately driving their pilots into the ground, and driving them away, in order to make way for a pilotless service for their paying passengers?
I believe Mahogany is right, pilot-less aircraft will come, and rather sooner than later.
Initially, driver-less/ semi-automated cars will become a normal sight, and tear down mental barriers of passengers with it. Pilots will then be degraded to some sort of tube driver: monitoring a more or less fully automated and fool proof system. In solitude, for mediocre pay. Complete replacement will follow, but doesn't really matter anymore, the job scope will be so boring it will come as relief.
Nobody entering this industry today in his 20's will retire as a pilot.
Initially, driver-less/ semi-automated cars will become a normal sight, and tear down mental barriers of passengers with it. Pilots will then be degraded to some sort of tube driver: monitoring a more or less fully automated and fool proof system. In solitude, for mediocre pay. Complete replacement will follow, but doesn't really matter anymore, the job scope will be so boring it will come as relief.
Nobody entering this industry today in his 20's will retire as a pilot.
Self driving cars--unlikely to succeed until human driven cars are banned--the idiot factor from other drivers/pedestrians is just too high for any sort of computer programming to predict and cope with.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 71
Posts: 851
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the linked article, this odd paragraph:
The passengers in the lawsuit have asked for a public explanation from Alaska Air and Horizon Air as to why the pilot was not subjected to preflight security screening.
I’ve not seen any evidence that the Emerson was not subjected to the same preflight security screening as any other jump seat occupant. It’s not as if he brought a weapon or explosive into the cockpit. The dangerous item that slipped past the security screening was Emerson’s brain.
The passengers in the lawsuit have asked for a public explanation from Alaska Air and Horizon Air as to why the pilot was not subjected to preflight security screening.
I’ve not seen any evidence that the Emerson was not subjected to the same preflight security screening as any other jump seat occupant. It’s not as if he brought a weapon or explosive into the cockpit. The dangerous item that slipped past the security screening was Emerson’s brain.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 71
Posts: 851
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BFSGrad
The entire lawsuit filing is absurd . . . but I'm trying not to waste electronic ink on it. Several previous pointless lawsuits have been derided here. Perhaps this one reaches some new low for ignorance.
The entire lawsuit filing is absurd . . . but I'm trying not to waste electronic ink on it. Several previous pointless lawsuits have been derided here. Perhaps this one reaches some new low for ignorance.
‘Is this hell?’ Alaska pilot accused of trying to crash a plane tells his story | The Seattle Times
The pilot said he knew he was having mental health issues and depression and see a therapist, but was afraid to report it for fear of being grounded by the FAA.
I'm thinking we need better ways to deal with pilots who self-report health issues - especially mental health issues. Last thing the industry needs is another 'Germanwings" catastrophe.
The pilot said he knew he was having mental health issues and depression and see a therapist, but was afraid to report it for fear of being grounded by the FAA.
I'm thinking we need better ways to deal with pilots who self-report health issues - especially mental health issues. Last thing the industry needs is another 'Germanwings" catastrophe.
This man, Emerson, is not a criminal. He is obviously sick and idea of taking mushrooms took him down - but it could be something else some days later. He should not be in jail but under treatment in medical institution. and charge of 83 attemped murder is beyond belief - even if he succeeded in switching engines off, it would not be the end of it. There were two able pilots in the cockpit and cabin crew was available to help put him under control - quite different situation than Germanwings. From what I read he was obviously excellent pilot and a good man, but mental problems took him down. Which of course does not make his action negligible - mentally sick people in the cockpit are ticking time bombs. So the question is how he ended up in the cockpit in such a state? Fear from losing his medical/licence/livehood brought him to self-medication instead of proper tretment. And there was no safety net below him that would prevent a catastrophe in his life if he honestly did what should have been done - but this is the only way to prevent another Germanwings and not just simply destroying any pilot`s life if s/he declares mental problems. But there is another, more difficult thing to solve: enormous pressure on pilots, as they are struggling with ever increasing demands from employers and with huge burden of training debt around their necks. No wonder that here and there someone succumbs to all the pressure/weight on their shoulders. Just add some financial issue or family matter or sick kid, and it might be the last straw. We went too far.
Last edited by hoistop; 13th Nov 2023 at 10:10.
(just making up figures to illustrate the point).
Airlines claim that safety is their primary concern, but surely cash flow and profit is. Otherwise, why do they continually run with not quite enough aircrew, meaning that those aircrew who are employed have to work intensive rosters and long days, starting or finishing in the small hours ?
It doesn’t come down to fare price but company procedures and the calibre of staff, not only HR but the whole management team including pilots and training.<br />Trust me I’ve seen and experienced diabolical treatment as did my wife in « expensive » flag carriers..one only have to have a quick gander at that lot in Hong Kong and what they post going back to the 49ers when the rot started.<br /&
Last edited by blind pew; 20th Nov 2023 at 16:52.
You might want to re-think that assertion because lying on the Medical Certificate application is, in fact, a Federal crime. You can get 5 years just for that. So can your AME if he falsifies it. Looks like this guy obtained a Medical not too long ago but is telling the cops he's been feeling depressed for a much longer period. Not looking good for him being "not a criminal".
Last edited by PukinDog; 20th Nov 2023 at 18:00.
Not looking good for him being "not a criminal"
I speak from experience, following an airborne event I spent eighteen months visiting the doc with nebulous complaints, in the end I asked my good Lady to get me to hospital where they bombed me out, four months of treatment and was back in the cockpit, on anti depressants. Before hospital admission got to see why folk find the suicide door as a viable way out. Know of a 747 skipper who was on anti depressants in another country whose regulator took an enlightened approach to the subject, and a number of aviators in my own country.
A lot of criminals flying for the airlines, and others, going by that proposition Pukin, you can find a lot of discussion here about keeping your DAME and private doctor well apart. Unfortunately the FAA, from what I read, seems somewhat backward in its approach to mental health, locally our regulator allows the use of anti depressants and keep flying if the individual case warrants. Some seem to treat mental issues as an axe murderer just waiting to explode, there is a vast range of symptoms to the disease, each requiring a tailored treatment.
I speak from experience, following an airborne event I spent eighteen months visiting the doc with nebulous complaints, in the end I asked my good Lady to get me to hospital where they bombed me out, four months of treatment and was back in the cockpit, on anti depressants. Before hospital admission got to see why folk find the suicide door as a viable way out. Know of a 747 skipper who was on anti depressants in another country whose regulator took an enlightened approach to the subject, and a number of aviators in my own country.
I speak from experience, following an airborne event I spent eighteen months visiting the doc with nebulous complaints, in the end I asked my good Lady to get me to hospital where they bombed me out, four months of treatment and was back in the cockpit, on anti depressants. Before hospital admission got to see why folk find the suicide door as a viable way out. Know of a 747 skipper who was on anti depressants in another country whose regulator took an enlightened approach to the subject, and a number of aviators in my own country.
There are treatments for some mental health issues that are approved by the FAA, including the use of some specific antidepressants. Not sure if they're "backwards", as they also take the individuals on a case-by-case basis for review. One's AME can't issue the medical certificate, but rather they make a request for Special Issuance by the main Aeromedical Branch in Oklahoma City. (this process isn't reserved for mental health issues, by the way, but often required for physical health issues after certain procedures) If interested, here https://www.faa.gov/ame_guide/app_pr...ntidepressants. You may be able to determine if the FAA would also have approved you as your local regulator did.
In this way (avenues back) it's no different than having a heart, blood pressure, or other physical condition that is initially disqualifying and potentially career-ending, at which point one who works with the AME using treatments, procedures, and medications that are FAA- approved. This ensures clear records when the review for approval time comes. The good news is that the treatments and list of medications are far more liberal than what was in the past. Too many get into trouble lying on their medical application for things that aren't permanently grounding anymore, and plenty are flying around with conditions that back in 1990 would've put them involuntarily on a different career path. Yes there are hoops to jump through but that goes with the territory in this profession and always will, we just feel less confident with less control if it's a medical condition rather than hoops that directly measures our performance.
Psilocybin, however, will never become an FAA-approved medication, clinical trial success or not. It's not as if little is known about the stuff and other hallucinogens, and these current studies aren't the first. For 25 years even the CIA was seeking-out and experimenting with them, lab-produced and natural, tromping through jungles and mountains around the world in search of native plants, potions, and concoctions that could potentially be tweaked for use as a "truth serum" or a key to unlocking brainwashing. Research wasn't limited to LSD. By the 70's, however, they had given up that chase because the substances were always found to produce unpredictable results with a high probability of negative psychoactive effects even under tightly-controlled conditions which rendered them, for their purposes, worthless. These negatives have been known for a long time.
Those well-known negatives are why present-day clinical trials have a very narrow aim; to explore psilocybin's potential use as a medication of last resort for cases resistant to other, safer and more predictable treatments for PTSD, Depression, etc. Even if approved for medical use, it will never be an initial go-to medication. That would be like immediately doing heart transplants on patients that could be treated with an angioplasty or a bypass. No matter what, you'll never see psilocybin or similar hallucinogens on the FAA's list of approved medications.
I made the point I did to Hoistop because I saw his Location was listed as "Europe" and wasn't sure if he realized that on a US FAA Medical application providing false answers to any question is indeed a prosecutable crime under the US Code, stated as such right where one signs their name to the document. I've held a couple foreign Medical certificates in order to fly non-US reg aircraft but not a European one so don't know if it's considered a crime there. I was just trying to provide some context for him as to how the US Government sees it. Whether or not the Feds choose to prosecute after the actual facts are known and not just we've heard, remains to be seen. On the issue of falsifying, however, I believe it will be the stick not the carrot.
I'm aware some don't disclose, but no one should ever mistake me for being the morality police. People make their own choice knowing the risks, and if it doesn't end well for them they can't say they weren't warned. There seems to be an undertone that being grounded, or the fear of being grounded, is reserved for disclosing mental health conditions or treatments when, in fact, the same applies to any health issue or treatment. I don't believe there will ever be an exception made for mental health issues that guarantees one's Medical Certificate remains valid while they sort out the case and it goes through review.
This guy will feel pretty dumb if finds out that there was an FAA-approved avenue he could have taken instead of going straight for an illegal substance the FAA will never approve just because the FAA drug screenings don't test for it.
Last edited by PukinDog; 21st Nov 2023 at 20:07.
Thanks for the facts re the FAA position Pukin. 
Re the autonomous aircraft, if the the pax won't accept a one pilot airliner I doubt very much they will accept zero.
Commercial airline flights are currently required to have at least two pilots - but some airlines, manufacturers and regulators are exploring reduced-crew and single-pilot operations in order to cut costs.
However, new data released by the Australian and International Pilots Association (AIPA) shows reducing the number of pilots on a flight deck would be extremely unpopular with the public.
A total of 89% of Australians would feel less safe boarding a flight with one pilot at the controls instead of two or more, according to a Redbridge Group poll of 1,022 Australian adults.
That includes 65% who would feel much less safe and a further 24% who would feel a little less safe. Only two per cent would feel safer.
The polling also revealed:
“Flying is the safest mode of transport because airlines have redundancy in the form of at least two engines, electric and hydraulic systems, flight management computers, and, crucially, two pilots.
“A single pilot could become incapacitated, fatigued or simply overwhelmed in an emergency at 35,000 ft and 950 km/h.
“Reducing the number of pilots required on the flight deck undoubtedly reduces safety margins for the passengers, crew and the wider public.
“This polling shows the public understands that, and therefore any airline which decides to adopt reduced-crew operations stands to lose customers to competitors offering a safer trip.
“The only safe way to fly is with at least two well-trained and well-rested pilots at the controls at all times.”
Several airlines including Cathay Pacific and Lufthansa are working on reduced crew operations. The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) is also working with manufacturers to study the regulatory changes required for reduced crew and single pilot operations.
On 27 March 2023, a collection of pilots’ unions from around the world formed a global Coalition against single pilot operations. In a strongly worded statement, the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA) said “an aggressive corporate-led lobbying campaign was targeting regulators around the world” to try to make single-pilot operations a reality. The campaign can be accessed at the website: www.safetystartswith2.com
Re the autonomous aircraft, if the the pax won't accept a one pilot airliner I doubt very much they will accept zero.
AIPA Media Release:
Passengers reject single-pilot flights: new poll
The vast majority of Australians would feel less safe and be more hesitant to book a ticket for a flight with only one pilot, new polling reveals.Commercial airline flights are currently required to have at least two pilots - but some airlines, manufacturers and regulators are exploring reduced-crew and single-pilot operations in order to cut costs.
However, new data released by the Australian and International Pilots Association (AIPA) shows reducing the number of pilots on a flight deck would be extremely unpopular with the public.
A total of 89% of Australians would feel less safe boarding a flight with one pilot at the controls instead of two or more, according to a Redbridge Group poll of 1,022 Australian adults.
That includes 65% who would feel much less safe and a further 24% who would feel a little less safe. Only two per cent would feel safer.
The polling also revealed:
- 83% would be more hesitant to book a commercial airline ticket if they knew there was only one pilot at the controls.
- 88% believe Australian airlines should rule out single pilot operations for commercial flights.
- 88% believe the Australian government should mandate at least two pilots on the flight deck at all times for all commercial airline flights operating within Australian airspace.
- Only 21% of Australians are aware of the push to reduce the required number of pilots on a flight deck.
“Flying is the safest mode of transport because airlines have redundancy in the form of at least two engines, electric and hydraulic systems, flight management computers, and, crucially, two pilots.
“A single pilot could become incapacitated, fatigued or simply overwhelmed in an emergency at 35,000 ft and 950 km/h.
“Reducing the number of pilots required on the flight deck undoubtedly reduces safety margins for the passengers, crew and the wider public.
“This polling shows the public understands that, and therefore any airline which decides to adopt reduced-crew operations stands to lose customers to competitors offering a safer trip.
“The only safe way to fly is with at least two well-trained and well-rested pilots at the controls at all times.”
Several airlines including Cathay Pacific and Lufthansa are working on reduced crew operations. The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) is also working with manufacturers to study the regulatory changes required for reduced crew and single pilot operations.
On 27 March 2023, a collection of pilots’ unions from around the world formed a global Coalition against single pilot operations. In a strongly worded statement, the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA) said “an aggressive corporate-led lobbying campaign was targeting regulators around the world” to try to make single-pilot operations a reality. The campaign can be accessed at the website: www.safetystartswith2.com
I made the point I did to Hoistop because I saw his Location was listed as "Europe" and wasn't sure if he realized that on a US FAA Medical application providing false answers to any question is indeed a prosecutable crime under the US Code, stated as such right where one signs their name to the document. I've held a couple foreign Medical certificates in order to fly non-US reg aircraft but not a European one so don't know if it's considered a crime there. I was just trying to provide some context for him as to how the US Government sees it. Whether or not the Feds choose to prosecute after the actual facts are known and not just we've heard, remains to be seen. On the issue of falsifying, however, I believe it will be the stick not the carrot.
I'm aware some don't disclose, but no one should ever mistake me for being the morality police. People make their own choice knowing the risks, and if it doesn't end well for them they can't say they weren't warned. There seems to be an undertone that being grounded, or the fear of being grounded, is reserved for disclosing mental health conditions or treatments when, in fact, the same applies to any health issue or treatment. I don't believe there will ever be an exception made for mental health issues that guarantees one's Medical Certificate remains valid while they sort out the case and it goes through review.
This guy will feel pretty dumb if finds out that there was an FAA-approved avenue he could have taken instead of going straight for an illegal substance the FAA will never approve just because the FAA drug screenings don't test for it.
I'll just point out that there is a material difference between not reporting a somatic (physical) illness/disablement and a mental illness. In the case of a mental illness, the part of the body responsible for making and taking decisions is not working properly, which means that your ability to make a rational choice can be affected.
People who are depressed experience reality in a very different way to people who are not depressed. If you have not been through it yourself, it is difficult to appreciate the difference. People make poor 'life decisions' when depressed.
This is not saying that people who have mental health problems should have a free pass to lie on medical declarations. Far from it. However, if you want people to be honest, basic psychology tells us that it is better to reward honesty than punish dishonesty. People need to believe that there is a supportive path back, which is why Megan's disclosure is important.
The reality is that some, or maybe even many, will not make it back. How that is dealt with in a fashion that doesn't leave people feeling that their useful life is over is a difficult question, but one that needs answering. Depression erases hope. If people are to report problems, they need a well-founded belief that their future is manageable.
Again, I am not a professional pilot, my experience is in other fields. But I would like well-rested, well-adjusted, rational professionals in the hot seat.
Again, I am not a professional pilot, my experience is in other fields. But I would like well-rested, well-adjusted, rational professionals in the hot seat.
The greater mental health risk to flying a plane is unsubstantiated confidence, which causes crashes on the regular. I'd rather have someone on medication for depression in Row 0 than Captain Confidence at the controls.
Mech, our regulator did a study on pilots who were on anti depressants and compared them to the rest as to how safety was affected, they found the anti depressant lot had a better safety record, but because of the small sample size they didn't give their findings any credence.
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Florida
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Appropriate Decision from Grand Jury
The jumpsuit pilot who had this mental health crisis has been charged with 83 counts of attempted murder. A grand jury in Oregon has chosen to bring a lesser charge against the pilot, a misdemeanor level crime with 83 counts of endangering another person. The felony charge of endangering an aircraft remains however. The pilot has remained in jail since the October incident.
https://www.opb.org/article/2023/12/...C%20a%20felony.
https://www.opb.org/article/2023/12/...C%20a%20felony.