View Poll Results: Should the jump seat be available for wannabe or family familiarisation flights?
Yes, the DfT rule is idiotic
1,740
89.19%
No, there is too much risk involved
182
9.33%
No opinion
29
1.49%
Voters: 1951. This poll is closed
DfT/CAA Jump Seat Restrictions
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The Sharp End.
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At long last there is some discussion on this crazy situation. The americans have 911 and then panic. Yes there have to be changes as a result of what happened, but it seems the the US can make the rules for all of us. Is there no one in the CAA who hasn't scratched their head and had a good look at this stupid situation????????????? Very annoying
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Danny you have realy hit the nail on the head with this thread the new regulations are no help what so ever in increasing security and in some cases REDUCE security.
The only security that is increased is the job security of the people who wrote the regualtions as these new rules will stop any chance of them taking any flack from the people who are realy driving this , the fleet street editors and we all know how much that bunch of parasites know about aviation security.
I cant understand how any aircrew can suport these regualtions ,I can only think that those who do have got carried away with the media frenzy and have not taken time to think over the situation or have such a low opinion of other crew members that there ability to co-operate with other crew menbers has to be drawn into question.
The bottom line is that an aircrew/ATC pass should be enough to permit a person to be on the flight deck .
If not what is this saying about the vetting that has taken place to issue the pass ?.
The only security that is increased is the job security of the people who wrote the regualtions as these new rules will stop any chance of them taking any flack from the people who are realy driving this , the fleet street editors and we all know how much that bunch of parasites know about aviation security.
I cant understand how any aircrew can suport these regualtions ,I can only think that those who do have got carried away with the media frenzy and have not taken time to think over the situation or have such a low opinion of other crew members that there ability to co-operate with other crew menbers has to be drawn into question.
The bottom line is that an aircrew/ATC pass should be enough to permit a person to be on the flight deck .
If not what is this saying about the vetting that has taken place to issue the pass ?.
Title? What title?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jump seat restrictions
Can I just comment that as a humble ppl and nurd who has enjoyed many cockpit visits and who has with no axe to grind in terms of being able to take people in a jump seat, that the ruling seems to me to smell like an attempt to try to make it look as if something positive is being done rather than an attempt to seriously achieve anything.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree very much with Danny on this one.
I'm an ATCO in TC, where, as you know, we do an awful lot of 'flying the aircraft' with speeds, using the aircraft performance etc. How are we meant to gain access to this info if we cannot talk to crews. No pax on the flight deck is fine, but there are alot of legitimate people who should be given access.
In the mean time keep unknown CAA Flight Inspectors off the flight deck until someone in authority shows some sense.
I'm an ATCO in TC, where, as you know, we do an awful lot of 'flying the aircraft' with speeds, using the aircraft performance etc. How are we meant to gain access to this info if we cannot talk to crews. No pax on the flight deck is fine, but there are alot of legitimate people who should be given access.
In the mean time keep unknown CAA Flight Inspectors off the flight deck until someone in authority shows some sense.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As most people in the industry seem to believe that these new regs are just so much window-dressing and will not do anything to enhance security, I was wondering if anyone from the DETR/CAA had put their head above the parapet to defend the introduction of this and possibly to give some idea of the thought that went into it before introduction.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to add my ATCO opinion, I've taken numerous fam flights over the past few years with the various airlines out of Gatwick and EVERY time I have learnt something about the aircraft or the way the companies operate. I have also been made to feel very welcome by the whole crew on every occasion for which I am always grateful and I let them know it! The fam flights are a unique opportunity as it is usually the only time ATCOs/Pilots meet face to face which gives both sides the chance to ask questions of each other. As for not allowing people in the flight deck who you work with nearly every day or have been married to for X years is ridiculous. If the commander of the aircraft can satisfy themselves that the 'visitor' in the jumpseat is genuine it should be his/her decision. Any one with Airport/Airline ID would presumably have had a counter terrorist check anyway! I for one would be quite happy to join the majority to 'petition' the CAA to be more flexible in the rules of flight deck access.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm just about to go on holiday with one of our franchise partners. It's very busy on the way down their and manic on the way back. The chances of me getting a J/S if I need it, remote.
I've got tickets with a one world memeber as backup. They're a company that doesn't even lock the door let alone ban J/S passengers.
I think this is rediculous especilly as everyone adopts such different policies.
It should always be the Skippers call, Yes or No, whether it's the Janitor or the CEO.
The DoT or whatever they call themselves these days don't have a clue.
Maybe they should do a jump seat fam flight!!!
Very Angry
I've got tickets with a one world memeber as backup. They're a company that doesn't even lock the door let alone ban J/S passengers.
I think this is rediculous especilly as everyone adopts such different policies.
It should always be the Skippers call, Yes or No, whether it's the Janitor or the CEO.
The DoT or whatever they call themselves these days don't have a clue.
Maybe they should do a jump seat fam flight!!!
Very Angry
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Complete madness, should:nt all forms of public transport have the same rules, a hijacked bus in a city centre or a ship packed full of explosives would or could have the same effect as 9/11, it is time the morons who legislate the rules lived in the real world & tackled the real issues instead of producing ridiculous rules.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
back to basics
I agree. Locked cabin door is dangerous. Try un-locking it. You cant because the smoke and fire is belching and after succesfully going through evacuation procedures time is against you. The two crewmembers are bumping against one another, blinded and desperate. The door suddenly opens and they see the exit and make it to the ramp. Who opened the door of the burning cockpit ? The jumpseater, the Captains 17 year old nephew !
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When this ruling was first muted several months back I wrote to the Minister responsible at the DTR outlining my own thoughts. My letter followed very much on the line of many of the posts above with particular emphasis that whilst most pilots agree that change has been necessary a compromise solution would be workable without affecting the goal ie. security! I asked questions such as: why does a NATS controller who has been security cleared pose a threat to security? Why does my wife of 20 years and my children pose a threat plus many other examples. I also pointed out that many people have access to a/c (cleaners, caterers, refuellers etc) who although they may hold an airside pass - how can we check the bona-fides of that person and as has been proved recently, getting airside clearance is not that difficult no matter what ones background is.
The answer I have received back is as expected in that none of my questions have been answered but also shows more than clearly that the people at the DTr have no idea.... to quote one part...
"The more people who are granted access to the flight deck......the more times the flight deck door is opened........." un quote.
Well obviously the minister has never been on a flight deck! I have carried many NATS controllers all over Europe who sit in the flight deck and generally have bladders that can last 2hrs!
My wife has sat up front for many a 11 hour sector and sits in the corner reading, sleeping and isn't constantly in and out of the cockpit.
Two final thoughts..... My brother recently gave me a full guided tour of one of our Navy's Destroyers, virtually full access and a great insight into how the Navy and a ship runs. In return he asked if there was any chance of getting a jump seat ride to see what my job is all about. You can imagine his surprise when I explained the rules......here is my brother who has probably had more access to classified material than most of us will ever have, has worked in the inner confines of the MOD but no......the DTR say he could be a security risk!!!
Finally....one of my colleagues who is about to retire has recently been reprimanded for allowing access to the flight deck to his life long friend, best man etc. How did the company find out.....a passenger wrote in to complain!
Right behind you on this one Danny.
The answer I have received back is as expected in that none of my questions have been answered but also shows more than clearly that the people at the DTr have no idea.... to quote one part...
"The more people who are granted access to the flight deck......the more times the flight deck door is opened........." un quote.
Well obviously the minister has never been on a flight deck! I have carried many NATS controllers all over Europe who sit in the flight deck and generally have bladders that can last 2hrs!
My wife has sat up front for many a 11 hour sector and sits in the corner reading, sleeping and isn't constantly in and out of the cockpit.
Two final thoughts..... My brother recently gave me a full guided tour of one of our Navy's Destroyers, virtually full access and a great insight into how the Navy and a ship runs. In return he asked if there was any chance of getting a jump seat ride to see what my job is all about. You can imagine his surprise when I explained the rules......here is my brother who has probably had more access to classified material than most of us will ever have, has worked in the inner confines of the MOD but no......the DTR say he could be a security risk!!!
Finally....one of my colleagues who is about to retire has recently been reprimanded for allowing access to the flight deck to his life long friend, best man etc. How did the company find out.....a passenger wrote in to complain!
Right behind you on this one Danny.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dublin Ireland
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys,
Is it possible that this decision was made on foot of some specific terrorist threat or intelligence?
I am shocked to hear of another piece of over the top legislation that will take away the freedom of the people its supposed to protect and will almost certainly not make a blind bit of difference in the future. My intrest in flying was sparked by a Jumpseat ride in an A330 which my uncle was a captain. I'm sure I'm not the first person this has happend to but its scary to think of all the people who might have also had an intrest sparked and will now be denied a chance.
Is it possible that this decision was made on foot of some specific terrorist threat or intelligence?
I am shocked to hear of another piece of over the top legislation that will take away the freedom of the people its supposed to protect and will almost certainly not make a blind bit of difference in the future. My intrest in flying was sparked by a Jumpseat ride in an A330 which my uncle was a captain. I'm sure I'm not the first person this has happend to but its scary to think of all the people who might have also had an intrest sparked and will now be denied a chance.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Oran
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with all of the comments which back danny's thread.
Some of you guys are already picking up the idea of fighting back by not allowing CAA to travel, I am also in the same mind.
There are other things we can do when these stupid rules come into force.
I for one now insist on an extra Cabin Attendant to be carried on my 767 flights, Her duties are to occupy the jump seat in case of crew incapacition, To guard / open the door when flight deck leave for calls of nature, Also I insist that a cabin crew member stays in the forward galley at all times to guard against passengers entering through the forward curtains, This of course means no passenger may use the forward toilet.
You see both the authorities and our employer's are happy to impliment new procedures so long as it does not cost too much money, But they fight against change if costs are involved.( Duty free shops, Cabin crew in forward galley where possible etc.).
So guys, When ever there is a change we don't like, We as aircraft commanders, can insist on procedures being implimented to make them think again.
If we stand together we will win, If we leave it for someone else to fight we will lose.
Some of you guys are already picking up the idea of fighting back by not allowing CAA to travel, I am also in the same mind.
There are other things we can do when these stupid rules come into force.
I for one now insist on an extra Cabin Attendant to be carried on my 767 flights, Her duties are to occupy the jump seat in case of crew incapacition, To guard / open the door when flight deck leave for calls of nature, Also I insist that a cabin crew member stays in the forward galley at all times to guard against passengers entering through the forward curtains, This of course means no passenger may use the forward toilet.
You see both the authorities and our employer's are happy to impliment new procedures so long as it does not cost too much money, But they fight against change if costs are involved.( Duty free shops, Cabin crew in forward galley where possible etc.).
So guys, When ever there is a change we don't like, We as aircraft commanders, can insist on procedures being implimented to make them think again.
If we stand together we will win, If we leave it for someone else to fight we will lose.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Devon UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Voted Yes
I agree with everything that has been said about family, staff etc, but would also like to add something that almost seems contraversial now.
I have witnessed on countless occasions the anxiety vanish from a nervous pax when they have had the opportunity to spend time in the flight deck being reassured by the flight crew
This has had such an impact that it definitely makes the job of the cabin crew much easier as you can see the pax relax and no longer worry about whether they will storm the a/c door and attempt to open it at cruising altitude (this does tend to upset the other pax and cause untold disruption!)
I doubt that we'll ever get back to that again, which is very sad as they are invariably little old ladies visiting their (now distant) family - but then again, they are the recognised carriers of lethal knitting needles so maybe this is the right course of action after all!
And of course at this time of year particularly it was always a great way to raise money for charity by auctioning off a Flight Deck visit, sorry to all those charities that are now missing out!!!
Perhaps the D for T could send them something extra this year, they must have received good bonuses for this fine example of paper pushing expertise!
I have witnessed on countless occasions the anxiety vanish from a nervous pax when they have had the opportunity to spend time in the flight deck being reassured by the flight crew
This has had such an impact that it definitely makes the job of the cabin crew much easier as you can see the pax relax and no longer worry about whether they will storm the a/c door and attempt to open it at cruising altitude (this does tend to upset the other pax and cause untold disruption!)
I doubt that we'll ever get back to that again, which is very sad as they are invariably little old ladies visiting their (now distant) family - but then again, they are the recognised carriers of lethal knitting needles so maybe this is the right course of action after all!
And of course at this time of year particularly it was always a great way to raise money for charity by auctioning off a Flight Deck visit, sorry to all those charities that are now missing out!!!
Perhaps the D for T could send them something extra this year, they must have received good bonuses for this fine example of paper pushing expertise!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This month's BALPA Log has a must-read article in it. Anyone who flies behind a locked door will feel a shiver down their spine on reading the full story of Tim Lancaster.
In Q and A sessions BA have tried to pacify flight crew by saying such incidents as this are a one off, that they just don't happen in real life, etc.
If he were to follow current BA sops Capt Lancaster would have had to drag himself back inside and open the door himself in order that his incapacitation could be handled by the cabin crew. In the unlikely event that he wasn't able to do this, FO Atchison should have engaged the autopilot and left the controls to open the door himself. Read the article and if anyone out there can tell me how this would not have ended in a very big messy disaster under todays sops I would like to know.
In Q and A sessions BA have tried to pacify flight crew by saying such incidents as this are a one off, that they just don't happen in real life, etc.
If he were to follow current BA sops Capt Lancaster would have had to drag himself back inside and open the door himself in order that his incapacitation could be handled by the cabin crew. In the unlikely event that he wasn't able to do this, FO Atchison should have engaged the autopilot and left the controls to open the door himself. Read the article and if anyone out there can tell me how this would not have ended in a very big messy disaster under todays sops I would like to know.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Between EGGP and EGCC
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a long thread and I don't have time to look right through it now, so apologies if what I am about to say has already been said..........
This ruling has been ill-conceived as far as I am concerned. Surely an airline should have the ability to make decisions based on whatever criteria necessary to vet a member of the public (especially family members etc) on to the flight-deck. Surely security is paramount in any company (and not just associated with flying).
Has this ruling stopped any chance at all of an aircraft being hi-jacked - NO !! because the failings appear to be that the person likely to cause harm is nowhere near the flight-deck. He is back there drinking his martini after cooly having passed through security with a gun.
Any member of the public is a potential security risk, who knows what goes through the mind of a seemingly normal person. The cockpit door only needs to be open for a second (for comfort breaks etc) and the perp could be in there.
Sounds paranoid, but that is where we are now. After Sept 11th things were obviously more raw. Now things should have settled to a more realistic level.
Allowing friends/family and off duty personnel associated with the business on the flight deck would be a step in the right direction.
Question.............. how many aircraft have been overtpowered by guests on the jump-seat as opposed to people forcing entry or terrorising pax ?? Hmmmmmmmmm.!!
This ruling has been ill-conceived as far as I am concerned. Surely an airline should have the ability to make decisions based on whatever criteria necessary to vet a member of the public (especially family members etc) on to the flight-deck. Surely security is paramount in any company (and not just associated with flying).
Has this ruling stopped any chance at all of an aircraft being hi-jacked - NO !! because the failings appear to be that the person likely to cause harm is nowhere near the flight-deck. He is back there drinking his martini after cooly having passed through security with a gun.
Any member of the public is a potential security risk, who knows what goes through the mind of a seemingly normal person. The cockpit door only needs to be open for a second (for comfort breaks etc) and the perp could be in there.
Sounds paranoid, but that is where we are now. After Sept 11th things were obviously more raw. Now things should have settled to a more realistic level.
Allowing friends/family and off duty personnel associated with the business on the flight deck would be a step in the right direction.
Question.............. how many aircraft have been overtpowered by guests on the jump-seat as opposed to people forcing entry or terrorising pax ?? Hmmmmmmmmm.!!
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: 30 West
Age: 65
Posts: 926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The most immediate effect that Captains can have is to very politely refuse carriage of all DTR or CAA personnel on the grounds of them being unknown and therefore a potential safety hazard under their own guidlines. Then file a report explaining why 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 46
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt Slackbladder - I sympathise with you entirely. I was in the Navy before I left to hopefully one day become an Airline Pilot. I served as a Warfare Branch Officer, Fighter Controller sub specialist. Believe you me it was easier to get my security clearance for the Navy than it was to get an airside pass to work at Stansted airport. And yes the Navy still strongly encourageos families days, where family and friends can come onboard our warships to see whats its all about with no security check what so ever!
I can go into the cockpit during a turnaround, I can be asked to search an empty aircraft for an item of lost property, put items into and out of a hold, handle passengers baggage, all alone, with no checks on what I have done. But should I ask if I can travel on the jumpseat on an aircraft operated by my company, in my uniform, with my airline pass, so I can learn more about my chosen future profession, the CAA so I cant because I am a security risk.
The point about occupation of the jumpseat inhibiting access to the flight deck crew is a very valid one. I have been lucky enough to travel on the jumpseat before this ruling came into force. With me sat there there wasnt even enough room for the Cabin Supervisor to pass the Captain and FO their coffee, let alone for someone to get passed to the controls.
Intelligence is the key to preventing terrorist attacks, not stupid rulings. But intelligence gathering costs time and money, passing pety legislation in comparision costs very little, so the latter option takes precedence.
I can go into the cockpit during a turnaround, I can be asked to search an empty aircraft for an item of lost property, put items into and out of a hold, handle passengers baggage, all alone, with no checks on what I have done. But should I ask if I can travel on the jumpseat on an aircraft operated by my company, in my uniform, with my airline pass, so I can learn more about my chosen future profession, the CAA so I cant because I am a security risk.
The point about occupation of the jumpseat inhibiting access to the flight deck crew is a very valid one. I have been lucky enough to travel on the jumpseat before this ruling came into force. With me sat there there wasnt even enough room for the Cabin Supervisor to pass the Captain and FO their coffee, let alone for someone to get passed to the controls.
Intelligence is the key to preventing terrorist attacks, not stupid rulings. But intelligence gathering costs time and money, passing pety legislation in comparision costs very little, so the latter option takes precedence.
aka Capt PPRuNe
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 1995
Location: UK
Posts: 4,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please note that this discussion is not about flight deck visits per se but about use of the jump-seat. Whilst the DeTR are using the red herring of 'extra' opening of the flight deck door as an excuse they will never answer a valid question directly because they know they have made a ridiculous and stupid decision and as we all know anyone working for a politician will never admit to being wrong.
Please limit this debate to the jump seat issue and not general flight deck visits.
I have reason to believe that this rule was introduced not because of 9/11 but because of the nutter, sorry, mentally impaired man who was allowed to board after being stopped at the airport earlier and then stormed the flight deck of a BA 747 en route to Nairobi when one of the pilots opened the door to go to the loo. He was eventually overpowered after a struggle. In that case, I believe that the F?O was the only person at the controls whilst one of the other pilots was leaving the F/D and the third pilot was resting elsewhere on the a/c. Perhaps if there'd been another person on F/D the nutter wouldn't have managed to even reach the controls in the forst place?
Please limit this debate to the jump seat issue and not general flight deck visits.
I have reason to believe that this rule was introduced not because of 9/11 but because of the nutter, sorry, mentally impaired man who was allowed to board after being stopped at the airport earlier and then stormed the flight deck of a BA 747 en route to Nairobi when one of the pilots opened the door to go to the loo. He was eventually overpowered after a struggle. In that case, I believe that the F?O was the only person at the controls whilst one of the other pilots was leaving the F/D and the third pilot was resting elsewhere on the a/c. Perhaps if there'd been another person on F/D the nutter wouldn't have managed to even reach the controls in the forst place?