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: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cortilla- it's going to be nigh on impossible to get the ruling changed for family/airline staff/ATC on FDs. I'm afraid that having pax visit the FD inflight has been consigned to history for evermore without doubt. Our Mr. Mukonyi and assorted nasty moslem acquaintances (we know several of their faces from TV) have seen to that!
I find it extraordinary that following all those terrible events, I haven't seen anybody say in print 'what sort of religion can possibly in any shape or form justify to anybody such behaviour?'. Sad sad sad. If ever it has been brought up, you get some rant about 'Crusades' coming at you. And now we take in moslem refugees and give them shelter and find them cooking (literally) up a mass killing plot of their gracious hosts. What a peculiar lifestyle and thought process!
I find it extraordinary that following all those terrible events, I haven't seen anybody say in print 'what sort of religion can possibly in any shape or form justify to anybody such behaviour?'. Sad sad sad. If ever it has been brought up, you get some rant about 'Crusades' coming at you. And now we take in moslem refugees and give them shelter and find them cooking (literally) up a mass killing plot of their gracious hosts. What a peculiar lifestyle and thought process!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The poll says...family fam flights.
So, what EXACTLY does the family ie: wife and kids have to do with fam flights?
ATC guys, yes (AVMAN included, have not forgotten)..but kids...WHAT would the possible accepted reason be?
Other than (of course)...that's what daddy does...?
Gimmie a break...!
So, what EXACTLY does the family ie: wife and kids have to do with fam flights?
ATC guys, yes (AVMAN included, have not forgotten)..but kids...WHAT would the possible accepted reason be?
Other than (of course)...that's what daddy does...?
Gimmie a break...!
aka Capt PPRuNe
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 1995
Location: UK
Posts: 4,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
411A, before this stupid rule was enforced on us, over here in the UK we could, with the companies and the commanders permission take a family member or friend with us on the jump seat. As far as I am aware, over all the years that we were able to do this there was not one instance of the jump seater causing ANY problem and certainly no security issue, no matter what the relationship was between the jump seater and the pilot who had invited them along for the 'experience'.
I am not trying to compare the rules as they were in the US before or after 9/11 with regard to jump seaters. I know that over there you haven't allowed jump seaters for decades but that is not the issue. And before those posters who cannot resist having a go at the US contingent repeat the often heard jibe that the locked door policy didn't prevent the 9/11 tragedy, remember that that was achieved only because the hijack compliance advice at the time was not appropriate in that case. Since then attitudes have changed and I won't go into those details on here but as far as I am concerned the new rules banning anyone from using the jump seat here in the UK is nothing but a knee jerk reaction and a cosmetic cover for the ineptitude of the agencies that are responsible for dealing with the issue, especially the US agencies including the FBI and the CIA.
In my experience, those people who were lucky enough in the UK to enjoy a jump seat ride before the stupid rule was brought in were extremely appreciative and in most cases they told me that it was one of the highlights of their lifes experiences, especially so when the jump seater was someone who was just embarking on the tortuous career path of becoming an airline pilot. Others included professionals from other backgrounds. In every single case, those jump seaters were astounded to discover exactly what it was we do every day.
There are still a few pilots around who would prefer that our jobs be classified as a 'black art' and that we are somehow privileged to members of some sort of exclusive club. Those pilots and the anonymous bureaucrats who thought up this new rule are probably savouring the fact that they can now continue with the closing of the gap that had been open and our profession returns to the dark and their satisfaction that if they can't enjoy making use of the privilege then no one else should be able to either.
Unfortunately because of this new rule, many people will never get to know what it is we do or why we do it. They will just continue in the misguided belief that we push a button and wait for the landing at the other end, a myth perpetuated by many journalists who haven't had the pleasure of a jump seat ride. At no time was there a security problem with having someone you knew, especially a family member on the jump seat and to suggest that banning them now will make any difference is as futile as the 'closing of the stable door after the horse has bolted' cosmetic security procedures introduced since 9/11.
411A, just because you may selfish enough to not want your kids to "know what daddy does", that doesn't give you the right to demean everyone else with your self centered and smug tone. Many of us would like to be able to continue providing the experience to others who would be appreciative. To invoke the security issue is nothing but 'reactive' panic instead of 'proactive' thought which just about typifies much of the 'patching up' that has been going on recently.
I am not trying to compare the rules as they were in the US before or after 9/11 with regard to jump seaters. I know that over there you haven't allowed jump seaters for decades but that is not the issue. And before those posters who cannot resist having a go at the US contingent repeat the often heard jibe that the locked door policy didn't prevent the 9/11 tragedy, remember that that was achieved only because the hijack compliance advice at the time was not appropriate in that case. Since then attitudes have changed and I won't go into those details on here but as far as I am concerned the new rules banning anyone from using the jump seat here in the UK is nothing but a knee jerk reaction and a cosmetic cover for the ineptitude of the agencies that are responsible for dealing with the issue, especially the US agencies including the FBI and the CIA.
In my experience, those people who were lucky enough in the UK to enjoy a jump seat ride before the stupid rule was brought in were extremely appreciative and in most cases they told me that it was one of the highlights of their lifes experiences, especially so when the jump seater was someone who was just embarking on the tortuous career path of becoming an airline pilot. Others included professionals from other backgrounds. In every single case, those jump seaters were astounded to discover exactly what it was we do every day.
There are still a few pilots around who would prefer that our jobs be classified as a 'black art' and that we are somehow privileged to members of some sort of exclusive club. Those pilots and the anonymous bureaucrats who thought up this new rule are probably savouring the fact that they can now continue with the closing of the gap that had been open and our profession returns to the dark and their satisfaction that if they can't enjoy making use of the privilege then no one else should be able to either.
Unfortunately because of this new rule, many people will never get to know what it is we do or why we do it. They will just continue in the misguided belief that we push a button and wait for the landing at the other end, a myth perpetuated by many journalists who haven't had the pleasure of a jump seat ride. At no time was there a security problem with having someone you knew, especially a family member on the jump seat and to suggest that banning them now will make any difference is as futile as the 'closing of the stable door after the horse has bolted' cosmetic security procedures introduced since 9/11.
411A, just because you may selfish enough to not want your kids to "know what daddy does", that doesn't give you the right to demean everyone else with your self centered and smug tone. Many of us would like to be able to continue providing the experience to others who would be appreciative. To invoke the security issue is nothing but 'reactive' panic instead of 'proactive' thought which just about typifies much of the 'patching up' that has been going on recently.
Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Danny
The really sad thing about this is that the first time a prospective pilot will sit in the Flightdeck of an airliner is when he has got his license.
It makes you wonder where the Industry is going.
The really sad thing about this is that the first time a prospective pilot will sit in the Flightdeck of an airliner is when he has got his license.
It makes you wonder where the Industry is going.
Cabin crew are subjected to exactly the same back ground checks as pilots. At least five years background has to be checked for the issue of an airside pass
We have a policy of only opening the flt. deck door when the curtain is drawn, fwd toilet unoccupied and additional cc in the forward galley. It works.
Sky9 is quite correct, and I have said it before, the door needs to be between the galley and the cabin, and another door needs to be on the flightdeck. This would mean there is never an open access to the flightdeck from the cabin. The arrangement that is currently being installed is not a complete solution.
Pre 9/11 the only airline that really took airbourne secrurity seriously was El Al, post 9/11 I suspect that they are still the only ones doing any more than just making it look good. They have a double door.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oxford(ish)
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was sat on a 737 a few days ago recalling this thread and thinking...
Yes, I could quite easily bolt onto the flightdeck from here (Seat 5c). Of course, I didn't have a mind to do such a thing, but looking at the single, flimsy door behind the crew and imagining them strapped in the seats as a miscreat battered them over the heads with a bottle of duty-free, the crash-axe or simply their own hands doesn't bare thinking about. The stewardess strapped into her seat near the door for takeoff sure isn't going to be able to do much about it, if anyone tries it.
Which makes the new "jumpseat" rule less valuable than it perhaps sounds at first glance. I tend to agree about the value of El Al's "kissing gates". My understanding is that this would have prevented anyone trying the kind of attacks used on 9/11/01, admitedly they could still have slaughtered the passengers, but they're not likely to bother with that when they know they can't get to the flight deck to attack the flight crew and fly the plane into buildings.
As a frequent passenger and confirmed propellor-head, i'd have jumped (groan!) at the chance of a jump-seat ride. Looks like I won't get the chance now. Which is a crying shame.
Yes, I could quite easily bolt onto the flightdeck from here (Seat 5c). Of course, I didn't have a mind to do such a thing, but looking at the single, flimsy door behind the crew and imagining them strapped in the seats as a miscreat battered them over the heads with a bottle of duty-free, the crash-axe or simply their own hands doesn't bare thinking about. The stewardess strapped into her seat near the door for takeoff sure isn't going to be able to do much about it, if anyone tries it.
Which makes the new "jumpseat" rule less valuable than it perhaps sounds at first glance. I tend to agree about the value of El Al's "kissing gates". My understanding is that this would have prevented anyone trying the kind of attacks used on 9/11/01, admitedly they could still have slaughtered the passengers, but they're not likely to bother with that when they know they can't get to the flight deck to attack the flight crew and fly the plane into buildings.
As a frequent passenger and confirmed propellor-head, i'd have jumped (groan!) at the chance of a jump-seat ride. Looks like I won't get the chance now. Which is a crying shame.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those who complain about nobody being able to see what
goes on up front in an airliner, I believe there is plenty of
videos on the market ("flying the big jets etc") that would
show what it's like.
Having been on Europen flights where the cockpit door
was a revolving door for all the kids to come up and take a look,
I think I prefer the US way where only a qualified individual is allowed to ride up front.
As far as taking away the right of a company pilot traveling
off duty in the cockpit I strongly disagree.
At the moment my airline can only take jumpseat pilots who can be verified in a database , which leaves out most other airlines, but at least I can offer a free seat in the back (if available)to
any Part 121 Airline pilot.
goes on up front in an airliner, I believe there is plenty of
videos on the market ("flying the big jets etc") that would
show what it's like.
Having been on Europen flights where the cockpit door
was a revolving door for all the kids to come up and take a look,
I think I prefer the US way where only a qualified individual is allowed to ride up front.
As far as taking away the right of a company pilot traveling
off duty in the cockpit I strongly disagree.
At the moment my airline can only take jumpseat pilots who can be verified in a database , which leaves out most other airlines, but at least I can offer a free seat in the back (if available)to
any Part 121 Airline pilot.
aka Capt PPRuNe
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 1995
Location: UK
Posts: 4,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Viking737, once again I reiterate, this is not about in-flight flight deck visits. Whilst many of us do miss the opportunity to interact with our passengers, especially those with an interest in what it is like up front, we realise that the days of allowing some kids a visit whilst in flight are over. What we are objecting to is the blanket ban on using the jump seat for the whole flight for someone we can personally vouch for and is no security risk. You know very well that watching a video does not convey the actual experiece for those who have never jump seated before.
We already decided to appease the US authorities by not allowing jump seaters to and from the USA. None of these jump seat riders have ever been a security problem here in the UK and Europe but now we have to kowtow to the demands of the understandably more twitchy US dictats. Your sense of unease at the sight of kids coming and going from the flight deck whilst travelling on a European carrier is understandable considering your own countries total ban for many years already, but to suggest that carrying someone personally known to the pilot, especially a family member or friend on the jump seat is a major security risk is ridiculous and has no precedent over here.
It appears to me that the terrorists have achieved their aims and are probably laughing at us now. Everyone running scared and paranoid. Life is full of risks and I am still more likely to be killed on the drive to and from the airport than to suffer at the hands of a hijacker, suicidal or not. Yes, we need security but it is my belief that far too much is being concentrated on doing something about a terrorist who is already on board rather than preventing them from getting past check-in in the first place. What is being suggested by the new rule, to me and many others, is that it is somehow a stopgap that will go a very long way to preventing another 9/11. Typical of the thinking of people who really don't have very much imagination but like to be seen to be doing something, no matter how cosmetic!
We already decided to appease the US authorities by not allowing jump seaters to and from the USA. None of these jump seat riders have ever been a security problem here in the UK and Europe but now we have to kowtow to the demands of the understandably more twitchy US dictats. Your sense of unease at the sight of kids coming and going from the flight deck whilst travelling on a European carrier is understandable considering your own countries total ban for many years already, but to suggest that carrying someone personally known to the pilot, especially a family member or friend on the jump seat is a major security risk is ridiculous and has no precedent over here.
It appears to me that the terrorists have achieved their aims and are probably laughing at us now. Everyone running scared and paranoid. Life is full of risks and I am still more likely to be killed on the drive to and from the airport than to suffer at the hands of a hijacker, suicidal or not. Yes, we need security but it is my belief that far too much is being concentrated on doing something about a terrorist who is already on board rather than preventing them from getting past check-in in the first place. What is being suggested by the new rule, to me and many others, is that it is somehow a stopgap that will go a very long way to preventing another 9/11. Typical of the thinking of people who really don't have very much imagination but like to be seen to be doing something, no matter how cosmetic!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hey Danny
How about starting a petition firstly to Balpa. (if you are a member) Otherwise let's organise ourselves and fight the government.
We should make it clear to Balpa that this is a priority for us. I would far rather they spent their time working on this issue than anything else.
If Balpa have no success, or are not interested we should start our own union.
It seems that we (as usual) are the only country in Europe with this ridiculous rule and many other carriers are operating into the uk with unknown jump seat pax as well as family members on J/S.
No other profession would allow ignorant bureaucrats to interfere like this if it was completely illogical. I'm glad you have taken the initiative to start discussion but action needs to be taken.
I would certainly contribute to the cause.
How about starting a petition firstly to Balpa. (if you are a member) Otherwise let's organise ourselves and fight the government.
We should make it clear to Balpa that this is a priority for us. I would far rather they spent their time working on this issue than anything else.
If Balpa have no success, or are not interested we should start our own union.
It seems that we (as usual) are the only country in Europe with this ridiculous rule and many other carriers are operating into the uk with unknown jump seat pax as well as family members on J/S.
No other profession would allow ignorant bureaucrats to interfere like this if it was completely illogical. I'm glad you have taken the initiative to start discussion but action needs to be taken.
I would certainly contribute to the cause.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What ever happened to IFALPA?
Surely now is the time for them to actually stand up against these ridiculous rulings. If they don't, very soon the Captains authority will have been completly taken away from him.
These rulings are absurd! I can not train in the USA without a clearance from the DOJ, even though I am qualified to fly (and have a few hundred hours) on NG Boeings - because I am not "current" on type. Anyone can learn how to program in the co-ordinates and altitude into a FMS, then select "direct to", without ever being on the flight deck.
Its time all members of IFALPA petition their local representitaves and a initiate formal protest. It was easy for IFALPA to blacklist potential Cathy Pacific newbies, but when something like this happens, they sit back and say nothing.
Perhaps the travelling public would get the message as to just how absurd the security situation has become if every airline in the did not fly for 5 hours!
Surely now is the time for them to actually stand up against these ridiculous rulings. If they don't, very soon the Captains authority will have been completly taken away from him.
These rulings are absurd! I can not train in the USA without a clearance from the DOJ, even though I am qualified to fly (and have a few hundred hours) on NG Boeings - because I am not "current" on type. Anyone can learn how to program in the co-ordinates and altitude into a FMS, then select "direct to", without ever being on the flight deck.
Its time all members of IFALPA petition their local representitaves and a initiate formal protest. It was easy for IFALPA to blacklist potential Cathy Pacific newbies, but when something like this happens, they sit back and say nothing.
Perhaps the travelling public would get the message as to just how absurd the security situation has become if every airline in the did not fly for 5 hours!
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oxford(ish)
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is what is known as "Cat and Dog logic" in political circles.
It runs like this. "All dogs have 4 legs and a tail. My cat has 4 legs and a tail, therefore my cat is a dog.
IE: "We need to do something.... This IS something.... therefore we must do it"..
Well known process.
It runs like this. "All dogs have 4 legs and a tail. My cat has 4 legs and a tail, therefore my cat is a dog.
IE: "We need to do something.... This IS something.... therefore we must do it"..
Well known process.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Kent
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Danny you have a valid point but what seems to be echoed throughout this string is that none of us are sure who is who!
I personally am a big fan of family on the flight deck because of all the benefits that result, also of helping other aviators/crew getting home, and dare I say it seeing the look of wonder on a child's face when they pop into see the pilots but I hope that I am intelligent enough to see the other side of the fence.
Even if the vote is inconclusive I hope at least the rules can be reconsidered and more imaginative investigation undertaken rather than bureacratic knee jerk reactions which at times have tipified the process since 9/11.
As per an earlier reply I would love to vote yes but alas the risks to our working environment, regardless of personal feelings, have increased since that tragic day.
Danny
Although I would love to vote Yes alas I can't!
I am in agreement with you that the rules at times are idiotic bureacratic knee jerk reactions to a drastically changed world but who knows who anybody is! Does the security check that all employees are put through guarantee that they won't ever do anything?
I was a big fan of family on the flight deck, rescueing stranded crew downroute and how I enjoyed the faces of wonder when the children popped up to see the pilots.
All I can hope that from this collection of votes an opinion is generated that will encourage more investigation and discussion before the policies are laid down.
May we all continue to slip the surly bonds of Earth in safety!
I personally am a big fan of family on the flight deck because of all the benefits that result, also of helping other aviators/crew getting home, and dare I say it seeing the look of wonder on a child's face when they pop into see the pilots but I hope that I am intelligent enough to see the other side of the fence.
Even if the vote is inconclusive I hope at least the rules can be reconsidered and more imaginative investigation undertaken rather than bureacratic knee jerk reactions which at times have tipified the process since 9/11.
As per an earlier reply I would love to vote yes but alas the risks to our working environment, regardless of personal feelings, have increased since that tragic day.
Danny
Although I would love to vote Yes alas I can't!
I am in agreement with you that the rules at times are idiotic bureacratic knee jerk reactions to a drastically changed world but who knows who anybody is! Does the security check that all employees are put through guarantee that they won't ever do anything?
I was a big fan of family on the flight deck, rescueing stranded crew downroute and how I enjoyed the faces of wonder when the children popped up to see the pilots.
All I can hope that from this collection of votes an opinion is generated that will encourage more investigation and discussion before the policies are laid down.
May we all continue to slip the surly bonds of Earth in safety!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London,Bucharest...wherever...
Posts: 1,014
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can only dream about being as good at pushing paper as Gill at DETR 
Anyway...yesterday returned on flight deck of international carrier operating into LHR...so up yours DETR...
Last week boarded a Eurostar train at Ashford Intl. Station situation covered by the same Aviation and Maritime Securities Act blah blah according to the signs...
Security cursory but adequate, nothing like the agro of LHR/LGW - returned Brussels to Ashford and at the station in Brussels you put yr boarding pass into an automatic gate and you are through...no immigration, no customs, no nothing...get off at Ashford..nobody...
Gill and rest of DETR...suggest you might want to look into this discrepancy instead of annoying most of the UK aviation industry...come on then how does a transport system under the same UK legislation operate so differently?
Because it hasn't been the subject of political 'tail wagging' by our own Govt. or been the interest of the Americans maybe ??
Anyway...yesterday returned on flight deck of international carrier operating into LHR...so up yours DETR...
Last week boarded a Eurostar train at Ashford Intl. Station situation covered by the same Aviation and Maritime Securities Act blah blah according to the signs...
Security cursory but adequate, nothing like the agro of LHR/LGW - returned Brussels to Ashford and at the station in Brussels you put yr boarding pass into an automatic gate and you are through...no immigration, no customs, no nothing...get off at Ashford..nobody...
Gill and rest of DETR...suggest you might want to look into this discrepancy instead of annoying most of the UK aviation industry...come on then how does a transport system under the same UK legislation operate so differently?
Because it hasn't been the subject of political 'tail wagging' by our own Govt. or been the interest of the Americans maybe ??
Last edited by Boss Raptor; 19th Jan 2003 at 15:43.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
flight deck access for staff/relatives
hi danny all fellow ppruners
i would like to start a new thread regarding flight deck access for relatives and staff.
This thread is NOT about the for/against discussion but is aimed at aircrew (pilots,cabin crew) who believe that the present ruling is ridiculous and would like to unite and find a way forward.
i've read the previous thread by Danny and on numourous occasions ppruners have mentioned that they are prepared to come together if BALPA are not willing to fight on our behalf and finance our own action.
By definition, as pilots, we are all intelligent, self motivated profesionals and feel that if we all came together we should be able to put together a valid argument against this silly blanket rule.
As i mentioned earlier this not about the for/against discussion and not about flight deck visits, it is solely about aircrew and relatives on the flight deck so if any ppruners are for the ruling the previous post is where your opinion wil be heard.
There has been 11 pages of discussion previously and lots of valid points against the ruling so NOW is the time for action, lets pull together and try to find away around this blanket ban.
i would like to start a new thread regarding flight deck access for relatives and staff.
This thread is NOT about the for/against discussion but is aimed at aircrew (pilots,cabin crew) who believe that the present ruling is ridiculous and would like to unite and find a way forward.
i've read the previous thread by Danny and on numourous occasions ppruners have mentioned that they are prepared to come together if BALPA are not willing to fight on our behalf and finance our own action.
By definition, as pilots, we are all intelligent, self motivated profesionals and feel that if we all came together we should be able to put together a valid argument against this silly blanket rule.
As i mentioned earlier this not about the for/against discussion and not about flight deck visits, it is solely about aircrew and relatives on the flight deck so if any ppruners are for the ruling the previous post is where your opinion wil be heard.
There has been 11 pages of discussion previously and lots of valid points against the ruling so NOW is the time for action, lets pull together and try to find away around this blanket ban.
Still behind the curtain
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is all well and good to allow flight deck access to crew, relatives and friends. I still enjoy that privilege on an airline that I fly. On the other hand, if rules are rules and they have to be enforced, I would be glad to give up that privilege to talk to my friend, the pilot.
The more times that the flight deck door is opened, the more chances there are of someone of not my ilk getting in who just want to listen to the radio chatter and look at the dials. There have been too many incidents recently when crazies have tried to get in to do serious harm to the pilots.
I would be willing in a moment to give up my pleasure of the door not opening up one more time for me so that on any off-hand chance they could not get in.
The more times that the flight deck door is opened, the more chances there are of someone of not my ilk getting in who just want to listen to the radio chatter and look at the dials. There have been too many incidents recently when crazies have tried to get in to do serious harm to the pilots.
I would be willing in a moment to give up my pleasure of the door not opening up one more time for me so that on any off-hand chance they could not get in.