Sure they will after they close out their lockers. They'll be riding in the back of the, er pardon the pun, bus:}. I'm sure they'll enjoy the great coach service given by their cabin crew, from the Jurassic age, that NWA is famous for:*.

As posted by Admiral346
You are way off the centerline with your remark. Air Crews in Wisconsin were on hot standby awaiting their orders to launch. Next time, please perform some due diligence before posting such rubbish and get your facts straight.

Only 1 person has mentioned the cabin crew. What were they doing?

The argument has got to be rubbish. Sounds like 2 guys knowing they are in the crud going 'crap, we'll say we were arguing, that'll sound better'.

So assuming they nodded off (and I make no judgement, nearly been there myself a million times), did the rest of the aeroplane not start to wonder why they were an hour late?

SELCAL apparently failed to wake them.

The loopy track after overflying MSP was dictated by ATC to be sure the pilots were flying the plane.

Roused only by having other flights contact them on the Denver frequencies.

Source:
Radio Calls Went Unanswered - WSJ.com

And the flight was met at the gate by police, and passengers not allowed to disembark until apparently police were satisfied that nothing untoward from a security standpoint had happened. Hhmmmm, I recall that UA 842's diversion into Miami was also met by the police.

Where's the professionalism?
 

First Air India's in-flight crew punch up - now this. Or were they really asleep? Unbelievable!

If the autopilot was programmed for the airport then why did the aircraft continue for 100 miles east? Wouldn't it endlessly circle the airport until it ran out of fuel? I seem to remember the Greek plane crash caused by a pressure problem circled Athens for some time before crashing.

If this is the case, the autopilot must have been disengaged...

Folks, those two pilots may well be reading this forum from time to time so I'm not sure automatic condemnation is appropriate. Can we wait for an investigation to run its course, please?

"Folks, those two pilots may well be reading this forum from time to time so I'm not sure automatic condemnation is appropriate. Can we wait for an investigation to run its course, please?"


Lol! Methinks they have bigger things to worry about than what is being discussed on some internet board.

@paul

If the plane reaches its destination in nav mode and nobody takes action it will continue in hdg mode and maintain its altitude. Perhaps it will reduce speed to minimum. That's it. AP will remain engaged on A320.

If the arrival was programmed into the FMS, and the last arrival segment is a heading, as is often the case, the A320 will fly that heading to infinity. If the last segment ends at a fix, the A320 will continue present heading.

The cabin to flight deck interphone call signal would have awakened Rip Van Winkel, it is that loud.

Domestic operations often don't activate selcall as it is not used. ACARS is the primary company comm method.

Only this week, on a line check no less, we missed a frequency change and received an ACARS message from dispatch to the effect, "ATC wants you on 123.57." This is not uncommon at all, and wasn't even critiqued after the check.

Finally, in the expanse of Minneapolis, Salt Lake, and Denver Centers, through which the flight flew, you can go 20 minutes or more without hearing anything on the radio.

Finally, despite all the reports and speculation, we don't know what happened exactly, and I think it's premature to fix cause and blame with any degree of precision.

No judgements here till the facts come out, but if the aircraft was out of radio contact for more than an hour wouldn't the message from dispatch to contact Center on XXX.XX have alerted them ?

Also does the Airbus have a "Pilot Response" message like some Boeings ?

Gentlemen, before we throw these two under the bus, let me relay a story of something that happened to me about 3 years ago.

While on a flight from Canada to NY (intentional vagueness), ATC had inadvertantly miscommunicated our flight number from one center to another. Now this wasn't simply a dislexic transcription but an entirely different call sign with an admittedly similar but not easily recognizable flight number. Our phantom callsign was given a frequency change without response and we continued on our way. It was not until I knew it was time to descend that I queried why we had not been given the expected descent. ATC responded by asking who we were and our position. I told them our callsign again and our position and was told to contact another frequency which I recognized as the next one in sequence. After contacting them they also aked who we were and our callsign. After some figuring, they realized that they had the incorrect callsign and had been trying to contact us for some time.

Throughout this episode we never received a selcal, acars message, or any other form of alert as to the mistake because they were probably trying to alert the wrong airline about a lost airplane that didn't exist.

My point is this, there are several possible explantions so let's not jump to any conclusions as the rest of the lay-world is so quick to do.

No, it doesn't.

The B777 has an alerting system that will progressively alert pilots if neither one touches a mike or knob over a period of time. The alert progresses at stages to culminate in flashing lights and loud aural warnings. That's a great idea!

On the A320, the under glareshield panel on either side of the FCU has six or so inches of unused panel at eye level directly above the primary flight display (electronic ADI), between the Master Warning and Caution lights and the Autoland light. This is precious, but unused real estate where I would incorporate the following two additional new lights:

A. A blue, selectable on/off light a pilot could use as a reminder light that he is in the middle of something like fuel balancing or an interrupted checklist.

B. A red light that could be addressed by company or ATC to turn on when attention is being sought, like Selcall. An accompanying loud aural signal would make it even better.

Such modifications, I think, would go a long way in preventing a lot of embarrassing and potentially dangerous incidents such as the one under discussion.

If the FMS has a missed approach programmed that ends in a hold, the aircraft will join that hold until it runs out of fuel (like the Helios accident). Anything else leads to "heading" mode on autopilot. From that map it looks like no approach was programmed, so the last fix was MSP and heading mode after that. There will be an accompanying "triple click" to alert the pilots about a mode change.

If they were under vectors the HDG and ALT were set on the MCP. The remainder of the flight plan track and KMSP would have slid from top to bottom on the HSI without them noticing which I find inexplicable, even in the depths of a heated discussion. Unless they were asleep of course. Onthe upside at least they didn't land on a taxiway.

According to the AP this morning,
Different from the controllers' version, but its possible that the intercom contact then alerted them to other flights, at the direction of ATC, which were calling them on the Denver frequency.

Cabin crew likely wondering why they were not already on the ground at MSP.

Questioning the title, is it the NTSB that is “investigating” or is it the FAA “investigating” or both? I suspect the FAA is conducting an investigation into the ‘incident’.

This next comment is directed to those of us who fly these jets for a living. If you had asked this crew on the crew bus before this happened what their chances were of being involved with an incident like this, they would have scoffed and never believed they would be where they are now. That in and of itself serves as a warning to me. If it can happen to “them” then it could happen to me. If I believe I am somehow exempt I’m fooling myself. You seasoned professionals who point out that this is still under investigation and that the vast majority of what we are reading here is only speculation I salute you! You are spot on.

No, I don't work for Delta/Northwest.

For those few, who hurl abuse, scream for their heads, have already solved the mystery and revel in some crew’s current crisis nothing I say will temper your behavior. Consequently don’t complain that you are not warmly received by some crewmember the next time-there are a lot of ‘nuts’ out there. You are completely within your rights to raise your concerns and expect accountability. It’s your decision on how you choose to go about that. Some ways are constructive; others will get you ignored or worse.

Few people are subjected to the level of scrutiny as commercial pilots are (rightfully so). The proper authorities with training and work experience will investigate everything this crew did and said. And this crew will have competent representation. If discipline is required it will be enforced after the process has run its course.

Stick to the facts, look for safety implications and solve the underlying problems as they are discovered. Screaming for blood and mocking in derision does little to prevent aircraft overlying the destination in the future.

Some positives
 

While everyone is baying for the pilots' heads, I'd like to point out some positives - the actions of a modern 'uncommanded' aircraft in our modern airspace.

a) Flight fuelling guidelines meant this plane had plenty of fuel for the 'excursion'
b) Airbus technology meant the aircraft maintained altitude and direction
c) ATC no doubt kept other aircraft clear

Result - no fatalities, no injuries. Clearly some major questions to be answered, but the 'safety envelope' helped recover the situation, and I think this should be acknowledged.

You have got to be kidding me. This has made international news, it is shamefull and deserves every prod or any speculation. Situational awareness lost as a result in a disagreement over company policy is simply the best explanation I SPECULATE those guys could come up with. The only argument up there was probably over what defense they could agree to on their way back.

Also understanding the CVR records only the last 30 minutes of flight, they may have thoghtfully planned their cover up to strech out 30 minutes they spent spooning in the cockpit to plan a return performance.

The new solid state CVR's record at least two hours as we found out in the BUF crash earlier this year. Not sure whether that was the case with NW188.

I wonder if they just put the wrong airport in the FMGC?
Otherwise it seems completely bizarre that none of the crew, cabin crew, etc. had any idea that the clock was ticking and they were very late on arrival time. As for fuel, I wonder what they landed with. I suspect they had some extra fuel on board, very lucky for them or the news story could have been somewhat different.
If it was a "heated discussion" that caused them total distraction from even the most basic checks (such as aviate, navigate, communicate) then for sure I hope they get the book thrown at them.
But I suspect there is more to this story......

I suspect you are right AB girl, I suspect they were checking their eyelids for holes.

Northbeach

Thank you for a well thought-out response to those who would 'armchair quarterback' the reasoning for this incident. Folks, cool your jets-- the crew probably screwed up, but lets not put them in jail until we hear what actually happened. Sadly, this forum seems to have a lot of 'pros' who have noses well beyond six feet in the air...

Aphros
 

I suppose that we shouldn't laugh about this as the implications are pretty awful, but I heard the BBC report that the pilots were: "..involved in a serious discussion about safety..." Yeah, right.
Oh by the way, was there a cabin crew input....they must have wondered why they hadn't landed.

Airliners ALWAYS have "some extra fuel on board"! They have reserves, alternate fuel, and sometimes a bit more than that.

IIRC, they landed about 18 minutes late, which would not have burned but half their reserves, since they were in cruise at high altitude. If the autopilot was in LNAV and the arrival and approach had been entered into the FMS, the airplane would have followed that path over the ground, but constrained by altitude. The last Missed Approach heading or hold would be the final path to follow. If the route to alternate had also been entered, that is another possibility for the path after the missed approach, if the discontinuity had been closed.

Yep, I know the reserves! I did not know it was only 18 minutes longer that they flew. And Airbus A320 doesn't have LNAV.

Old Glass,
I'm impressed by your incredible knowledge of aviation incidents and accidents.

Somehow, I must have missed to see an equivalent comment of yours on a recent taxiway landing.

And, by the way, it's trimmer, but seen your (mental?) age, this is probably excusable)

Intruder,
Flightaware has the following for NW188:

Scheduled Dep: 2:35PM PDT
Scheduled Arr: 7:47PM CDT (3 hours 12 minutes)

Seven Day Running Average for this flight
Actual Departure 2:38PM PDT
Actual Arrival 7:50PM CDT

Oct 21 Flight
Actual Departure 3:00PM PDT
Actual Arrival: 8:54PM CDT

Quite sure that ATC would not have had them fly a loopy return if fuel on-board was becoming critical.

Airbubba wrote No they wouldn't. It isn't the Crew's call. The decision is made by Air Defence. Maybe the staff at NORAD are spending too much time in the Donut Shop

Question from interested layperson;

Is this triggered by perceived crew inactivity, to guard against sleping crews?

Airliner overshoots airport; controllers feared hijacking - CNN.com

Controllers asked other NW flights over Minnesota and Wisconsin to reach the NORDO aircraft on the last Denver ARTCC frequency that the pilots had communicated on. Eventually, this worked.

marchino61, they flew about 150 miles past MSP, but they were declared NORDO about long before MSP when they did not respond to Denver ARTCC attempt to handoff to MSP. One hour + 14 minutes.

I still think they would have had a better ultimate defense if they actually had fallen asleep... they would have eventually been shown to suffer from sleep apnea, and after suitable treatment been found fit for resumption of flying duties.

But the notion of zipping past your destination at flight level while arguing is too fanciful!

The last paragraph is interesting: (Though I fail to see why they need to have a "Photo Op" for this!)

While this COULD have been an accident of major proportions, it was NOT. There is no Earthly reason to release the CVR to the news media where it will get completely misconstrued.

When did the truth ever get in the way of a good story?

Looks like some of the solid-state CVR's record 30 minutes, some do two hours. Maybe this one only did 30 minutes.

From the preamble of the BUF crash CVR transcript:

http://www.ntsb.gov/Dockets/Aviation...027/418693.pdf

AirBubba
 

Another news source confirming it was only a 30 minute CVR.

Only 30 Minutes of Audio on Flight 188 to MSP?

benefit of the doubt
 

giving the pilots the benefit of the doubt:

MAYBE the radio freq change/handoff was blocked by another transmission or something else.

Maybe there was a good tail wind and they were moving right along.

Maybe they were arguing about a newly advertised airline policy...DUE to the MERGER!

Maybe they were tired from working a second job because they had lost 2/3rds of their pension and half of their pay?

So there they are, no radio calls...and not paying attention....aviate, navigate, communicate...and finally they come out of their stupor (hey maybe it was a bit hypoxic up there, or fumes or something) and manage a safe landing.


we all know that modern planes are a bit too automated...we shall see.

on the other side...

I've seen guys read books on how to build houses, or fill out forms for scholorships for their kids. There is sort of a highway hypnosis of the air...you have to concentrate sometimes.

And when you kept a paper chart handy...well, I just think that kept you in the loop better than the moving map.

over