If not even the cockpit colleagues sitting next to him get any warning right before I doubt that a psychiatrist can give guarantees. The 4U pilot back then deliberately split up his issues and met different doctors to hide the size of his only known to him problems.
Should all mental illnesses be blocked now, including pilots having suffered only for limited periods? Just to be on the safe side?
On the other hand what does it mean for teamwork, trust and safety culture? Will this bring us the single pilot cockpit with remote surveillance and some AI-master check for "plausible" flight operations?

The headlines don't match the quotes. The media have inferred that because it appears to not be a technical problem with the aircraft or engines, it must have been a deliberate act. That's a big leap. Hopefully the CVR can illuminate that..

My questions, if a pilot was standing, became incapacitated and fell forward, could they fall on the yoke such that it would put the aircraft into a near vertical attitude?
If you had an aircraft in a near vertical attitude with an incapacitated person on the yoke, how difficult would it be for the other pilot(s) to remove the incapacitated person and regain control ?

(SLF and Chartered Engineer working in aerospace)

No. There is a control sear behind each yoke. A toppling person would fall forward onto the engine controls. I am sure that a pilot's deliberate sustained nose down control input would be impossible to counter in sufficient time to affect the outcome. That’s after 25 years on type, and I am a former University football linebacker.

Calling it suicide by pilot is not particularly good description of it as well you could argue... suicide is something you do to yourself and doesn't involve others...

^^^^^^^ Mass murder would be more appropriate.

There are assumptions being made here. The question, then, is ... who benefits from the options posed (both in terms of finance, and reputation)?
Having closely followed the Colorado Springs event, I am unconvinced.

Of course, though, this idea would make the situation even more strange, that the assumed illicit pilot manages to become rogue again and the 2 others "didn't" do anything at all, given the startling factor of a potential first action would be overcome by now.

And the whole is even stranger, given it is clear, the pilots do attempt to keep the aircraft somewhat on the original course (deviates roughly +/- 30 degrees), which would be very strange, when fighting with the yokes would happen.

Let us wait and see, what the control inputs were: Yoke or trim.

My bet is on trim. And that might not have been through any of the trim switches in the cockpit........

Just to redeem my fellow journalists: The leap from

to those headlines is not as big as some here like to make us believe. That is a very specific statement in regard to action and effect made by someone who's seen inside information.

Air Mozambique flight 470 in 2013. That one is hard to argue with.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LAM_Mo...nes_Flight_470

Actually, the reality might be even less exact, and this might read more like:

Quote:

---

“The plane did what we read back from what the sensors of the cockpit flight controls registered on the FDR."

---

The CVR could give the additional info, whether the movements of the cockpit flight controls (represented by the sensor values) are caused by human inputs. Of course not in a 1:1 relationship, though qualitatively.

The yoke forces are on the FDR - so it would be trivial to differentiate between pilot yoke inputs and a trim failure.
I know people who were directly involved in the Egypt Air investigation. The Egyptians never agreed with a pilot deliberate act, but among the investigators on this side of the pond, there was zero doubt.

It's rather well documented that people that are suicidal generally don't account for how their actions will affect other, uninvolved people (e.g. the passengers). Hence someone who decides to commit suicide by suddenly turning their car into on-coming traffic at high speed won't consider the impact of the young family occupants of the oncoming car.

Good to hear about the yoke forces being registered.

Still, why word the "pilot input" so cryptic, when it was "just" yoke input:

Scenario 2/20.

If I was senior (and bitter) enough, maybe I could just request everyone else out of the cockpit, apart from the one at the controls. From there it’s my field of play…

Not allowed and its and eerie request. But waiting for the right moment when PIC goes to toilet before TOD...
​​​​​​... and the cadet would not take the vacant chair but stay on the jump seat out of courtesy.

​​​​​​

But your "bet" is on trim isn't it? If there were no defects currently being investigated, either it wasn't trim or it was forward trim with neutral or forward control input. Surely this type of event couldn't happen with any crew that were monitoring the flight path. And I can't think of many instances where a yoke input could be achieved without at least some form of pilot input (deliberate or accidental).

I have an open mind on this event. What we currently have is a leak from some party which in my mind has no credibility guarantee. Until we get something on formal lines I'd say there are many possible scenarios. The sooner this can be put to bed the better in my opinion.

Wikipedia should be calling it what it is - mass murder or murder-suicide, not suicide, if there is anyone but a single pilot aboard.

I am slightly shocked by the rush to conclusion here. As I am by the premature disclosure of FDR data. The question that now needs an answer is, "What were the pilots seeing on their displays" .

Simple answer. Only brown color on the PFD.

But if for some reason they were only seeing blue that would go some way to explaining events . We do not know. How about we wait for more facts.

That is certainly an explanation that the Chinese will be looking for a way to somehow grasp at.

Expect a final report a long time from now with extensive analysis of many possible scenarios that can't be proven(unless there is obvious CVR statements).