What Would KMEM Do?

[+ glutes]

Captain, how do you feel about NTSB attempts to monitor pilots conversations for safety reasons?

 

From USA Today:

 

Idle chit-chat in an airline cockpit can be deadly.

 

A little more than a year ago, distracted pilots overreacted to a cockpit warning and caused the crash of a Continental Connection flight near Buffalo, killing 50 people. One of many problems? As the flight neared the airport, the pilots were engaged in a lengthy non-work conversation that violated the federal "sterile cockpit" rule barring such discussions below 10,000 feet.

 

There's good reason for the three-decade-old rule. Airline safety watchdogs can tick off a string of similar incidents linked to distractions:

 

— In 1988, a Delta Air Lines flight crashed on takeoff in Dallas after the pilots failed to set the wing flaps properly. The crew was joking about aviation accidents, politics and the dating habits of flight attendants.

 

— In 2006, a Comair regional jet took off on a dark, closed runway in Lexington, Ky., after pilots overlooked numerous signs that should have alerted them. Forty-nine of the 50 on board died. The pilots had been chatting about seeking other jobs.

 

— Last October, two Northwest Airlines pilots flew 100 miles past their Minneapolis airport destination because, they said later, they were preoccupied with their laptop computers. There was no accident, but the pilots' licenses were revoked.

 

 

Even if most pilots focus strictly on business, there appear to be enough low-altitude lapses to warrant further action. Last week, the

 

National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), over objections from pilots, made an unprecedented push to curtail such distractions by recommending that cockpit voice recordings be routinely monitored, after the fact, to see if discipline is breaking down.

[Guest greatness]

I think

 

Our captain is an ideal pilot and this won't affect him at all.

[KMEM]

Thanks for the kind words, greatness, but I am not an ideal any thing.

 

The NTSB wanting to monitor conversations is just another government intrusion. The unions will fight it. The bottom line is, either you are a professional or you are not. However, no one is perfect all the time.

 

The FAA and others have tried to constuct a relationship between DWI and flying. It might be a personality indicator but it is far from conclusive. Alcohol while flying is a very, very small problem among aviators. But, why not give a test before every flight, just to be sure? Again, invasion of privacy, unconstitutional, etc. Either you are professional or you are not.

 

It is interesting to see that there are aviators that have many years and many hours of experience without incident or accident, which included Sully until one day, but that is a different story. The point I am making is I know and know of several pilots who have had multiple incidents and/or accidents but none "chargeable". Bad luck or poor attitude? Should they be restricted? If you know of any drivers who constantly have other folks running into them, do you begin to suspect they are doing something to "cause" these accidents?

 

Being the conservative type, I say no to calls for monitoring conversations. If you crash it is beneficial to have all the evidence available to determine the cause but not before.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[jgoo]

Just saw this morning on the Today show a report where an air traffic controller brought his young son to work and allowed him to relay some instructions to pilots. A serious violation provoking his suspension (the air traffic controller, not his son) and an investigation. This is just an example of how professionals who have a huge responsibility for the lives of many people can have a serious lapse of judgement that puts peoples lives at risk. Given the nature of the risk balanced against individual rights, in this specific case I come down on the side of safety for monitoring cockpit conversations to help keep pilots more focused on their responsibilities. If not as a general rule, then certainly one I endorse on each and every flight that I am on

[+ glutes]

 

Being the conservative type, I say no to calls for monitoring conversations. If you crash it is beneficial to have all the evidence available to determine the cause but not before.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

 

 

Thank you Captain, I concur with your view. There is a balance between safety and privacy, it really got me that the proposed audits would be 'random and anonymus'. Foot in the door, then they would expand it...

 

That said, after todays news of a ATC controllers kid giving directions to a JetBlue plane, I remembered the famous Aeroflot crash some 16 years ago:

 

"Aeroflot Flight 593, was a "Russian Airlines"[1] Airbus A310 passenger airliner, registration F-OGQS, operating on behalf of Aeroflot, which crashed into a hillside in Kemerovo Oblast on 23 March 1994. All 75 passengers and crew were killed.

 

Voice and flight data recorders revealed that the pilot's 15-year-old son Eldar Kudrinsky, while seated at the controls, had unknowingly disabled the A310's autopilot's control of the ailerons, which put the aircraft into a steep bank, and then an uncontrolled dive. The pilots were not aware of the partial disconnection of the autopilot, which occurred with no audible alarm, and did not regain control of the aircraft.

 

The accident sparked outrage in the aviation community around the world, and ultimately helped re-write many regulations on flight deck protocol and sterile cockpit environments. In addition, airlines around the world almost immediately began inspection and retraining of the autopilot devices onboard aircraft"

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_593

[KMEM]

jgoo-

 

This is no limit to what silly humans can think up to have fun and jepordize others. We see it all day, every day on the roads. Why should the airways be different? Just because we think we should hold all those to a different and higher standard does not make it so. There are plenty of other parallels to draw but, if I listed very many, this thread would be banished to the political forum. I would be pleased to show you how a professional flight should happen, if given the opportunity.

 

glutes-

 

I don't know which is worse, putting your child in a position to kill folks or letting a "female of the opposite sex" sit on your lap and kill folks. I have to disagree with both.

 

Don't forget the episode when the Swiss controller ran the Russian airliner into a freighter. Just plain neglect. As I recall, the family of one of the crew members sought out the controller and knifed him until dead, a possibly just but illegal solution to the family's plight.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[instudiocity]

Being the conservative type, I say no to calls for monitoring conversations. If you crash it is beneficial to have all the evidence available to determine the cause but not before.

 

Hmm, pretty much goes for driving as well. I drive 25,000 miles per year. 95% for business over rural interstate highways. My 9 year old car has 215,000 miles on it with only parking lot dings. I've driven nearly 1,000,000 miles in the last 30 years. I've eaten, talked on the cellphone up beside my head, text, email, surfed the web, used my laptop. All wrecklessly.

 

So why do I need to worry about texting while driving? Talking on the phone without a hands-free device? Because other people made wrong decisions. I know when it is appropriate to divide my attention with other things and when it isn't. Frankly, I don't need anyone to tell me what to do when.

 

In this case, what's good for the goose, ain't necessarily good for this gander!

[instudiocity]

...in this specific case I come down on the side of safety for monitoring cockpit conversations to help keep pilots more focused on their responsibilities. If not as a general rule, then certainly one I endorse on each and every flight that I am on

 

The supervisor was suspended, too.

 

Now about this cockpit monitoring, what good is after the fact listening to cockpit recordings? First, cockpit recorders are restricted to what? The last 30 minutes. Second, does violating everyone's privacy justify the few bad apples. Third, put the shoe on the other foot - what if you employer or the govt were allowed to monitor your Internet activity. Don't you already know when and where you should or shouldn't be doing something?

[KMEM]

instudiocity-

 

Strangely enough, the last 30 minutes of a cockpit conversation includes the accident. Plus, the newer CVRs run about 90 minutes. In addition to what the pilots were saying, which could give a clue to what their mindset was and what difficulties they were experiencing, in the background, there are often identifiable sounds that indicate what various systems were doing. It could be important to know if the autopilot "kicked off" and whether it was un-noticed by the crew or not. Over speed warnings could be heard as well as stall warnings, those and more could be important clues regarding what was transpiring.

 

Otherwise, I read what you are saying as agreeing that privacy is more important that monitoring "routine" conversations. I think the Russians and others have proved this point over and over again. Why is the US not paying attention?

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[seeker630]

Monitoring

 

Third, put the shoe on the other foot - what if you employer or the govt were allowed to monitor your Internet activity. Don't you already know when and where you should or shouldn't be doing something?

If you work for a large company, particularly one with intellectual property, your internet habits at work ARE most likely recorded or monitored in some fashion.

We're not talking about what you do in your home - it's in the workplace, on the company's time.

To be honest, i'm ambivalent about this. But I'm cynical (or experienced) enough to think that *knowing what you should & shouldn't do is NOT a guarantee of correct behavior.

[Guest OCBeachbody]

That is to true... now a days privacy is a things of the past in the workplace.

That is why when ever I worked for a new company I quickly disable any internet browsers and delete them from the computer.... throw management into a quandry... but like I said... "your policy" use of the internet. Thank goodness for my iphone so at least can check my e-mails. Luckily in the job I am in they can't ban Iphone use..... yet.

 

In the end, I think we should not become a "Nanny State", too much control and fear of monitoring may cause more crashes in the end. You should be able to trust your employee or a professional that he is doing his job.

 

As for the kid, the only thing the controller should be busted for is access for unauthorized personnel in a restricted area. I heard the kid, he did a great job relaying the message. Technically as long as he is supervised what was the deal... if he had made a mistake... the controller would have stepped in.

Also if they ae going after the controller and supervisor, why not the pilot?

If this is such a big real issue, the pilot response should have been "Who is this? Please identify yourself? or You are not authorized for this converstion, patch me to another controller"....

[KMEM]

ATC these days is VERY busy and there is little to no time to be "quizzing" controllers. Often, even a short remark is "too much". Sometimes, pilots and controllers do get into disagreements over the air but that is quickly reduced to here is a phone number, call me when you get on the ground. I have actually asked the controller for a phone number so I could call him when I got on the ground for clarification and further commentary. A rare occasion.

 

Usually what happens when there is a dispute or mis-communication, the next voice you hear is a supervisor "taking charge" and straightening things out with a few words. Usually all are mollified and "order" is restored.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[instudiocity]

To be honest, i'm ambivalent about this. But I'm cynical (or experienced) enough to think that *knowing what you should & shouldn't do is NOT a guarantee of correct behavior.

 

Absolutely right. But it is a guarantee of our Liberty and our Pursuit of happiness! <grinning from ear to ear>!

[+ purplekow]

Lets see. These people are at work. They are supposed to be working not chitchatting. This is not funny hats, balloons and horns, this is work. You know where you work. And your boss should expect you to work. There is no personal conversation at work. That is why they call it work. There is no implied privacy at work. Hmmmm, did I mention this is work.

As for texting, while you drive, well if that is your own time you may certainly increase the risk to your life needlessly by doing that. It should just be a crime with a penalty if other people are hurt by your needless distraction. As for knowing when to divide your time between driving and doing something else, well that should be never. While you are driving, you should be driving. It is arrogant to assume that you know when to divide your attention. You may feel it is low risk, but you can't know it is safe until it is over. I am not blind to the fact that there are all sorts of diversions when we drive, most of them do not carry the risk of texting and hand held phone conversations which have been shown to be as risky as drunk driving.