Gotta do something about these "suicide by crashes"

[Guest]

No one seems to be saying it yet, but it's looking more and more as if that Germanwings pilot decided to commit suicide by crashing a planeload of people. It seems like that's what could have happened in that Indian Ocean Malaysian Airlines flight, too. It seems there needs to be some action in order to prevent these events...

[BabyBoomer]

It happened about 15 years ago with Egypt Air 990 too.

 

~ Boomer ~

[gallahadesquire]

We could, just for shits and giggles [i wish [i]someone[/i] would explain that expression to me!], we could start enumerating methods of suicide.

 

I've never done this taxonomy. I apologize, as my knowledge of torture and execution will blend into this.

 

I would assume it would start with classes:

 

Armaments (knives, guns / projectiles)

Gases, organic

Gases, inorganic

Drugs, with pharmaceutical applications

Drugs, without pharmaceutical applications

Substances, organic

Substances, inorganic

Physical methods (neck; arms; legs; other)

Other objects, animate (elephant)

Other objects, inanimate (airplanes)

 

Modifiers:

Collateral damage

Threat to others

Evaluation of failure ("Next time: THICKER rope, THIRD floor" was heard in the E.R. once ...)

 

Maybe this thread should merge with the one about assisted suicide.

 

If anyone thinks I'm serious about this: PEOPLE, I"m just kidding. This is an exercise in Intentional Absurdity, of which there seems to be too little of late. UN-Intentional absurdity, on the other hand, is running rampant.

[+ deej]

No one seems to be saying it yet, but it's looking more and more as if that Germanwings pilot decided to commit suicide by crashing a planeload of people.

 

Or he could have had a stroke at the yoke. The identities of the pilots have not yet been released, nor is there any evidence yet of which pilot may have been left in the cockpit. (And the source of the NYT story is unconfirmed by other news sources.)

 

There is no evidence yet that it's a suicide.

 

But yes, LET'S ALL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT! RUN AROUND! YELL!

 

PANIC! BECAUSE, Y'KNOW, THAT HELPS SO MUCH!

 

(What do you intend to do, by the way?)

[gallahadesquire]

An old quote:

 

When in trouble, or in doubt,

Run in circles, Scream, and Shout!

 

I'm temped to add a third line: Burma Shave.

[For those of you old enough to remember reading the rhymes at the side of the road]

[gallahadesquire]

Remember, Delta airlines had an interesting problem in the not so long ago, when a string got caught in the door. The Pilot stepped out to Take A Wizz, and the string blocked the door.

The Co-Pilot, who at this point we can assume was NOT GOD, had to land the thing. Easy, except maneuvering the beast once on the ground requires someone in the Number 1 seat (on the left).

They had to be towed to their berth.

[instudiocity]

UN-Intentional absurdity, on the other hand, is running rampant.

WAIT! The UN has a council for that shit, too? No, I'm giggling so hard I might shit myself.

[+ FreshFluff]

Law of unintended consequence (for the post-9/11 rules re cockpit doors).

[+ Gar1eth]

A French prosecutor says the co-pilot committed suicide. The story is in the NY Times. How horrible if true. Bad enough if it had been a plane malfunction, weather, or pilot error. But for the families to find out someone deliberately killed their children, parents, friends.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/27/world/europe/germanwings-crash.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share

 

Gman

[bigvalboy]

Now perhaps we can revisit Unicorn's inquiry, as sad and disturbing as it is....clearly airlines need to revisit how pilots are screened during the hiring process

 

God bless those that lost their lives and may God bless the loved ones that are left behind.

[bobchitown]

It is now looking more and more like suicide. Alone in the cabin, pilot can he heard knocking on the door to be let in louder and louder, and meanwhile the voice recorder picks up the co-pilot breathing normally up until the very end and not saying a word. Chilling.

[maninsoma]

I don't think screening alone will address the issue. I fail to understand how it is that a pilot or copilot can be locked out of the cockpit against his will. Surely they can design these doors for both safety issues (preventing unauthorized persons from entering but also preventing anyone from disabling entry to authorized persons barring that person using brute force to block the door).

[Tonyko]

(quote) I don't think screening alone will address the issue. I fail to understand how it is that a pilot or copilot can be locked out of the cockpit against his will. Surely they can design these doors for both safety issues (preventing unauthorized persons from entering but also preventing anyone from disabling entry to authorized persons barring that person using brute force to block the door).

Sorry but ANYONE OUTSIDE that door be it pilot or first officer or #1 F Attendant etc with the ability to enter that door from the cabin is an instant target. The only thing preventing another 911 type intrusion is the knowlege that NO ONE can get in the cockpit unless someone inside LETS them in. (remember the cell vid Crazy Jet Blue pilot last year screaming the plane must go down as he was being restrained by attendants and passengers? That smart first officer picking up on his erratic behavior and having the ability to lock that unstable pilot OUT is what possibly SAVED that plane from this same fate)

MY solution?? (you'll notice this never happened on an extended 10hr-plus flight with a 3-4 person cockpit w relief pilot etc)

Require TWO ppl in the cockpit at ALL times. The pilot or 1st officer steps OUT to use the restroom: The #1 flight attendant steps IN and stands on the other side to let them back in. Christ, in LA CASTING SESSIONS are required to have two ppl in the room at all times to prevent any sexual misconduct or claims of, shouldn't our LIVES have the same precautions????

[Tonyko]

PS the requirement differs from nation to nation and even airline to airline, re mandatory TWO ppl in cockpit at all times.

[+ Charlie]

Just as there is no fail-safe method to completely eliminate accidents, there is no fail-safe way to completely prevent a determined person in the cockpit from crashing a plane. One person in the cockpit can disable the other person, two or more members of the flight crew (or passengers) can work together. etc. The one element that simply cannot be engineered is human nature, no matter how carefully crew and passengers are screened.

[Guest]

(What do you intend to do, by the way?)

 

I don't intend to do anything, obviously. I do believe that policies, rules, and regulations should be addressed to at least attempt to tackle this problem. One solution I thought of would be to have it so that if I pilot commits suicide by killing a plane-load of people, that all of his assets, as well as those of any living first-degree relatives, be liquidated to compensate the victims' families. That way the pilot would know that it wouldn't be just the relatives of his passengers whose lives are ruined, but his family's lives as well. But Tonyko's solution of having a policy that there must be two people in the cockpit at all times certainly seems simpler and probably even more effective.

[+ FreshFluff]

One solution I thought of would be to have it so that if I pilot commits suicide by killing a plane-load of people, that all of his assets, as well as those of any living first-degree relatives, be liquidated to compensate the victims' families.

 

That would be effective, but in the US, it may be unconstitutional. Also may be inconsistent with Germany's Basic Law.

 

I think pilots who intentionally bring down a plane full of people should be called mass murderers, not suicide cases. After all, the Virginia Tech and Columbine killers shot themselves too. The stigma attached to the term (versus "pilot suicide"), and the additional shame it would bring to his family, might serve as a deterrent to some considering this act.

 

Also, I wonder whether it would be effective to have the pilots greet the passengers coming in, just as the FAs do. It's been shown that looking one's victims in the eye makes it harder to kill them.

[rguer]

That would be effective, but in the US, it may be unconstitutional.

 

Another reason not to like Tom Cotton:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/tom-cotton-corruption-of-blood_n_3322251.html

[Tonyko]

QUOTE UNICORN I don't intend to do anything, obviously. I do believe that policies, rules, and regulations should be addressed to at least attempt to tackle this problem. One solution I thought of would be to have it so that if I pilot commits suicide by killing a plane-load of people, that all of his assets, as well as those of any living first-degree relatives, be liquidated to compensate the victims' families. That way the pilot would know that it wouldn't be just the relatives of his passengers whose lives are ruined, but his family's lives as well. But Tonyko's solution of having a policy that there must be two people in the cockpit at all times certainly seems simpler and probably even more effective.

Yes!!! Re families!!! I was thinking that EXACT SAME thing today!!! I was thinking it (re a German airline) because of their policies during the war, and how FEW Wermacht (sic) soldiers deserted, even if they were anti-Nazi and not anti-semetic themselves, because even IF they managed to get away, they knew their families would suffer HORRIBLE consequences as a result. Granted this guy had to know his family would bear horrible guilt and shame, and resent him for the rest of their days for what he has done, but would they HATE him??? Revile him??? Probably not. If he has parents he probably did this believing they would still Morn him in some way. BUT if someone contemplating this KNOWS that their parents grand parents siblings wife children neices nephews all loved ones etc etal would lose EVERYTHING THEY OWN HOMES SAVINGS POSSESSIONS ETC ETC AND SUFFER THE REST OF THEIR LIVES (AND PROBABLY DETEST THEM FOR IT), WOULD THEY THINK TWICE BEFORE TAKING 150 INOCENT LIVES WITH THEM AND SIMPLY JUMP OFF AN ALP ALONE IF THEY'RE DETERMINED TO END IT?? It really makes me wonder.

[+ Charlie]

I don't intend to do anything, obviously. I do believe that policies, rules, and regulations should be addressed to at least attempt to tackle this problem. One solution I thought of would be to have it so that if I pilot commits suicide by killing a plane-load of people, that all of his assets, as well as those of any living first-degree relatives, be liquidated to compensate the victims' families. That way the pilot would know that it wouldn't be just the relatives of his passengers whose lives are ruined, but his family's lives as well. But Tonyko's solution of having a policy that there must be two people in the cockpit at all times certainly seems simpler and probably even more effective.

What is the justification of punishing the pilot's relations, who are not responsible in any way for his actions? People who engage in irrational, extreme actions are not usually deterred by concerns about the well-being of their families--they may even be trying, consciously or unconsciously, to hurt their families. The assumption that a pilot who commits suicide by flying a plane full of passengers into the ground is engaged in a rational act from which he could be dissuaded by a rational argument is ridiculous.

[+ quoththeraven]

I don't intend to do anything, obviously. I do believe that policies, rules, and regulations should be addressed to at least attempt to tackle this problem. One solution I thought of would be to have it so that if I pilot commits suicide by killing a plane-load of people, that all of his assets, as well as those of any living first-degree relatives, be liquidated to compensate the victims' families. That way the pilot would know that it wouldn't be just the relatives of his passengers whose lives are ruined, but his family's lives as well. But Tonyko's solution of having a policy that there must be two people in the cockpit at all times certainly seems simpler and probably even more effective.

 

Not to speak of a whole lot less punitive toward people who had nothing to do with it. Going after the relatives is cruel and uncalled for.

 

BTW, the airline is certain to be vicariously liable and is in a much better position to bear these costs than private individuals. So what you call for isn't necessary as a means of compensation anyway.

 

The only other action I can think of is ongoing mental health screening, but I assume that's already part of pilot licensing and recertification.

[Guest]

In light of this week's horrific Germanwings crash, Norwegian Air is taking steps to adopt new cockpit rules.

 

The airline will instruct all flights to have at least two crew members in the cockpit "as soon as possible," the company said in a press release. Airline spokeswoman Charlotte Holmbergh-Jacobsson told the Associated Press that the new rule, which the airline has been thinking about for a while, will go into affect on all global flights as soon as it gets approval from the Norwegian Civil Aviation Authority.

 

Other airlines, including Finnair, already mandate that at least two crew members be in the cockpit at all times, the AP reports. American carriers require that any pilot who leaves the cockpit be replaced by a flight attendant so that two people remain inside at all times.

 

On Thursday, Easy Jet and Air Canada announced that they will change their procedures to require two crew members in the flight deck at all times.

 

The idea of making relatives pay wasn't to provide survivors with compensation, but more of a thought that it might make suicidal pilots consider another method. But I agree that the 2 crew in the cockpit at all times is a smarter and simpler solution.

[BabyBoomer]

All airlines should go back to 3 men in the cockpit. Pilot, copilot, & third pilot. The third pilot through the years has been referred to as the second officer, navigator, flight engineer. The frequency of psychological evaluations needs to be increased. I assume the flight attendant is in the cockpit only to open the door to let the other pilot back into the cockpit, No flight attendant knows how to fly a plane!

 

~ Boomer ~

[gallahadesquire]

I have to read this more carefully, but on a recent flight from Orlando to Boston, there were three (3) people in the cockpit: Two in uniform, and one in just old ordinary clothes. #3 was an air marshall, I think.

 

The missile silos had two people to prevent mishaps from happening ala Dr. Strangelove. [POE = Peace On Earth, Purity of Essence]. At the Titan II Missile Museum in Tucson*, they said not only was a single

team on for 24 hours (I think); they had to remain in eyesight of each other at all times. Yes, including the bathroom.

 

*Highly recommended, especially for those of us who remember the Cold War.

[rvwnsd]

...The idea of making relatives pay wasn't to provide survivors with compensation, but more of a thought that it might make suicidal pilots consider another method. But I agree that the 2 crew in the cockpit at all times is a smarter and simpler solution.

 

If the idea that killing more than one hundred people doesn't deter a pilot from slamming a jet into the ground I doubt the prospect of liquidating the pilot's assets and distributing the proceeds to the crash victims' families will deter them, either.

 

"Doing something" is a natural urge. However, there are times when there isn't anything that can be done. This is one of those times.