NTSB wants to monitor flight deck conversations

The Python sketch has been a favorite of mine. The other great prank that would involve a lot of lawyers is to go spastic (can I use that word?) and start screaming as if in pain when you go through the screening device. The other pilot is yelling "TURN IT OFF.. TURN IT OFF!" and the first guy then goes limp on the floor.

Yep.. time off for sure but it would be interesting to watch the pax and their response.
 
If I ever found myself in situation where I was about to crash and die I am going to try to yell 'Where the hell did those penguins come from?!'
 
mshunter said:
So, anyone who is in an airplane required to have a "black box", make me understand why you are so against it, if only the NTSB will be reviewing the tapes? If they use the tapes purely as anonymous information, would you still object (i.e. no certificate/employer action could come from the tapes).
Click to expand...

Thats the problem, they always say its non punitive to enhance safety. Problem is first time the media demands it, someone at the NTSB WILL leak it, I think Colgan 3407, and NWA 188 taught us that the NTSB has more holes than swiss cheese, they were leaking long before the final reports were out, and I found that disturbing as should most pilots...I dont have a problem with CVR's per se its the potential abuse of the info they contain that I dont like...

Now on a lighter note, my favorite thing to do late at night is to say things like, Hey Cap you see that weird green light in the distance, oh man its coming right at us, duck.....just in case they are checking....it also helps to make sure the captains awake. :insane:
 
Man, the things that are said up there....


And as long as you push the CB back in after you run off the runway... similiar to the whole "Whats the last thing a pilot does after landing gear up in an airplane?"
 
I would shoot for a recording of fingernails on a chalk board, play it through a little setup like a pair of headphones resting on the CAM... make that tape torture to listen to...

not sure about everybody else, but our cvr takes pilot 1 boom/mask/Mic, pilot 2 boom/mask/Mic, observer boom/mask, CAM 1 (glare shield) CAM2 ( low on the center panel)

Just covering one of the CAM's won't do it... and honestly with the hotmic in the Q, even if you have your headset off it will prob. be picked up.
 
If it were used like FOQA data, essentially rolled into FOQA as another data feed, I would not only think it's ok, it would be a huge increase in safety. Another would be video in the cockpit, to include inputs to all the control inputs. Doesn't need pilot faces, that would not have much value, but to confirm that they actually pushed a button or attempted to activate a control would be good for both accident investigation as well as protecting pilots from being wrongly accused of not doing something they should have.
 
seagull said:
If it were used like FOQA data, essentially rolled into FOQA as another data feed, I would not only think it's ok, it would be a huge increase in safety.
Click to expand...

No not really.

With properly run LOSA observations, a fully functioning ASAP Program, and a robust FOQA program it can produce all the data you need to enhance safety.

Plus the technical ability to use the CVRs would be extremely difficult.
 
seagull said:
If it were used like FOQA data, essentially rolled into FOQA as another data feed, I would not only think it's ok, it would be a huge increase in safety. Another would be video in the cockpit, to include inputs to all the control inputs. Doesn't need pilot faces, that would not have much value, but to confirm that they actually pushed a button or attempted to activate a control would be good for both accident investigation as well as protecting pilots from being wrongly accused of not doing something they should have.
Click to expand...

Already can tell most of that with the DFDR. Why dont we put camera's at your place of work where you sit for 8-10 hours a day?
 
WalterSobchak said:
Already can tell most of that with the DFDR. Why dont we put camera's at your place of work where you sit for 8-10 hours a day?
Click to expand...

Not only does it do that, but much, much more accurately than a video ever could. Cockpit video cams lenses would end up with a nice thick snozzberry layer pretty quickly.

The problem with increasing the monitoring, is that the pilots will not trust managment to use it correctly, and it become a severe detriment to crm. Putting video cameras in the flight deck would never lead to anything good. It would add almost no additional valuable data to a foqa program. If it's not there for foqa then it's there to watch and snitch on the pilots...
 
Seggy said:
No not really.

With properly run LOSA observations, a fully functioning ASAP Program, and a robust FOQA program it can produce all the data you need to enhance safety.

Plus the technical ability to use the CVRs would be extremely difficult.
Click to expand...

You need to get more involved in investigations and analysis. You would see that those are FAR from "all the data" needed.
 
Gonzo said:
FYI: He is a check airman at FedEx.
Click to expand...

Not doing check airman work anymore, mostly involved in safety work, was chair of several safety and operational committees for the union previously, and was also part of several CAST working groups, etc. I guess that I should get another 20 years of active airline safety work to make it a solid 50 years of aviation safety work before I can have an opinion, though!:rolleyes:
 
TUCKnTRUCK said:
Not only does it do that, but much, much more accurately than a video ever could. Cockpit video cams lenses would end up with a nice thick snozzberry layer pretty quickly.

The problem with increasing the monitoring, is that the pilots will not trust managment to use it correctly, and it become a severe detriment to crm. Putting video cameras in the flight deck would never lead to anything good. It would add almost no additional valuable data to a foqa program. If it's not there for foqa then it's there to watch and snitch on the pilots...
Click to expand...

You totally miss the point. Let's say that a water bottle rolls under the rudder pedal and you try to push it and it doesn't move. You run off the side of the runway, and as you bounce along, the water bottle dislodges and heads aft. Looks like pilot error according to the DFDR. You say you were pushing on that rudder? "Yah, right, sure you were, we found nothing wrong with any of the flight controls."

The video should show you actually trying to push, and maybe even that water bottle. Same could be said of hitting a switch but it not taking, or bouncing back, etc. I could go on and on.
 
TUCKnTRUCK said:
Not only does it do that, but much, much more accurately than a video ever could. Cockpit video cams lenses would end up with a nice thick snozzberry layer pretty quickly.

The problem with increasing the monitoring, is that the pilots will not trust managment to use it correctly, and it become a severe detriment to crm. Putting video cameras in the flight deck would never lead to anything good. It would add almost no additional valuable data to a foqa program. If it's not there for foqa then it's there to watch and snitch on the pilots...
Click to expand...

Similar issue: In the fighters I flew in the AF, all of our HUDs have cameras just behind the combining glass that films what we're doing and whats displayed in the HUD as well as in the front of the aircraft; plus all the radio comm. The tapes are titled in the beginning, so it's known who/what/when that particular event occurred (as the tapes do get recycled). It varies Wing by Wing when we're required to have the cameras on, but generally its takeoff/landing and any mission-related portions of the flight. The intent of these cameras is for mission review and debrief, as well as can be used post-accident as a record of what occurred (pending it survives). However the DO in one of my units would regularly make a random review of HUD tapes in order to check for things he's interested in, such as flight discipline, etc. So, "how its used" by management could widely vary.
 
MikeD said:
Similar issue: In the fighters I flew in the AF, all of our HUDs have cameras just behind the combining glass that films what we're doing and whats displayed in the HUD as well as in the front of the aircraft; plus all the radio comm. The tapes are titled in the beginning, so it's known who/what/when that particular event occurred (as the tapes do get recycled). It varies Wing by Wing when we're required to have the cameras on, but generally its takeoff/landing and any mission-related portions of the flight. The intent of these cameras is for mission review and debrief, as well as can be used post-accident as a record of what occurred (pending it survives). However the DO in one of my units would regularly make a random review of HUD tapes in order to check for things he's interested in, such as flight discipline, etc. So, "how its used" by management could widely vary.
Click to expand...

If used like a FOQA program, the information would be deidentified and only the union "gatekeepers" would be privy to the flight specific identification information. Problems would be forwarded to the union pro stan committee, not to management. Management gets only deidentified stuff to use in developing training programs, identify trends, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top