Cameras & cockpits ...

If the fire was above the cockpit environment how would the camera have captured it on video (and again through the smoke)?

And there's a difference between working in a bank or office were cameras are monitoring an entire room compared to a camera at each, individual desk/workstation. Huge difference.
 
No problem R2F. We don't know how much smoke there was in the cockpit since there wasn't a camera, so I can't answer your question.

I guess I'm just apt to believe the NTSB investigators on this one. When solving a puzzle I like to have all the pieces to work with.
 
How many incidents are there per year where an airline pulls a CVR to bust pilots for complaining about work?
 
R2F
I'm not sure and wasn't able to find why the TSB (remember it was in Canada) believed cameras would have helped them. When I saw a documentary on PBS of the crash they wanted to know when the crew smelled smoke, and from where is was coming from. Egypt Air 990 needed a camera to positively determine it was the R. FO who committed sucide.

I don't believe that there has ever been a crash in the US where the CVR was leaked to the media. I know there was a crash, I think in South America, that the CVR was leaked and the media showed no shame in playing it.

Again, the more information the NTSB can get the better. Exacly why they are adding paramiters to the FDR- just add the video feed.
 
[ QUOTE ]
How many incidents are there per year where an airline pulls a CVR to bust pilots for complaining about work?

[/ QUOTE ]

What's your point? You said you worked under cameras and I said there is a big difference between a camera in a room versus one at your desk.

And, again - not to be a jerk - if the fire was outside the cockpit environemt (i.e. above in the "baffles") how would a camera recording the cockpit environment been able to capture evidence of a fire, aside from smoke (which was established as being present via the CVR and other evidence)?
 
[ QUOTE ]
What's your point? You said you worked under cameras and I said there is a big difference between a camera in a room versus one at your desk.


[/ QUOTE ]

I was countering the assertion that "Big Brother" could use this video recording against pilots, not your "big difference" statement.

So if someone can't show me that airline bosses use the CVR to bust pilots then I can't believe them when they make the above assertion.
 
First: I’m kind of "middle of the road" with camera's...no opinion yet.

Second: The Videos will be leaked, they always are. Just like CVR's, look for any crash you want, if you can't find the audio you can surely find the transcript.

Third: SR111 crashed because:
a. Fire caused by arcing in the newly installed video system that ran extremely hot with no cooling method, and was also wired incorrectly, by passing the cabin-bus switch.
b. The fire proof insulation on the MD-11 was not fire proof.
c. The pilots did not land quickly enough, instead they followed Swiss Air company policy and worked the check list for smoke in the cockpit while they turned around and went back over the ocean to dump fuel.

How would the camera have prevented this from happening?
 
That was one sentence, one minor point as an aside ... but you still haven't answered my question about how a camera could record an image outside it's field of view. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
First: I’m kind of "middle of the road" with camera's...no opinion yet.

Second: The Videos will be leaked, they always are. Just like CVR's, look for any crash you want, if you can't find the audio you can surely find the transcript.

Third: SR111 crashed because:
a. Fire caused by arcing in the newly installed video system that ran extremely hot with no cooling method, and was also wired incorrectly, by passing the cabin-bus switch.
b. The fire proof insulation on the MD-11 was not fire proof.
c. The pilots did not land quickly enough, instead they followed Swiss Air company policy and worked the check list for smoke in the cockpit while they turned around and went back over the ocean to dump fuel.

How would the camera have prevented this from happening?

[/ QUOTE ]

Two quick things:
1) Transcripts are released by the NTSB on most major crashes ... not leaked. It's policy.
2) It's not matter of cameras preventing an accident it's whether or not the info they record is valuable in determining a cause of an accident or incident. I'm sure in a handful of cases it might be but does the cost and potential downfalls outweigh the cost to install them? I, personaly, say no. Other's opinions will vary. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]

1) Transcripts are released by the NTSB on most major crashes ... not leaked. It's policy.


[/ QUOTE ]

You know I thought it was against policy to release CVR transcripts, but after looking I guess it's only the audio (which is still leaked or otherwise disseminated to the public quite often.)
 
I doubt video would have helped in the swissair crash..If you recall the FDR and CVR stopped recording a 1+ minutes before impact due to the burning wiring. I would imagine the a video recorder would have stopped at about the same time too...

Why don't they just encrypt and data link the FDR to a ground station. Then they would have a perfect copy instantly accessible in case of accident.

Also, I sure the tapes would get out. How many CVR tapes have you heard on the news. All too many.

The FEDS do need to mandate that companies cannot use the FDR / CVR data against pilots.... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bandit.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
You know I thought it was against policy to release CVR transcripts, but after looking I guess it's only the audio (which is still leaked or otherwise disseminated to the public quite often.)


[/ QUOTE ]
I'd like to see which CVR audio was leaked. I've only heard of one, and that was a crash in S.A. - outside of US laws. I really don't think it happened becasue ALPA would be citing it specifically to us about the time (no not in band camp) that a CVR was leaked and how it could happen again with the video feed

The CVR FDR stopped recording data 6 mins before the crash due to the fire severing its power. Because of this, the TSB recommended that they have independent battery power supply for when the main electric power is lost.

The NTSB releases transcripts. They are very much edited. Only the dialogue pertinent to the crash is released. If you have ever seen tape recordings of "big" CRM/ C/L/R accidents, they are only reenactments for learning purposes using those transcripts and the NTSB reports.

Yes, there is a cost to installing cameras in the A/C. The cost of a second, preventable crash is far greater IMO. And besides, how much can a VHS camcorder really cost--even w/ the aviation rip-off factor.

From what I have seen of the NTSB, if they think cameras would give them better insight into investigations-give it to 'em.
They seem to be the only part of the government out to find true answers and improve transportation safety.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[I'd like to see which CVR audio was leaked....

[/ QUOTE ]


If you really want, check out airdisaster.com, they have some CVR tapes to listen to (chilling!)
 
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, there is a cost to installing cameras in the A/C. The cost of a second, preventable crash is far greater IMO. And besides, how much can a VHS camcorder really cost--even w/ the aviation rip-off factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, but how do you think that cameras will prevent accidents? Not being an ass, just asking the question. Also, they want to put these into GA aircraft. Honestly, I could see more value in those because we GA pilots do not have the extensive training that a guy flying for the airlines does. We probably make more mistakes that can be used to prevent accidents.
 
I doubt you'd get any more data from having a camera in the cockpit above what you already get with FOQA and DFDR's.

Lets look at some accidents:

Valujet 592: Probably see lots of smoke then static. Probably useless.

American Airbus: Probably see the plane yaw and pitch, consistent with the DFDR data about control movements. Watch the pilots try to control and uncontrollable aircraft then static.

UAL/Colorado Springs: Probably see the aircraft snap roll, then static.

Every time a switch is moved, power is adjusted, control inputs made, any flight dynamic change whatsoever gets recorded on a digital flight data recorder. A lot of aircraft have "FOQA" (Flight Operations Quality Assurance?) when an operations center has a live feed to the aircraft's telemetry, configuration and position.

In reality, it'd just be another expense, another non safety-related electronic gadget that could short out and cause an emergency, or another thing that's going to end up a category "A" MEL item that goes deferred for months.
 
What about low time guys like me? Do you think it would be beneficial for us? We probably make mistakes that guys like you, with tens of thousands of hours, don't. And people could learn from those.

For example, seeing a GA pilot do the cross control stall/spin/crash on final might help save a life or two.
 
I don't know man!

All I know is that when Bill Waldock would show us crash tapes and NTSB "Go Team" footage during Aviation Safety courses at ERAU, I didn't really feel like going out to the flight line, or even eating at all! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Which brings up another safety issue. Most pilots don't learn from other mistakes because we think it'll never happen to us. Just like in some of the war movies when the commanding officer exclaims, 'Some of you boys won't make it home' and you see all of the soldiers looking around the room silently thinking "You poor guys are going to die!"
 
Putting cameras in the cockpit to "learn why accidents happen" would be kid of like having cameras in every office in America to "Learn why violence/sexual harrassment/racial discrimination happens in the workplace.

Very few folks would go for that....
 
[ QUOTE ]
Most pilots don't learn from other mistakes because we think it'll never happen to us. Just like in some of the war movies when the commanding officer exclaims, 'Some of you boys won't make it home' and you see all of the soldiers looking around the room silently thinking "You poor guys are going to die!"

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's true. People keep on dying every year by continuing to fly VFR under instrument conditions, get a little lower so they can see the ground, and then fly right into the side of a hill that they can't see.

And no matter how many times people hear about that, or are told not to do it, someone always does.
 
Heck, if you're 5 knots above your flap speed, the people on the ground here in ATL know instantly the telemetry of the aircraft. Unstabilized at 1000 AFE on an instrument approach? They already know. But the information is 'de-identified' and used to fine tune training, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top