It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Could It Happen Here? - Pilot Suicide

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 07:23 AM
link   
Zaphod58 has actually said similar things here on ATS about safety protocol.

No according to the aviation experts and here's why. I'll provide to stories and links that show the FAA and procedures here in the USA are different than other countries.

It would be next to impossible for the same scenario that took the life of all the passengers on Germanwings Flight 9525, by the co-pilot, so say the experts.

Could it happen here?


Moreover, U.S. pilots cannot be left alone in the cockpit — the fatal error that investigators say doomed the Germanwings flight. “It’s just a common-sense issue,” said aviation security expert Glenn Winn. “If you have a two-person cockpit, you don’t leave [one of] them alone up there.” In Europe, however, there is no requirement that two crew members be in the cockpit at all times. After the crash, European carriers were moving swiftly to adopt such rules; on Thursday, Norwegian Airlines became the first to announce that its flights would adhere to those guidelines.




FAA rules on pilot mental health, cockpit doors

www.kmtr.com...





Q. What are the U.S. rules that apply when pilots leave the cockpit?


A. U.S. airlines have to develop procedures that the FAA approves. Those procedures include a requirement that, when one of the pilots exits the cockpit for any reason, another qualified crew member must lock the door and remain on the flight deck until the pilot returns to his or her station. A qualified crew member could be a flight attendant or a relief pilot serving as part of the crew.



So now maybe some of us can rest a bit easier knowing this scenario will not happen in the USA.
edit on 27-3-2015 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 07:37 AM
link   
Depression is a very powerful thing. Many of us deal with it, and some of us don't even know we have it. Someone determined enough could subdue another crew member/flight attendant, especially if body size and strength play a factor. Never say never, anything is possible. I just hope this event hasn't put this in the mind of some disturbed pilots as the way to go.



edit on 27-3-2015 by Passive because: typos



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 07:39 AM
link   
It damn near happened on FedEx Flight 705, so I would hesitate to say that something can't happen.
Wikipedia: FedEx Flight 705
It is more difficult for exactly what happened on the crashed plane this week to happen on a US carrier, but a pilot could disable another crew member in the cockpit as was attempted on Flight 705.
edit on bu312015-03-27T07:42:00-05:0007America/ChicagoFri, 27 Mar 2015 07:42:00 -05007u15 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 07:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Realtruth

Now it would be much harder. But it did happen here in the past Egyptian air flight 990.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Realtruth

Perhaps this was a false flag to boost support for pilotless commercial flights. Sad thing is, could a pilotless aircraft not also commit suicide too...remember the all singing all dancing brand new fly by wire French plane that decided to land in a forest when the pilot was only attempting a fly-by to show it off? Not really suicide and thankfully there were few passengers but still, an avoidable accident caused by a "thinking" plane.




Air France Flight 296 was a chartered flight of a newly-delivered fly-by-wire Airbus A320-111 operated by Air France. On June 26, 1988, as part of an air show it was scheduled to fly over Mulhouse-Habsheim Airport (ICAO code LFGB) at a low speed with landing gear down at an altitude of 100 feet, but instead slowly descended to 30 feet before crashing into the tops of trees beyond the runway. Three passengers died. The cause of the accident is disputed, as many irregularities were later revealed by the accident investigation. This was the first crash of an Airbus A320

edit on 27/3/2015 by nerbot because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 08:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: nerbot
a reply to: Realtruth

Perhaps this was a false flag to boost support for pilotless commercial flights. Sad thing is, could a pilotless aircraft not also commit suicide too...remember the all singing all dancing brand new fly by wire French plane that decided to land in a forest when the pilot was only attempting a fly-by to show it off?


That is actually a great question, since all commercial planes have auto pilot.

Since I'm not an expert in this area maybe Zap or some others could comment. Great question!



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

FedEx 705 had an extra crew member, and didn't involve one pilot leaving the cockpit.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

Which was not a US carrier. This is only talking about US carriers.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Realtruth

if a rogue pilot wanted to dope any other cockpit members drinks, then it doesn't matter how many are in the cockpit.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: nerbot

There isn't a push for pilotless planes though. Everyone in the industry has talked about it, and the general concensus is that it will be years before any kind of remote system is even attempted, when it is tried, it will be on cargo aircraft and there will always be at least one pilot on board.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Greathouse

Which was not a US carrier. This is only talking about US carriers.


I beg to differ about the meaning of the word here. It took off from JFK and 100 Americans were killed. Sorry that follows under the definition of here to me.

Edit; Zap my main point for bringing Egyptian air flight 990 up is. That pilot suicide happened before why are we discussing this issue again? Many people should look at history when a event happens, people say there's always a first time yet that rarely happens at all. This issue should of been settled after flight 990 yet it wasn't.
edit on 27-3-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-3-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

Which means nothing. A US carrier is an air carrier flagged in the United States, and owned by a United States based company.

It hasn't been addressed because I can almost count pilot suicides on one hand. That's going back to the 60s and 70s, when rules were much more relaxed.
edit on 3/27/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Did you read my edit?



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

Read and edited in a reply to it.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: butcherguy

FedEx 705 had an extra crew member, and didn't involve one pilot leaving the cockpit.

Just to be clear, would you say that it would be impossible for a pilot (a depressed or suicidal one) to hit the other crew member (whether it be copilot or steward... what have you) with a blunt object while locked in the cockpit and then deliberately crash the aircraft?

Because I thought I was clear enough that the hammer, handled by a FedEx employee was my point in my post. It wouldn't have to be a hammer either. It could be a coffee mug, a belt used as a garrote or something equally non-threatening.
edit on b000000312015-03-27T09:54:10-05:0009America/ChicagoFri, 27 Mar 2015 09:54:10 -0500900000015 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I remember this exact same discussion after Egyptian air flight 990. Calls for new rules to have more than one person in the cockpit.

Does the FFA require foreign carriers to operate under our rules when over our airspace?



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

It's remotely possible.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

It's kind of a grey area for rules like this. For major rules, it's easy to enforce. For rules like this they SHOULD follow it, but barring am FAA inspector on board there's no proving if they are or not.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

That reply kind of makes this whole thread null and void. Without an FAA inspector on every flight it could certainly happen here.

"When people fail to study history they are doomed to repeat it."

Paraphrased



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: butcherguy

It's remotely possible.

Actually, there is a remote chance that it could happen for every flight that takes off.
Obviously, it is very remote, but people won't be in as much fear if we don't make a better effort to scare them.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join