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: 4
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

In over thirty years(closer to 40 if we look back to 1976 which was the first recorded suicide). It was almost 700 dead last year alone. Over 900 of you add MH17 to the list.

In a single year, as opposed to over thirty.

From 1976, counting non pilots that have stolen planes and crashed them, there have been 566 fatalities caused by suicide. That includes 4 on the ground.

That's an average of 14.5 fatalities a year due to suicides. As opposed to over 600 last year due to preventable accidents.
edit on 3/27/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3/27/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 06:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: Zaphod58


You would not need to totally redesigned the cockpit you could put a chemical toilet in there. But I'll stand by what I said. The pilots should not be allowed to leave the cockpit I don't care if they have to crap in a bucket and throw it out the window.


By the way earlier you were claiming it only happens rarely so why should we do anything.





In some helicopters they have a tube I believe, like coast guard helicopters. But I'm quite sure that adding a toilet or tube to the cockpit would not do anything to prevent someone determined to crash the plane from crashing it. How would it?

It is a rare occurrence compared to how ever many millions of flights there are each year. Why should something be done since its so rare I guess because when it does happen, its human nature to want to fix the problem, and come up with solutions so it never happens again, but since this is so rare, and when someone is determined to do it, I'm not sure much can be done to prevent it.

Having 2 people in the cockpit at all times would be a better option I think. But still, if someone wants to crash it, they will find a way regardless if there's a toilet or 2 people in there.
edit on 27-3-2015 by C84K2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Like I said it's only like 500 people. So who cares we shouldn't do nothing, we should continue to leave a gaping hole in the security of passengers. After all I'm sure their families couldn't give a crap either.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

So when are you going to demand that something be done about all the preventable car accidents? Or is it only planes? Or all the other preventable accidents that happen MUCH more frequently than this does?

You can twist it any way you want but the simple fact is that no matter what fool proof scheme you come up with if a pilot wants to crash the plane he is going to.

Putting a toilet in the cockpit isn't going to change anything. The other pilot is still away from the controls. Yes he can get back faster, but did you know that EgyptAir 990 had two pilots on the controls? One was trying to recover, the other was trying to crash. Having the other pilot come back and get on the controls did them no good at all.

Unless you're going to put diapers on pilots as soon as that other pilot steps away from the controls that other pilot is in complete control and can do anything he wants.
edit on 3/27/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3/27/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 06:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

You're talking apples and oranges. We can say the same thing about any multiple story building. If A brick falls off the 10th floor due to improper maintenance it's an accident. If a guy leans out the window and throws a brick down at somebody and kills them it's a crime. They are two completely different things there is no way you can compare them logically. One is mechanical failure or pilot error, the other is an intentional act to murder people which is a crime.

Hell the way you're saying it we might as will take down all the metal detectors at the airport if somebody wants to do would bad enough their going at Least that is your opinion on security.

Note 2 men were not struggling over the controls on flight 990. The captain excused himself the first officer shut down the engines reversed elevators and put them in a dive then he would not help pull to try to recover the aircraft. Noticed anything in common and that statement like one pilot at the controls for a while?


The cockpit voice recorder (CVR) recorded the captain excusing himself to go to the lavaotory, followed thirty seconds later by the first officer saying in Egyptian Arabic "Tawkalt ala Allah," which translates to "I rely on God." A minute later, the autopilot was disengaged, immediately followed by the first officer again saying, "I rely on God." Three seconds later, the throttles for both engines were reduced to idle, and both elevators were moved three degrees nose down. The first officer repeated "I rely on God" seven more times before the captain suddenly asked repeatedly, "What's happening, what's happening?" The flight data recorder reflected that the elevators then moved into a split condition, with the left elevator up and the right elevator down, a condition which is expected to result when the two control columns are subjected to at least 50 pounds (23 kgf) of opposing force.[1] At this point, both engines were shut down by moving the start levers from run to cutoff. The captain asked, "What is this? What is this? Did you shut the engines?" The captain is then recorded as saying "get away in the engines" (this is the literal translation that appears in the NTSB transcript), followed by "shut the engines". The first officer replies "It's shut". The final recorded words are the captain repeatedly stating, "Pull with me" but the FDR data indicated that the elevator surfaces remained in a split condition (with the left surface commanding nose up and the right surface commanding nose down) until the FDR and CVR stopped recording. There were no other aircraft in the area. There was no indication that an explosion occurred on board. The engines operated normally for the entire flight until they were shut down. From the presence of a western debris field about 1,200 feet (370 m) from the eastern debris field, the NTSB concluded that the left engine and some small pieces of wreckage separated from the aircraft at some point before water impact.[1]


A lot of this seems to happen on bathroom trips. God for bid you find a way for the pilots to go to the bathroom in the cockpit. To prevent over 500 murders every 30 years.
edit on 27-3-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

Uh, wrong. The Captain left to use the bathroom and then came back and tried to recover the aircraft.

Did you even read what you just quoted, beyond the Captain leaving?

From your quote, right there:


The flight data recorder reflected that the elevators then moved into a split condition, with the left elevator up and the right elevator down, a condition which is expected to result when the two control columns are subjected to at least 50 pounds (23 kgf) of opposing force.



The final recorded words are the captain repeatedly stating, "Pull with me" but the FDR data indicated that the elevator surfaces remained in a split condition (with the left surface commanding nose up and the right surface commanding nose down) until the FDR and CVR stopped recording.


Both pilots were fighting over the controls after the dive started. The Captain was pulling back, trying to bring the nose up, the relief Captain was pushing forward keeping the nose down. That's the only way to get a split elevator position in a 767. And the aircraft still crashed.

So what's your fool proof answer then. That shows that even with two pilots fighting over the controls the plane still crashes. So are you going to make the pilots wear diapers?

I used to work security at a major airport. You know what was one of the first things we were taught in training? With all the holes that are in an airport, there is no realistic way to stop a terrorist. We may stop individuals, but a truly determined group, no way. They could bribe a ramp agent, who doesn't go through security to get to work, and put something on the plane. Or one of the cleaners to leave something hidden in the cabin.

And 9/11 proved we can't stop them.

What part of, "as soon as the other pilot stands up the plane is out of his hands" did you not understand? Go back and actually read the EgyptAir 990 report. The Captain came back almost immediately after the dive started, fought the controls, and FAILED TO SAVE THE AIRCRAFT.

The ONLY way to prevent this is to put the pilots in diapers so they never have to get up.


edit on 3/27/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3/27/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I knew you would ignore the difference between mechanical failure and crime. You also cherry picked your comments and quotes I did find it humorous how desperate you are to cherry pick your highlighted statement. is expected is the part you left off. In no way does it say it is absolute. And yes I agree the captain came back quickly. But they did not fight over the controls as you claimed. The captain repeatedly shouted pull with me. But I'm sure it's quite simple maneuver to pool a jumbo jet out of the steep dive with no engines.

A key moment that you left out was that the pilot left the room to go to the bathroom. That is when the first officer was able to initiate these moves change in the elevators shutting down the engines. Will never know if a pilot was sitting next to him whether he could've stopped it or not, because the pilot left the cabin to go to the bathroom.

You've lost the moral debate now you are getting into specific parts of another debate. Bottom line there's a big difference between mechanical failure human error and a criminal act.

And is it truly your belief that criminal acts should not be addressed even when they murder over 500 people in 30 years?

Simple yes or no answer to my last question would be nice.
edit on 27-3-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

If they weren't fighting over the controls then the elevators wouldn't split. They would go to full nose up. But I'd expect someone that knows nothing about planes to not understand that.

It's really simple. In normal operation, when the yoke is pulled back, the elevators move down at the front. The entire system. It's not split so that you have to pull both back to get full nose up. You pull one back, the entire elevator moves as one.

If one pushes forward, and one pulls back, they split. The elevator on the side pushing forward goes to full nose down. The elevator on the side pulling back goes to full nose up. It's the only way for it to happen in a mechanically sound aircraft. The only other way for it to happen is a hydraulic failure, which did NOT happen here.

The Captain kept saying "pull with me" because in a dive that steep it requires full back on the control column, which requires a lot of force. It's easier if both pilots are pulling back, requiring less force from one person.

They have been addressed. They require two people in the cockpit at all times now. There's not much more that can be done. Even a lav in the cockpit won't stop it.
edit on 3/27/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 07:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Thank you for the explanation I now understand the fight over controls. But the key point of my argument before it got deflected was. The whole initiation process to doom that flight began when the captain left the cockpit to go to the bathroom.

No matter how many other subjects are brought up mechanical failures pilot error. My complaint from the beginning of this thread has been that the pilots should not leave the cockpit.

Two quick questions.

Does the senior officer have a override button or switch for the controls?

You said you work security at an airport were you a TSA employee?



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 07:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

Even if he never left the cockpit, he would have to leave the controls. Once he leaves the controls the aircraft is vulnerable, because it's entirely in the hands of one pilot. The ONLY way to prevent that is for the pilots to not get up unless a relief pilot is taking over, and then not to get up until they're standing beside the seat.

Even if he can get back to the controls immediately it's not a guarantee that he can save the plane if the other pilot fights him. There is no override to make one set of controls primary. Fly by wire systems have protections to prevent dual control inputs, but these can be switched off for safety reasons.

I worked there on 9/11, and worked after as a tech. Never for the TSA.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 07:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I apologize earlier in this thread I called you a pilot I now know that was an assumption .


Being 3 feet away from somebody instead of 30 feet if I saw someone shutting down the engines on the plane or programming the autopilot that I didn't think was right I could get there with my pants around my ankles a whole hell of a lot faster.Lol


I apologize for drilling you so hard on this subject. But it is my opinion that the airlines should do what ever they can be it mechanical failure, pilot error or preventing crime to help ensure their passengers safety.

And your it's going to happen anyway, minimizing did angered me some what. When people's lives are at risk you should do what ever you can to protect them.

I can almost guarantee steps will be taken now. It's a damn shame we had to wait 20 years for action.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 07:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

I was working towards my private license, and have almost 30 years on a ramp. I've done almost everything you can on and around an aircraft at some point.

There are only so many things that you can realistically do.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 07:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I can probably get you onto Wright Pat if you're interested. Nowadays they have a lot of security questions though. And they'll leave you sitting for year while they check your background. If you're interested PM me and we'll figure something out.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

If we get that way I will. I'm jonesing to hit the AF museum, and a chance to get on base again would be great.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Drop me a line if you get up there. If you go to Florida drop me a line I can get you in the Kennedy space Center. Not the museum the actual working facilities) Mac dill could also be a good possibility.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

We don't get down to Florida much but you can bet I will if we do.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 09:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: buddah6

That's one thing the FAA got right. The training requirements here make a huge difference, for both pilots and mechanics. Look at how many airlines from other parts of the world end up grounded or black listed because of training.

One of the new low cost Indian airlines did an audit, and found a number of their pilots were flying on forged certificates, or had invalid licenses.

Many of the middle eastern airlines hire their royalty and affluent regardless of their skill. Eastern airlines have a strict hierarchical class in the cockpit where the copilot has very little input to the flying the plane. The captains are gods with no exceptions.

US carriers adopted Cockpit Resource Management (CRM) policies in the 1980's after a DC-8 captain ran out of gas after his flight engineer was told to shut up about the low fuel state. Now, the whole crew has an input to flight safety.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join