Canadian airlines must have two crew in cockpit at all times
A spokesperson for Air Canada said the policy change is a direct result of reports that say one of the pilots on the fatal Germanwings Airbus flight was locked out of the cockpit during the plane’s deadly descent.
“We are implementing without delay a policy change to ensure that all flights have two people in the cockpit at all times,” Peter Fitzpatrick said in a statement.
No alterations needed. Two people in cockpit at all times regardless of skill sets. Pilot goes for a whizz, stewardess can replace his presence in cockpit with the expectation she will beat the snot out of any deranged pilots should they have a death wish like this German fellow. ...or at least unlock the door.
not sure that would work, unless she was Rambo...she/he are not familiar with the logs, there is just one button to push to descend......i guess we will never know if this locked cockpits have saved us any lives.
Next crash will be caused by a pilot attempting a go "around around" with the stewardess; rules will be changed so that the entire crew is required to wear chastity belts.
they might as well make a retro fit toilet for pilots inside the cockpit.. flying has become crazy.. u don't know who or what mental capacity the person flying has or is going through.
they might as well make a retro fit toilet for pilots inside the cockpit.. flying has become crazy.. u don't know who or what mental capacity the person flying has or is going through.
i can't see a space for a lavatory in the cockpit......thinking the air-marshals might be their best bet...
they might as well make a retro fit toilet for pilots inside the cockpit.. flying has become crazy.. u don't know who or what mental capacity the person flying has or is going through.
i can't see a space for a lavatory in the cockpit......thinking the air-marshals might be their best bet...
now they are banning bran muffins from the pilots lounge
This has been SOP for US-flagged carriers since 9/11 and they've managed just fine- it won't be a huge change operationally for Canadian carriers.
i recall a people being mad when they introduced these inflight marshals, the deal was we had to pay extra $20 bucks on top of our ticket..and of course we did no need this and that because 9/11 happened in USA...$20 is too much....sort of the same attitude when they announced paying $25 for checked luggage.
they might as well make a retro fit toilet for pilots inside the cockpit.. flying has become crazy.. u don't know who or what mental capacity the person flying has or is going through.
Except it's not that crazy. When you think about how many flights get from point a to b without incident it's staggering. Terrorist attacks and this crazy copilot make up a small small fraction of the boatload of flights that occur every year. It has to be something like .00000001% of flights have an issue. It's probably safer than driving a car.
The 21st century seems to panick after situations occur that I would consider outliers. Very rare things that are far outside the norm. Rules and regulations get setup to address these issues that are barely a problem. Complete panick after a one off incident.
Hi Zod, like most things, its a matter of sorting out the requirements. - prevent crazy guy from entering cockpit - provide override code such that a person with the code can enter cockpit (with caveat that door opens after 5 seconds which gives cockpit crew time to disengage the overide - I am assuming to ensure legitimate person is allowed in and not being forced to enter overide code by cwazy person) - missing requirement (way to access cockpit by sane pilot after cwazy guy locks him out) Solution is easiest solved by never leaving cwazy guy alone.
The 21st century seems to panick after situations occur that I would consider outliers. Very rare things that are far outside the norm. Rules and regulations get setup to address these issues that are barely a problem. Complete panick after a one off incident.
The great majority of people are unable to grasp the perspective of large numbers. They understand the numbers themselves, their brain is just unable to properly juxtapose the difference between them.
The 21st century seems to panick after situations occur that I would consider outliers. Very rare things that are far outside the norm. Rules and regulations get setup to address these issues that are barely a problem. Complete panick after a one off incident.
OTOH it was reasonable after 9/11 to provide a physical defense for the airplane cockpit.
Consider: US TSA inspectors even these days confiscate over 2,000 firearms a year from people going through airport checkpoints:
a) Surely they miss some, so the number is really higher.
b) And that is among people who KNOW IN ADVANCE that they will be screened, but were carrying the weapons anyway !!
So defenses are still needed, the question is how to not have them backfire.
The 21st century seems to panick after situations occur that I would consider outliers. Very rare things that are far outside the norm. Rules and regulations get setup to address these issues that are barely a problem. Complete panick after a one off incident.
The great majority of people are unable to grasp the perspective of large numbers. They understand the numbers themselves, their brain is just unable to properly juxtapose the difference between them.
Tell that to the families of the people that died, namely, what happened were due to issues "that are barely a problem." If there WAS two people in that Cockpit this might not have happened.
In this day and age it doesn't require a brain scientist to address the fact that one person should not be alone in the cockpit. In the time taken for the bathroom break the one person could have a medical emergency.
If they can hack protected websites, I would not bet on an airplane being safe either.......... Psychologically not viable until the paying public is used to remote controlled cars......
In this day and age it doesn't require a brain scientist to address the fact that one person should not be alone in the cockpit. In the time taken for the bathroom break the one person could have a medical emergency.
But what if there's a chemical fire in the cockpit and both persons present are suddenly incapacitated? Should there also be a third pilot outside the cockpit at all times? What if the aircraft suffers sudden depressurization, shouldn't we have another pilot in his own sealed compartment with it's own, completely independant pressurization system? What if, what if, what if...
The world is a dangerous place. People die. Aircrafts are orders of magnitude safer, no matter the number of people in the cockpit (unless the number is zero but I haven't heard of that one yet though).
There's absolutely NOTHING you can do to stop someone bent on killing from doing so. All you can do is punish them after the fact and hope that the prospect of punishment is enough to keep them from acting on their desire.
I guess not....and even if it were, people would bitch over a computer system controlling the flight.
As it stands today, all current Airbus aircraft flying are fully computer controlled (fly by wire), while the B777, B787 & B747-8 have varying degrees of fly by wire as well.
The 21st century seems to panick after situations occur that I would consider outliers. Very rare things that are far outside the norm. Rules and regulations get setup to address these issues that are barely a problem. Complete panick after a one off incident.
Yup, purely a knee-jerk reaction. One mentally ill pilot kills ~180 pax, yet millions of flights a year transporting billions of people a year fly successfully with no issues - and yet it's treated as a crisis.
Geez, what about all the drunk drivers killing people every year - doesn't seem to be treated like much of a crisis in comparison. *sigh*
The 21st century seems to panick after situations occur that I would consider outliers. Very rare things that are far outside the norm. Rules and regulations get setup to address these issues that are barely a problem. Complete panick after a one off incident.
OTOH it was reasonable after 9/11 to provide a physical defense for the airplane cockpit.
Consider: US TSA inspectors even these days confiscate over 2,000 firearms a year from people going through airport checkpoints:
a) Surely they miss some, so the number is really higher.
b) And that is among people who KNOW IN ADVANCE that they will be screened, but were carrying the weapons anyway !!
So defenses are still needed, the question is how to not have them backfire.
Were metal detectors not common in use before 9/11? I'm pretty sure you couldn't bring a gun onto a plan back then either. There was a reason the 9/11 hijackers used boxcutters?
I do agree that locking the cockpit was a good idea. It prevents the plane from getting taken over.
