Arguing pilots fly 150 miles past runway

[sushi]

Here's some interesting information on the incident:

Both pilots were interviewed separately by NTSB investigators yesterday in Minnesota. The following is an overview of the interviews:

• The first officer and the captain were interviewed for over 5 hours combined.
• The Captain, 53 years old, was hired in 1985. His total flight time is about 20,000 hours, about 10,000 hours of A-320 time of which about 7,000 was as pilot in command.
• The First Officer, 54 years old, was hired in 1997. His total flight time is about 11,000 hours, and has about 5,000 hours on the A-320.
• Both pilots said they had never had an accident, incident or violation.
• Neither pilot reported any ongoing medical conditions.
• Both pilots stated that they were not fatigued. They were both commuters, but they had a 19-hour layover in San Diego just prior to the incident flight. Both said they did not fall asleep or doze during the flight.
• Both said there was no heated argument.
• Both stated there was a distraction in the cockpit. The pilots said there was a concentrated period of discussion where they did not monitor the airplane or calls from ATC even though both stated they heard conversation on the radio. Also, neither pilot noticed messages that were sent by company dispatchers. They were discussing the new monthly crew flight scheduling system that was now in place as a result of the merger. The discussion began at cruise altitude.
• Both said they lost track of time.
• Each pilot accessed and used his personal laptop computer while they discussed the airline crew flight scheduling procedure. The first officer, who was more familiar with the procedure was providing instruction to the captain. The use of personal computers on the flight deck is prohibited by company policy.
• Neither pilot was aware of the airplane's position until a flight attendant called about 5 minutes before they were scheduled to land and asked what was their estimated time of arrival (ETA). The captain said, at that point, he looked at his primary flight display for an ETA and realized that they had passed MSP. They made contact with ATC and were given vectors back to MSP.
• At cruise altitude - the pilots stated they were using cockpit speakers to listen to radio communications, not their headsets.
• When asked by ATC what the problem was, they replied "just cockpit distraction" and "dealing with company issues".
• Both pilots said there are no procedures for the flight attendants to check on the pilots during flight.

I can't imagine not completing a cockpit scan -- even a partial one -- every 30 seconds to a minute. If true, these guys must really have been distracted by their non pilot duty cockpit discussion.

 

[leomac08]

Pilots are humans too........

 

[jecapaga]

I can't imagine not completing a cockpit scan -- even a partial one -- every 30 seconds to a minute. If true, these guys must really have been distracted by their non pilot duty cockpit discussion.

dmr727 touched on this and I just can't even imagine that not every few seconds to minutes scanning the controls and area. To not do this almost seems unnatural. How did they just not respond to all of the different responses they received to check in? Can't imagine just losing myself in a laptop for that long. Where is the human instinct to "check the road". Scary really.

If the cockpit has become so automated that it promotes tuning out human attention I don't think that's a good thing. The fact that they did this and Delta has now come out and said any pilot caught using a laptop in flight is against the rule and will be fired makes me wonder how prevalent this is. Because you know this was not the first time for these seasoned veterans.

No doubt they should lose their license.

 

[iBlue]

So I'm not the only one who thinks the laptop excuse is a a big steaming pile of dookie? It seems like it's actually a lousy lie to tell because what if it suddenly becomes regulation for laptops not to be present in the cockpit? Ruining it for pilots who are more responsible than that.

I admit, I don't know jack about piloting other than what dmr727 and sushi tell me but if I were a gambling sort of girl I'd bet they fell asleep and they're too embarrassed to admit it. I also wonder if this laptop lie could more damaging than the probable truth of sleeping. (?)

 

[Thomas Veil]

So I'm not the only one who thinks the laptop excuse is a a big steaming pile of dookie? It seems like it's actually a lousy lie to tell because what if it suddenly becomes regulation for laptops not to be present in the cockpit? Ruining it for pilots who are more responsible than that.

Actually, it already is against regulations on this airline.

 

[Hmac]

So if they fly an hour past MSP, by the time they turn around and land, the last hour recorded will be the hour after they realized their mistake. Maybe we'll hear them making up a story though.

You mean they just didn't know that there was a CVR on board?

Uh...unlikely they'd have such a discussion during that part of the flight.

 

[sushi]

So I'm not the only one who thinks the laptop excuse is a a big steaming pile of dookie?

Believe me, this has crossed my mind a time or two.

Even if they didn't have their headsets on, and were listening on speakers, I still find it hard to believe that they didn't hear ATC or any other calls.

I admit, I don't know jack about piloting other than what dmr727 and sushi tell me but if I were a gambling sort of girl I'd bet they fell asleep and they're too embarrassed to admit it. I also wonder if this laptop lie could more damaging than the probable truth of sleeping. (?)

That's definitely a good question. Either is bad. Being distracted while on a computer, which against the airline rules, is probably better than having fallen asleep, which would be in violation of FAA regulations.

In short hand, maybe this:

• Computer = Fired (or face heavy disciplinary action). Can still fly with their current airline or another airline.
  
• Asleep = FAA license suspension. If permanent, their flying days are over.

dmr727, what do you think?

 

[Gregg2]

Being distracted while on a computer, which against the airline rules, is probably better than having fallen asleep, which would be in violation of FAA regulations.

Better in terms of how much hot water the pilots find themselves in? Not better, IMO, for the safety of the passengers and crew. They were intentionally distracted. They just flat were not paying attention to what they were supposed to be paying attention to. Had they been asleep, something could have awoken them sooner. It seems unlikely that two people could doze off at the same time, and both be asleep for over 75 minutes. Even unplanned naps during the day tend to be brief.

 

[sushi]

Better in terms of how much hot water the pilots find themselves in? Not better, IMO, for the safety of the passengers and crew. They were intentionally distracted. They just flat were not paying attention to what they were supposed to be paying attention to. Had they been asleep, something could have awoken them sooner. It seems unlikely that two people could doze off at the same time, and both be asleep for over 75 minutes. Even unplanned naps during the day tend to be brief.

I was strictly looking at it from the pilot's perspective -- which excuse would put them in less hot water.

Safety of the passengers and crew is paramount. Either way they failed big time in this task.

I do find it hard that they were so engaged that for 75 minutes they didn't not do a scan or hear any calls made to them. That just boggles the mind.

 

[jknight8907]

Believe me, this has crossed my mind a time or two.

Even if they didn't have their headsets on, and were listening on speakers, I still find it hard to believe that they didn't hear ATC or any other calls.


That's definitely a good question. Either is bad. Being distracted while on a computer, which against the airline rules, is probably better than having fallen asleep, which would be in violation of FAA regulations.

In short hand, maybe this:

• Computer = Fired (or face heavy disciplinary action). Can still fly with their current airline or another airline.
  
• Asleep = FAA license suspension. If permanent, their flying days are over.

dmr727, what do you think?

Not necessarily. The FAA could easily call this "careless & reckless", something that results in suspensions.

 

[yg17]

I was strictly looking at it from the pilot's perspective -- which excuse would put them in less hot water.

Safety of the passengers and crew is paramount. Either way they failed big time in this task.

I do find it hard that they were so engaged that for 75 minutes they didn't not do a scan or hear any calls made to them. That just boggles the mind.

I actually think the sleeping excuse might've been better. Whether it would've been true or not, they might have been able to pass it off as long hours, pilot fatigue and poor policies, pass some of the blame off to Delta, and gotten some sympathy from someone (albeit not many).

 

[jecapaga]

Good to hear the FAA laid the smack down on these guys. Licenses revoked.

 

[yg17]

Good to hear the FAA laid the smack down on these guys. Licenses revoked.

Great news. The only work these two will be allowed to do on an airplane is emptying the lavatories on the ground.

 

[ucfgrad93]

Good to hear the FAA laid the smack down on these guys. Licenses revoked.

Yep, hopefully the next step for them is getting fired.

Two Northwest Airlines pilots who flew 150 miles past their destination because they were focused on laptop computers instead of cockpit displays had their licenses revoked by the FAA.

Delta Air Lines Inc., which acquired Northwest last year, said in a statement that using laptops or engaging in activity unrelated to the pilots' command of the aircraft during flight is strictly against the airline's flight deck policies. The airline said violations of that policy will result in termination.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,569867,00.html

 

[Gregg2]

I actually think the sleeping excuse might've been better.

...depending on whether or not it took more than 30 minutes to return to the Minneapolis airport. They were out of radio contact for 75 minutes, but I don't know where they were at the beginning of that period. It's been reported that they overshot the airport by 150 miles. I don't know how long that takes, plus they were put through some maneuvers, not a straight line between two points. Maybe they also didn't know which voice recorder they had on board, the 30 minute or the 2 hour type. So, they might have reasoned that if they claimed they were napping, the tape would betray them. In the end, it seems that they have answered the investigators' questions openly, after a small hiccup.

 

[yg17]

Yep, hopefully the next step for them is getting fired.

Well, if they don't have pilots licenses, I think that's pretty much the only choice NWA has. Or put them on toilet duty

 

[sushi]

It's good to see that their licenses have been revoked.

I still have a hard time believing that it was simply due to them being so engrossed on their laptops and discussing company policy regarding crew scheduling. Seventy eight minutes is a very long time.

Must be a very complicated policy.

The pilots have 10 days to appeal the revocations, which are effective immediately, to the NTSB, the FAA said.

Article

 

[yg17]

Must be a very complicated policy.

If it's anything like their baggage, frequent flyer mile earning and expiration, cancel/change tickets, delayed flights, canceled flights, missed connections, frequent flyer upgrades, lounge access or boarding policies, it is

 

[dmr727]

I still have a hard time believing that it was simply due to them being so engrossed on their laptops and discussing company policy regarding crew scheduling.

So do I. However my wife did mention that when you have a laptop out on the tray, the screen does block the PFDs.

 

[Peace]

I still have my theory but it won't get any traction.

 

[yg17]

I still have my theory but it won't get any traction.

They were out of communication with ATC for over an hour, I don't think anyone is that good

 

[dmr727]

A quality takeoff briefing:

"You stay on your side of the flight attendant, and don't touch my dick. Okay, let's go."

 

[sushi]

So do I.

However my wife did mention that when you have a laptop out on the tray, the screen does block the PFDs.

Okay, I've changed my idea. They were actually playing Aces High on line. They were engaged in a heated battle and focused on those cockpit instruments instead.

Interesting comment about PFDs and computer displays. Back in the day we didn't have those issues.

I still have my theory but it won't get any traction.

Might as well add for fun. Spill it.

 

[dmr727]

Interesting comment about PFDs and computer displays. Back in the day we didn't have those issues.

Yeah, the Airbus definitely encourages such behavior, with the tray table instead of a yoke. Anytime anyone asks my wife about flying the 319/320/321, she always says that while as a pilot it's completely lame, as someone that likes being comfortable on long trips, it's awesome!

It's funny how small the Airbus screens seem now. Back in 1990 the 320 was so revolutionary, but by today's standards the avionics are pretty antiquated.

 

[Peace]

Okay, I've changed my idea. They were actually playing Aces High on line. They were engaged in a heated battle and focused on those cockpit instruments instead.

Interesting comment about PFDs and computer displays. Back in the day we didn't have those issues.


Might as well add for fun. Spill it.

Already did. I think there was a three-way going on.