Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

GoCubsGo

macrumors Nehalem
Original poster
Feb 19, 2005
35,741
153
Say by chance this was the issue as they described. Perhaps there can be something said for quick mergers and policy change to a point where employees feel the need to distract themselves with such issue. Perhaps there needs to be some reassurance that other employees aren't as seemingly confused about the merger so there aren't future "training" sessions going on while in flight. Outlandish, yes, but still possible.
 

aethelbert

macrumors 601
Jun 1, 2007
4,287
0
Chicago, IL, USA
Say by chance this was the issue as they described. Perhaps there can be something said for quick mergers and policy change to a point where employees feel the need to distract themselves with such issue. Perhaps there needs to be some reassurance that other employees aren't as seemingly confused about the merger so there aren't future "training" sessions going on while in flight. Outlandish, yes, but still possible.
I can't really see how this could have much to do with the merger. Last I heard their scheduling databases were set to remain separate until their operating certificates were merged into Delta's name. On this issue at the moment, the only difference between now and eighteen months ago is that Delta is Northwest's parent company; all Northwest flights are still run with Northwest flight crews and the scheduling procedure hasn't been changed yet.
 

yg17

macrumors Pentium
Aug 1, 2004
15,027
3,002
St. Louis, MO
Haha - only one flaw - that cockpit belongs to the A380, they were flying an A319/A320 I believe.


Well, it's very similar except the A320 isn't as advanced. They have Budweiser instead of Heineken, Windows ME instead of XP, and Maury instead of Oprah.
 

Blue Velvet

Moderator emeritus
Jul 4, 2004
21,929
265
Patrick Smith over at Salon chips in:

To start with, airline policies vary as to what pilots are or aren't allowed to do during the cruise portion of flight, but most carriers, Northwest included, prohibit the use of laptops and other forms of personal entertainment. Indeed, the Federal Aviation Administration has revoked both pilots' airline transport licenses (they can later be eligible for reinstatement). Even still, how two pilots could have remained so distracted, for such a protracted length of time, is very difficult for me to understand.

Yes, the cockpit radios can sometimes remain quiet for long stretches, particularly when flying late at night or over remote areas. And yes, it is common for pilots to temporarily lose contact with ATC: We copy down the wrong frequency or mistakenly leave the volume down; we miss a handoff. But these are innocuous gaffes that generally resolve themselves after just a minute or two. For an hour to pass? On a short-haul domestic flight? Had they not noticed the absence of ATC? Were they not monitoring their position relative to the flight plan waypoints, right there on the plane's navigation screens?

Do airline pilots sometimes become distracted? Of course they do, just as any professional in any line of work occasionally becomes distracted, even in the middle of important duties. There is no such thing as a perfect flight; pilots make minor mistakes just like anybody else. But this was something different.

Just the same, I am more than a bit dismayed by the intense media focus on this story. There was no catastrophe. There was no near catastrophe. The plane was temporarily off-course during high-altitude cruise flight, under ATC watch above non-mountainous terrain. The crew made an embarrassing mistake, and will be punished accordingly, while the rest of us who fly for a living will draw important if obvious lessons. It was a comparatively minor event that has received far more attention than it deserves. I've been astounded by the level of traction. A week later and it's still above the fold. Reporters and pundits have been digging and digging for some nonexistent deeper meaning, asking if perhaps the event was a symptom of a frightening breakdown in air safety. One radio station even asked me if I thought the incident was related to "pilot stress" brought on by Northwest's ongoing merger with Delta.

No, I don't. I think it was what it was: a freak event.

Red herrings everywhere. I appeared on a talk show the other night with an aeronautics professor who began talking about cockpit automation, and how the downside of the high-tech flight deck is the propensity for pilots to grow bored. Modern avionics, she insinuated, were making this sort of incident more likely. Bollocks. Boredom and automation have little to do with one another. Boredom was a factor 60 years ago, when planes had rudimentary autopilots and propellers spun by pistons. It's going to be a factor in any profession where the bulk of tasks becomes repetitive and routine. We don't know exactly what happened over Minneapolis, but the fancy electronics of the Airbus A320 weren't the problem, trust me.

I operate eight-, nine-, even 12-hour nonstops all the time. There's a certain tedium that I expect and have to deal with. But is it because of the automation? No. If I had to have my hands on the wheel that whole time, I'd be twice as bored and 10 times as exhausted. And on the whole, Minneapolis notwithstanding, pilots are pretty good at the kind of self-discipline it requires to be alert for long periods of low workload. It's part of the job. (What's the best method for combating boredom? One word: conversation.)

Contrary to what people think, both boredom and fatigue (we'll get to the latter in a moment) are often easier to manage on long-haul flights than on shorter ones. Most flights over eight hours long carry augmented crews, allowing pilots to take organized rest breaks in a bunk room or designated crew seat. On a 12-hour nonstop from New York to Tel Aviv, a pilot will spend no more than three or four consecutive hours at a control seat, versus six hours on a trip between New York and San Francisco.

And the cockpit can be a busier place than you might imagine, even late at night over the middle of the ocean: There are ATC and company position reports to transmit and record, weather reports to check, arrival procedures to review and plan, aircraft systems to monitor, logbook issues to take care of, and so on.

More over here:
http://www.salon.com/technology/ask...ory=/tech/col/smith/2009/10/29/askthepilot339
 

dmr727

macrumors G4
Dec 29, 2007
10,420
5,158
NYC
Quoted from BV's post:

Just the same, I am more than a bit dismayed by the intense media focus on this story. There was no catastrophe. There was no near catastrophe. The plane was temporarily off-course during high-altitude cruise flight, under ATC watch above non-mountainous terrain. The crew made an embarrassing mistake, and will be punished accordingly, while the rest of us who fly for a living will draw important if obvious lessons.

Case in point, Delta put a 767 down on a taxiway in Atlanta that very same week, and the press pretty much ignored that situation to cover this. That mistake had a much higher chance of ending in catastrophe than this.
 

Blue Velvet

Moderator emeritus
Jul 4, 2004
21,929
265
That mistake had a much higher chance of ending in catastrophe than this.


Patrick Smith, who I used to read regularly, has an ongoing beef with the way in which aviation stories are reported in the general media, rather than the trade press.

But his columns are always interesting to me, at least, and I guess his over-arching point about the way these stories are handled says more about feeding our fears and misconceptions about flying. In this case, it seems the idea that pilots were 'out of control' in some way is far more juicy because of its human interest factor.
 

dmr727

macrumors G4
Dec 29, 2007
10,420
5,158
NYC
^^^ It's been awhile, but I believe it was you that introduced me to Patrick Smith. It's nice to see a professional pilot able to so clearly articulate many of the frustrations the industry has with the media.
 

MooneyFlyer

macrumors 65816
Nov 18, 2007
1,484
0
Boston
Quoted from BV's post:



Case in point, Delta put a 767 down on a taxiway in Atlanta that very same week, and the press pretty much ignored that situation to cover this. That mistake had a much higher chance of ending in catastrophe than this.

I was curious about this as well. It certainly didn't receive the coverage that I was expecting (someone told me about it and I had to search the archives).

Maybe part of the reason is that the media can sensationalize the "what if" and play to the inherent fears of flying while a plane is still in the air and the pilots are not paying attention (made for TV movie coming soon to channel 3 near you). The imaginative path to the potential outcome of an in-air incident is far more scary than a ground incident in most peoples minds I would imagine.
 

theBB

macrumors 68020
Jan 3, 2006
2,453
3
Patrick Smith over at Salon chips in:
Sure, nothing happened and it was a relatively safe terrain, but it could be a more dangerous terrain or the plane could have a malfunction. I've heard that minor equipment failures happen quite often and they are called minor as long as pilots take notice and respond properly. If these guys were out of it for 70 minutes, that sounds quite dangerous to me. Anyhow, media is sensationalist in general, not just about air travel, so there is no surprise there.
 

yg17

macrumors Pentium
Aug 1, 2004
15,027
3,002
St. Louis, MO
I was curious about this as well. It certainly didn't receive the coverage that I was expecting (someone told me about it and I had to search the archives).

Maybe part of the reason is that the media can sensationalize the "what if" and play to the inherent fears of flying while a plane is still in the air and the pilots are not paying attention (made for TV movie coming soon to channel 3 near you). The imaginative path to the potential outcome of an in-air incident is far more scary than a ground incident in most peoples minds I would imagine.

Most people probably don't know what a taxiway is or don't see the dangers of landing on one. But two pilots in the air not paying attention and flying 150 miles past the airport? That's something everyone understands and it makes for great sensationalist journalism.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.