Posted: 11/28/2009 10:12:39 AM EDT
|
Nov. 28) - After a Northwest Airlines plane flew past Minneapolis last month, air traffic controllers asked the pilots repeatedly for explanations about why they didn't heed radio calls, according to transcripts released on Friday. The Oct. 21 flight
had been out of contact for 77 minutes before the pilots responded. The pilots told controllers right away that they had been distracted, but didn't give details, according to the transcript of their radio conversations released by the Federal Aviation Administration. After almost 90 seconds of conversation about the route they should take to Minneapolis, the controllers said, "I just have to verify that the cockpit is secure." "It is secure, we got distracted," one of the pilots responded. The transcript says the pilot then said that they never heard a call from the ground. A different controller took over and, after five more minutes of directions about routes and altitudes, asked, "Do you have time to give a brief explanation on what happened?" "Cockpit distractions that's all I can say," was the response from Northwest Flight 188. About 12 minutes after contact had been re-established, the same controller asked, "is there any way you can elaborate on the distraction?" The pilot said that they were dealing with some company issues, and that's "all I can tell you right now at this time," according to the transcript. Air traffic controllers ultimately had the pilots perform several turns to verify that they were in control of the plane. It landed safely in Minneapolis, and was met at the gate by police. The FAA has said that after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, controllers have been told to alert the military when a plane goes out of contact for five to 10 minutes. They waited for 69 minutes in this instance, a delay that FAA head Randy Babbitt has called "unacceptable." The agency has said it will strengthen procedures for alerting the military when controllers lose contact with planes. The transcripts also show controllers checking that the flight, which originated in San Diego, had enough fuel. The pilot responded that they had about two hours' worth of fuel on board and that it wasn't a concern. The pilots have told the National Transportation Safety Board that they were discussing their company's complicated new crew-scheduling program over their laptop computers as their plane flew past Minneapolis by 150 miles. Northwest was bought by Delta Air Lines Inc. last year and the company has been working to integrate its computer systems. The FAA has revoked the licenses of the pilots, Timothy Cheney of Gig Harbor, Wash., the captain, and Richard Cole of Salem, Ore., the first officer. Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. Audio of the transcripts: http://news.aol.com/article/transcripts-errant-minneapolis-northwest/740058?icid=webmail|wbml-aol|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fnews.aol.com%2Farticle%2Ftranscripts-errant-minneapolis-northwest%2F740058 Looks like these guys will only get to fly ultralights now...  |
|
That's just the ATC transmissions. The cockpit voice recorder probably didn't have the time in question recorded, since they loop over continuously. They're great for investigations on crashes, where the last bit of time is crucial for the investigation.
I don't believe they were sleeping, but I don't buy their story about being on the laptops. I'm sure they were distracted, just by something else. Like their pants weren't on all the way. We'll probably never know. |
|
There must be something we don't know, or the "Emergency Revocation" was a total PR move. That is in place for people who are a eminent threat to aviation safety or national security (falsified records, failure of a drug test, etc.) The FAA has been abusing the "emergency" part of the revocation process for sometime now. Usually one can not reapply for all of their certificates until 1 yr has passed after the revocation. If you try to fight it, it's going to take well over a year and about $100,000, so you're screwed either way.
I am really curious to see if these guys will get off with a NASA form. That has to been unintentional though........so, if their story is that they were [intentionally] using their laptops, they're probably screwed on that. It's not against the FARs, but against company "policy". If that policy is in the NWA's Gen Ops Manual, then they're done. If they would have said they both fell asleep, that would have been unintentional. Fill out the NASA form, and if they hadn't had a violation in 5 yrs, POOF, no revocation. They would still have this on their record, but at least they didn't get all their certificates revoked. They could try to file a grievance, or a blow the whistle claiming job related fatigue, to keep their jobs––that's a hot topic with the NTSB right now after that commuter crash in Buffalo. I think it was a total PR move on their part......just like with that controller in the NYC midair. |
|
Quoted:
I think it was a total PR move on their part......just like with that controller in the NYC midair. I don't know, being that far out of the loop as to what's going on while transporting that many people, well, I think that's a pretty clear case for emergency revocation. And I am no fan of the FAA. |
|
Quoted: There must be something we don't know, or the "Emergency Revocation" was a total PR move. That is in place for people who are a eminent threat to aviation safety or national security (falsified records, failure of a drug test, etc.) The FAA has been abusing the "emergency" part of the revocation process for sometime now. Usually one can not reapply for all of their certificates until 1 yr has passed after the revocation. If you try to fight it, it's going to take well over a year and about $100,000, so you're screwed either way. I am really curious to see if these guys will get off with a NASA form. That has to been unintentional though........so, if their story is that they were [intentionally] using their laptops, they're probably screwed on that. It's not against the FARs, but against company "policy". If that policy is in the NWA's Gen Ops Manual, then they're done. If they would have said they both fell asleep, that would have been unintentional. Fill out the NASA form, and if they hadn't had a violation in 5 yrs, POOF, no revocation. They would still have this on their record, but at least they didn't get all their certificates revoked. They could try to file a grievance, or a blow the whistle claiming job related fatigue, to keep their jobs––that's a hot topic with the NTSB right now after that commuter crash in Buffalo. I think it was a total PR move on their part......just like with that controller in the NYC midair. I think part of it was them being vague with the FAA then going to the press quickly and then changing their stories. If they try to screw around too much with the process the FAA will knee jerk like that, and the NYC controller issue will be tied up in the process for a long time the FAA jumped on that one as well and skipped a few steps. These two knuckleheads brought a lot of this on themselves. l |
|
Quoted: That's just the ATC transmissions. The cockpit voice recorder probably didn't have the time in question recorded, since they loop over continuously. They're great for investigations on crashes, where the last bit of time is crucial for the investigation. I don't believe they were sleeping, but I don't buy their story about being on the laptops. I'm sure they were distracted, just by something else. Like their pants weren't on all the way. We'll probably never know. You'd think so, but they'd have to be stallions, and the passengers completely unaware, both for 90+ minutes??? Extremely unlikely... |
|
This could have never happened if they didn't have the locked cockpits. Remember the days when you could take your kids up to the cockpit while they were flying, chat with the pilots and view everything? There would be no way pilots could ever fall asleep or fall into the same predicament that these two pilots got into. Just imagine if these two pilot suffered a freak accident to where they both were incapacitated, both suffered heart attacks or one decides to kill the other pilot (suicide type deal)? What if? If both pilots suffered heart attacks and the cockpit is locked what happens then? I think its much safer for everyone to leave the cockpit door unlocked during flights. |
|
Quoted:
This could have never happened if they didn't have the locked cockpits. Remember the days when you could take your kids up to the cockpit while they were flying, chat with the pilots and view everything? There would be no way pilots could ever fall asleep or fall into the same predicament that these two pilots got into. Just imagine if these two pilot suffered a freak accident to where they both were incapacitated, both suffered heart attacks or one decides to kill the other pilot (suicide type deal)? What if? If both pilots suffered heart attacks and the cockpit is locked what happens then? I think its much safer for everyone to leave the cockpit door unlocked during flights. I agree. Leave the doors unlocked and give the pilots guns. |