SafetyDude From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3795 posts, RR: 16 Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2964 times:
This same type of debate came up when jetBlue announced that they would install cameras. It was made clear that the cameras would be for safety purposes only, and the flight would only be checked up on every now and then.
Usnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4891 posts, RR: 54 Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2956 times:
I agree with the discontent about this. The flight deck is an environment that should be limited to only those who are trained to be there. I don't like the idea of some legal technician viewing my operating procedures to see if its all kosher with him. If someone wants to check up on the flight, they need to get someone from operations to ride jumpseat. If not, stay the hell out of my office!
WrenchBender From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 1779 posts, RR: 9 Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2927 times:
The system is currently in use on a couple of platforms within the CAF. It is part of the CVR/FDR System. It takes about 4 frames a second kind of like stop action movies. The data collected can only be viewed after an incident/accident when the tapes are downloaded. There is no way for the "Boss" to review the tapes. It will be the same as current CVR tapes.
Jgardiner From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 114 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2859 times:
I think a higher priority would be having the CVR and FDR powered by UPS (Uninterruptable Power Supply; basically batteries). That way a burnt wire or blown breaker won't leave everyone guessing what happened.
Spacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3277 posts, RR: 14 Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2732 times:
Whilst current black boxes record conversation, it does not necessarily show who is doing what.
Nor does it show things like smoke conditions and what, if anything, is being done or could be done about them - something that's come up in Swissair 111 and that Valujet crash (forget the flight #).
I don't really see the big deal here. Nobody rips out the CVR just to check up on whether pilots are following company etiquette; they're used only in the case of an accident. Same would be true here.
A CVR can only do so much. In many cases they're useless, and while certain types of sounds can be identified on a tape, the NTSB never says things like "sound of the flap handle being moved" on a transcript, they will only say something like "sound similar to flap handle being moved". You can never say with certainty what a sound is, and often times the nature of a sound cannot be backed up by any other evidence. If you've got a visual record to go along with the voice recording, that's just one more bit of evidence to refer to. You can listen to the sound, see where a pilot's hand is, and know exactly what he's doing at that time.
It strikes me as a little selfish when pilots say they don't want this. They know it would only be used in the case of an accident, so why don't they want it? Because they don't want there to be compelling and irrefutable evidence that can be pinned on them in the case of pilot error. That's the only reason why a pilot could be against this. My position is, if there's something that can be done to help safety investigations and possibly promote safety in the future, then that thing should be done.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
LongHauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4316 posts, RR: 36 Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2674 times:
In my opinion, the main problem here is what if the Cockpit Camera tapes are used for other than safety issues?
I will never forget when CNN announced that the Millions (!) they used to bribe the FAA official to get a copy of the CVR tape of the Alaska Airlines MD-80 off LAX was a cost of doing business. Many viewers got to hear two airmen battle the almost uncontrollable aircraft as the horizontal stabilizer began to break loose. They said the ratings increase alone was worth it!!!
If your loved ones were on that aircraft, or worse, in the cockpit, would you have wanted the public ghoulishly listening to their last moments on earth, while being hidden under the guise of journalism?
Just think how much they would pay for actual video footage of your loved one's death!
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
CON207 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 292 posts, RR: 12 Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2591 times:
I have to admit that it is a heated issue and I can understand why!
On my job as a bus driver we have buses that are equipped with the latest CCTV cameras. There are four fitted to each bus. Two are overlooking the driver at all times. This is to benefit the driver in the case of any physical and verbal abuse by a passenger as well as other possibilities. The live images are transmitted back to the Ops Room at Head Office during the day time hours and are recorded on late night operations. We all feel alot safer having this system.(And so should any airline pilot once they got use to it. )
On the down side you can easily "forget" yourself and probably end up picking your nose or try to scratch one of those embarrassing itches in your lower regions of your body or let go of some verbal abuse at some idiot that just cut you up on the road. :o
You can view it as protection and evidence but with your privacy compromised in a minor way.
The Black Box does not provide this "caught on camera" kind of evidence needed so badly in some cases.
With the ever increasing threat from terrorism and in the wake of 9/11, the airline industry needs this kind technology fitting as standard.
In the case of accidents as mentioned,it will either clear or condemn any pilot error.
If I remember rightly when the Black Box was first introduced, weren't pilots world-wide originally opposed to that, claiming invasion of privacy then?
Only in the event of accidents, acts of terrorism, technical faults etc should the tapes be viewed.
All aircrews are in a position of trust.I expect the vast majority carry out their duties on board accordingly.( If any of them DO decide to engage in er.. lets say "close encounters" , be a bit discreet ! )
SafetyDude From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3795 posts, RR: 16 Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2554 times:
How would you like it if you were to be monitored on a VCR Camera while working in your office?
If I had a potentially-dangerous job, I would want a camera around me.
If, then I think it should be possible for the
CREW OF THE FLIGHT to actually RESET the camera
(and delete the material) after every flight, and even then the camera should only record 20 minutes, similar to how the voice recorders work.
What would happen if it was later discovered that something important was deleted, or if a terrorists were to reset the camera?
People are over-doing this. It is not like flight ops is watching every second and saying "Oh, we are going to have to fire that pilot for doing..."
GRZ-AIR From Austria, joined Apr 2001, 573 posts, RR: 4 Reply 15, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2548 times:
I dont think people are overdoing it..
If terrorists wanted to disable the camera, all they would have to do would be cover up the lens.
In contrast to a microphone which could be hidden a lens can be easily discovered.
My suggestion would be, that the cameras recordings can be deleted after every flight ONLY from the outside of the airplane ! That would give every "flight deck employee" the option to protect his/her privacy!
CON207 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 292 posts, RR: 12 Reply 16, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2484 times:
Actually GRZ I am being monitored by the cameras. Read the post correctly.
I like many, objected to the system when it was proposed to bring it in. It was accept it or face the possibility of unemployment. After weighing up the pros and cons of it all we realised it was for the best and it has proven to work in our defence big time!!
You get used to it eventually.
Everything has its advantages and disadvantages.
Agreed with Will on this. People are overdoing it. Give it a chance !!
GRZ-AIR From Austria, joined Apr 2001, 573 posts, RR: 4 Reply 17, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2443 times:
Sorry @ CON --> in my posts I was referring to cameras which would only record, not broadcast to some headqu. or ops station. That is a different issue, just as a Busdriver is different to an airline pilot! Completely different working environment...
Well...If I were a pilot, I would not be against cameras if it were used for safety purposes. However, to determine pre-crash scenes or similar I think it shouldn't be a problem if the recorded stuff could be deleted after a flight by the pilots. (To avoid terrorists etc. to delete the video the delete button could be placed into the cargo/avionik compartment)!
I would be absolutely against any "live" images which could be sent to airline ops., imagine people hacking into a system could then observe sensitive flight operations and so on..
In my opinion, more emphasis should be put on the issue of NOT LETTING TERRORISTS enter airplanes or even flight decks, or avoiding crashes than on cameras which could only reveal things after it is too late.
CON207 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 292 posts, RR: 12 Reply 18, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2416 times:
I get your point. Yes, there is no need to record every live moment and yes there could be the danger of live hacking into the flight operation.
Its a big issue on cockpit cameras. The cost alone of fitting the system ?
I couldn't even guess at it,
PeterPuck From Canada, joined Jun 2004, 318 posts, RR: 2 Reply 19, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2409 times:
Maybe we should have cameras in every work place.
In the gynecologists office (in case you need to sue for malpractice)
In the lawyers office (to make sure they're being honest)
In politicians offices (we would know where the white stains on the dress came from)