Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Your On Candid Camera!  
User currently offlineOldman From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Posted (15 years 2 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2680 times:

Hello Everyone,
Just wondering how you guys/gals feel about this. When I was hired we did not have cockpit voice recorders, and then, there they were. The FAA in all its wisdom said the information contained would be used strictly for accident investigation. Then came along the flight recorders with the same promise. Now, after every accident we see and hear the "Private" transcripts being exploited on the 11:00 news. Narrated and commented upon by non aviation "experts".
Now there is a big push for cockpit video for the same purpose. Do we need it? Will it be used for only investigative purposes? My flying is about over but just starting for many of you. How would you feel if your face was on the news catching the final moments of terror just before impact or as the flames and smoke worked their way to your mangled seat. Not a pretty picture and I for one would not want my Wife,Children,Grandchild or neighbors to remember me that way. Just "Food for Thought" any comments? Keep the tail behind you. Smile Oldman

29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
User currently offlineIainhol From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (15 years 2 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2530 times:

I honestly think that the the CRV tape should be kept private, the NTSB, airline, FAA and other angencies involved should get the transcript.
If they started putting camera's into the cockpit, I would choose another career. The last thing I want if anything goes wrong up there, is for the world to see me struggling while the news man who happens to know nothing about aviation, however is classed as an expert by the media, to tell everyone what I was doing wrong!

User currently offlineNKP S2 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1714 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (15 years 2 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2511 times:

Bad idea. In my opinion, it's just another media driven concession to the old shibbeloth of "doing SOMEthing". The presence of a camera will not, in and of itself, prevent mishaps, and in any case it can no doubt be easily "blinded" by obstructing the lens. Then of course the issue of privacy: It will certainly be abused by opportunists. --- Read an interesting quote that more or less mirrors my worldview: "A great deal of tyranny goes by the name of protection".

User currently offlineAmbasaid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (15 years 2 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2499 times:

Like everything else there are pros and cons for this, but think about the Eqypt Air / Silk Air crashes, cockpit video may have provided to solutions to these crashes.

User currently offlineMD11Nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2460 times:

I agree with Ambasaid. I have helped reviewing flight data recorder data a few times (as part of the manufacturer participation) and how often I wished I had seen what the pilots were doing at the same time, usually involving situations FDR were lost due to power switching/loss.

Keep in mind that we usually have video taping of the cockpit during flight tests. The cameras would zoom in on the glareshield panel and the instruments. You can only see the pilots' hands pushing the buttons, never the faces. We certainly do not want to see what the pilots look like, just to find out what was done, which button was pushed, etc.

I am also one who is absolutely against allowing the general public and media to get a hold of these data, audio and in this case, video.

User currently offlineXFSUgimpLB41X From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 4300 posts, RR: 34
Reply 5, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2446 times:

I am personally against it... the only way maybe would be if the media wouldnt be allowed in anyway shape or form to get their hands on it...which they will pitch a fit over. Overall i am against it.

Chicks dig winglets.
User currently offlineStallspeed From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2446 times:

I agree with Ambasaid. The problem isn't the camera, it's the dollar driven media.

User currently offlineFlyerC_B757 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2436 times:

I agree with Ambasaid.

User currently offlineATRpilot From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2438 times:

The only possible way I could live with a camera on the flight deck is if the information on the videotape would be for NTSB use only. There would have to be severe sanctions against any individual or organization that released this information to the public.

There are very few, if any, accidents that have occurred in which the cause would have been identified conclusively through a cockpit video camera. Silkair and Egypt Air, accidents often cited as ones which would have had their investigations benefited by cockpit cameras, would not have had there outcomes changed since the pilots themselves would not have been in the picture.

In short, I believe flight deck cameras would be essentially useless and are an undue intrusion on the already highly monitered flight crew. They would, however, make a fine place on which to hang my hat!


User currently offlineJETPILOT From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3130 posts, RR: 27
Reply 9, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2444 times:

Most workers are under the scrutiny of Video today. Why should aircrews be any different?


User currently offlineTwotterwrench From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2429 times:

Oh my god! I find myself in new territory. I have to agree with Jet Pilot on this one. When in the cockpit, the pilot is at work, adn therefore on his bosses time. There are many precedents that say that while at work, your privacy is not your own, except in certain places such as lockers. A cockpit hardly qualifies as a locker. It is easy to argue that video in a cockpit would provide invaluable data in the event of an accident or an incident. The only question I have is why has it taken so long.

User currently offlineJG From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 0 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2414 times:

I am against the additional intrusion of video in the cockpit. Through the freedom of information act, accidental mishandling, ...some how, some way the media will get their hands on the video. The same media fighting show autopsy photos of Dale Earnhart may one day be showing your video.

Jet, I am suprised to read you caving to the video debate. I don't necessarily agree with the argument that just because other occupations are subjected to video that ours might as well be. My suprise comes from reading, in a previous thread, your shock about having your address in the certificated airman database and what an invasion of privacy you thought that to be as it is available on the web. To me, video will just be a further invasion of privacy. I don't even want to discuss the possibilities of unscrupulous management. As a group we should more strongly unite to prevent this intrusion.

The aircraft I fly already monitors over 400 parameters, even the exact time I turn off a fuel boost pump to balance fuel. My voice is already recorded. Suggestion: Improve the fidelity of the voice recorder, add to the number of monitored parameters, but spare me from the video. Although I fail to see the value in prevention, video may help in the RARE investigation.

We already defend our jobs every six months in the sim (some events videotaped I might add), every six months with a medical, yearly line checks, randomly with urine and alcohol tests, VR and FDR and FOQA monitoring, even security screening. I feel "looked at" enough. Video, by itself, does not bother me, after all I was video recorded in the elevator to my hotel room tonight. It is the addition of video to the whole of our monitoring.


User currently offline242 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 498 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2409 times:

I really think that a cockpit video camera would aid signifigantly in accident investigations, and should be implemented.

I'll also suggest placing cameras in the cabin as well, for the same reason they're placed on school busses. Passengers will be much less likely to behave like jackasses when they know their actions can be shown verbatim to a jury.

User currently offlineAmbasaid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2400 times:

I gave you the pro, now for the con....

In at least one case that I know, it was either in Oz or NZ, a crew member was sentenced in a court of law based on the CVR. This is actually setting a bad precedent and not only removes the crewmembers right of privacy following an accident, but even during his normal working day.

I would love to think that it was possible for cockpit video data to be private and remain the property of the crews family, they could allow it to be used for investigative research, but in the good old US of $$$$$, this will never happen. Just look at the media frenzy that followed the Egypt Air.

But I for one, would be happier knowing that Eqypt Air/ Silk Air were pilot suicides rather than thinking that the 767/737 have mysterious faults. Cockpit video would have provided that proof.

User currently offlinePopee From Pakistan, joined Feb 2001, 151 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2388 times:

Summarising the long discussion, I think,video monitoring be implemented in the c/p as well as cabin. No hard feelings should be shown by c/p crew as their faces r not to be focused, but their actions. Its sole reason is to get feedback for future actions in case of any CRASH or any emergency. As far as u guys r flying safe & as per SOP, I dont think u need to be scared of anything in the c/p ?
A strict law must be passed to ensure that only NTSB can use the video for their information ONLY.

User currently offlineMinuteman From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 271 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2386 times:

Sure, I think cockpit video is a good thing..if you're going to attempt to collect operational data from an accident, I would expect every possible method of monitoring the aircraft (FDR, CVR, and video) to be used if reasonable and prudent. There's no sense in doing a half-assed job of it.

Conversely, I am cautious of justifying things like this in the name of "safety". If it ever gets to the point where CVR or video are routinely reviewed, or even for random flights, then no, that's defeats the purpose of why those boxes are there (at least I hope it does).

I've heard that the actual video will not be made available, but a written transcript that describes that action on the video, synchronized with the CVR and flight data, will be available for public record. I have no reason to believe that this we be significantly different that the cockpit audio availability.

User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 30408 posts, RR: 57
Reply 16, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2380 times:

You realize that the quality of the video is probably going to be the same high quality as most convience store and ATM cameras......

Still the practical joke possiblity are endless....The fight crew doing the flight in clown wigs or mooning the camera.......

User currently offlineMax Power From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2376 times:

In a way I can understand where Twotterwrench is coming from. However as pilots the reply from JG is correct. The maintenance departments are not subject to constant security. Most airports they drive to the employee parking lots and go to the hangar and drive all over the ramps, board aircraft and all they have to do is wear their ID badge. Only time they are checked is if they leave the "secure" area of the terminal and wish to go back to the gate area via the terminal. I'm only saying, unless you walk in the same shoes as the crews it is easy to have another perspective. I suspect the camera's will be here in the not to distant future. Not sure exactly how beneficial it will or will not be but it's on they way. Regards

User currently offlineTwotterwrench From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2373 times:

Actually, Max, most AMT's are subject to video surveilance for a variety of reasons, one of which is safety monitoring. I am not talking about the poor boys slutting at the FBO's. But, just about anyone working for a larger airline or repair station is. Privacy is NOT a valid argument when it comes to safety of flight. Do you object to the FAA's 10 year background check? Do you object to random and pre-hire drug testing? These could all be deemed an invasion of privacy, but are allowed in the interest of flight safety. The video systems being discussed would not show your face, so even if you picked your nose the whole flight, unless the FO ratted you out, no one will ever know. It is merely a system to provide visual clues of switch position, crew input, uncommanded inputs and etc leading up to an incident or accident. I for one, think that video of in flight incidents would be an invaluable training aid for future CRM classes and etc.

User currently offlineXFSUgimpLB41X From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 4300 posts, RR: 34
Reply 19, posted (15 years 2 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2367 times:

You have to keep in mind that basically every input into ever instrument is already recorded..as are the voices... the video would be an uneeded extra. Make the mics better instead with the money... there is often garbling in it..so make them better. That would be a heck of alot more efficient.

Chicks dig winglets.
User currently offlineSophieMaltese From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 2064 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (15 years 2 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 2347 times:

It seems like at first I'd be a little camera shy but would then just forget it was even there. Just don't pick your nose when you fly.

User currently offlineDC-9CAPT From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (15 years 2 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2346 times:

Two sides to every coin. There is the privacy issue which looms large and then there is this one. I side with JP, Think about it....

In most accidents, the first place the investigators look is to the pilots. Case in point was the Eagle 4186 crash where the pilots were crucified until the facts came out. The FO's family was getting nasty calls for weeks afterwards whereas a video would have cleared up the truth.

USAIR 1016 was another case in which the crew was absolutely crucified by their conversations on the tape and by a lot of speculation. A video would have supported their case.

Bottom line, the system may not necessarily incriminate you...it can serve to absolve you as well.

This video system would have to be able to capture a lot of key parameters, so there would have to be numerous cameras just as there are numerous channels to capture voices. I'll bet that the video if it ever comes to fruition will be claused so that only the NTSB will be able to gain ultimate access--no company big brothers.

We live in a new world now, people. What had once been our privacy is an open book. Our names are available on an on-line DB. You can get drivers license information on FL residents through a last name search. There are surveillance cameras everywhere and I've probably been watched while taking a dump at some point in my life. Cockpit video is nothing more than a distraction, it will do more good than harm.

User currently offlineAmbasaid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (15 years 2 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2329 times:


I guess that you were around in the late 70's when CVR's were first introduced, can you tell us how crews felt about those?

In the years since their introduction, do you think that they have benefited aviation?

User currently offlineDC10hound From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 463 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (15 years 2 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2311 times:

I probably would'nt want to take a picture of ya either Big grin

"Eagles soar. But weasels never get sucked into jet intakes.."
User currently offlineOldman From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (15 years 2 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2307 times:

Yes I was there as a young "Pup" Hired into airlines in spring of 1961.
I remember getting onboard many times to find the microphone covered over with duct tape or to have a paper cup full of Kleenex taped over also. Other times the previous crew just pulled the CB. Of course I was never party to any of that.  Innocent
Then came the flight recorders with some of the early acceptance problems. Basically I think they have helped the industry and us as pilots. If you fly like you were trained and follow all procedures I do not see a problem. Still undecided about the cameras, they are on the way for sure. My concern is everyone seeing it on TV like I mentioned in the original question. Regards.

25 Fr8tdog : One of my crashpad rommates is a former Accident investigator for the FAA he worked in that field for about 15yrs. He has been all around the world an
26 JG : This is an important issue. I will most likely be in lock step with Oldman, Fr8dog and his former FAA accident investigator friend and others opposing
27 Ambasaid : JG, Am I right in saying that your argument isn’t against the video cameras in the cockpit but against the blatant misuse of the video by the me
28 Ambasaid : Oldman, I have just finished reading the book "Emergency". One of the stories is about Hoot Gibson and the supersonic B727, he suffered under the hand
29 Oldman : Who knows? Only time will tell. There a lot of opinions above. Many I discard only because of lack of experience, others are much more credible. Anyth
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Your On Candid Camera!
No username? Sign up now!

Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Ideas For Mounting A Camera On A Small Plane? posted Mon Sep 5 2005 06:41:05 by AirplaneDork
Your Opinion On Low Time Transport Pilots. posted Sat Aug 27 2005 21:26:05 by VuelingAirbus
Pilots,what Maneuver Puts A Smile On Your Face? posted Sat Mar 22 2003 21:58:18 by William
Your Views On The PA-28-161. posted Mon Sep 17 2001 23:38:37 by King767
Info On 707 Testing 727 Engines posted Wed Dec 6 2006 16:39:20 by Nosedive
Logo Lt CB On B752 posted Tue Dec 5 2006 16:15:05 by HAWK21M
Payback Period On An Aircraft posted Tue Dec 5 2006 01:19:29 by HKA
757 On Pacific Routes Possible? posted Mon Dec 4 2006 09:06:54 by Centrair
Object On MD-82 Nosewheel posted Sat Dec 2 2006 10:48:24 by Btriple7
Cockpit Emergency Exit On The 744 posted Fri Dec 1 2006 13:54:12 by SK A340

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format