Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Cockpit Voice Surveillance In Emergencies  
User currently offlineJulianUK From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 105 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1850 times:

I am not sure if such a system exists, but surely this would be a good idea - in the event of a perceived emergency, silence from the cockpit after several requests from air traffic or a possible hijack situation that the voices in the cockpit could, without pilot intervention, be accessed directly through air traffic without pilots having to "transmit" - such a system is already in operation with the UK police, in that in the event of a police officer not responding after several calls the microphone to their radio can be remotely opened on authorisation of a senior officer only for the purposes of saving life/welfare of that officer.

In emergencies the key thing is to know what is going on, and potentially not interrupt - if you knew something was wrong and could listen in the assistance would be much more useful than trying to wait until someone had the chance to transmit - say for example an aircraft fire - the pilots would be very busy dealing with the situation, but if air traffic could hear the voices in the cockpit they would know what is wrong and start clearing airspace and runways for the very likely emergency landing.

Safety to ensure no misuse could occur would be only senior officers on air traffic watch could authorise such an intervention and when that radio channel was open and the aircraft systems would log when this has been done and also indicate to the pilot that it is in operation.

Or is this already a system used?

J

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1843 times:

Well, this idea will probably get some support. Ironically it will get support from people who are opposed to the US "patriot act" which they deem to be Big Brother spying on innocent people.

How about we just go ahead and place a bomb onboard all airplanes that can be command-detonated by radio whenever needed. That way we wouldn't have to scramble fighters at all.  Sad



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineBobster2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1831 times:

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 1):
bomb onboard all airplanes that can be command-detonated by radio

No need for a bomb. Just a spark in the center fuel tank.


User currently onlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17017 posts, RR: 67
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1817 times:

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 1):

How about we just go ahead and place a bomb onboard all airplanes that can be command-detonated by radio whenever needed. That way we wouldn't have to scramble fighters at all.

I always wondered how Shuttle astronauts feel about that...



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineMarkHKG From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 960 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1751 times:

Quoting JulianUK (Thread starter):
Safety to ensure no misuse could occur would be only senior officers on air traffic watch could authorise such an intervention and when that radio channel was open and the aircraft systems would log when this has been done and also indicate to the pilot that it is in operation.

A similar situation that may suggest how it will be recieved...the NTSB recommended in 2004 that "enhanced" Cockpit Voice Recorder technology be installed in aircraft, which included a digital camera to record images. The NTSB reasoned that a video recording would be tremendously helpful in the post crash investigation process. (Makes a lot of sense!) However, the suggestion recieved intense scrunity from the aviation industry, particularly pilot unions who cited privacy issues. The FAA did not recommend to adopt the suggestion.

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2004-11-04-video-usat_x.htm

Using that example, I don't think pilot unions would be very happy about cameras in the cockpit-- even if it was for emergencies and with safeguards you mentioned.



Release your seat-belts and get out! Leave everything!
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31679 posts, RR: 56
Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1729 times:

Quoting MarkHKG (Reply 4):
the suggestion recieved intense scrunity from the aviation industry, particularly pilot unions who cited privacy issues.

If it could be used for only Investigative purposes.Why should Flt ops object.
A visual aid would prove more helpfull than an Audio one alone.

regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineMolykote From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1340 posts, RR: 29
Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1726 times:

Good luck getting this approved from an operator's flight department.

We had an issue not long ago where a dispatcher read an unflattering comment (about himself) transmitted via ACARS. A minor stink was raised and the response from the union was to suggest that access to ACARS transmissions be limited.



Speedtape - The asprin of aviation!
User currently offlineWing From Turkey, joined Oct 2000, 1560 posts, RR: 24
Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1637 times:

Instead of spending money to investigate a crash it is wiser to invest the same money to prevent the accidents,therefore there won't be a need to spy on the pilots on their work environment.

The current technology of FDR/VCR are enough to understand the reasons behind any air accident besides there are other techniques that the accident investigators use to determine the real causes.

In addition to this an video system will be as the the CVR may be interrupted by the other causes as it happened in Swissair MD-11 accident.

As a result this will not bring the benefit as big as the money invested for it deserves.



Widen your world
User currently offlineMolykote From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1340 posts, RR: 29
Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1607 times:

Quoting Wing (Reply 7):
Instead of spending money to investigate a crash it is wiser to invest the same money to prevent the accidents,

Agree and disagree....

I am certainly of the mindset that it's better to avoid an accident than to add on measures to assist in the survival of an accident (i.e. give me bigger brakes and better handling in a car rather than a side airbag).

However, at some point we have to accept that accidents will happen. Spending money to investigate the cause of an accident is an excellent use of cash in my opinion.

By your own admission, you are discussing "spending money to investigate a crash" - In this case the crash would have already happened. Are you suggesting that an investigation would not be warranted? and that the money required for an investigation should go toward preventitive measures without an eye toward causes of an accident? What information then would you use to determine what preventitive measures are to be taken?

Clearly we all want the minimum number of accidents possible while maintaining reliable and accessible transportation. I do believe however that accident investigation is an excellent investment.

Quoting Wing (Reply 7):
The current technology of FDR/VCR are enough to understand the reasons behind any air accident besides there are other techniques that the accident investigators use to determine the real causes.

This was the mindset prior to the USAir flight 427 crash as well. This crash was of particular interest to me as I heard the aircraft explode from my front yard following football practice. If rudder position/pressure sensors had been installed on the USAir 737 it is very probable that the outcome of the investigation (which it looks like you may not have supported in the first place) would not have been in dispute and the debate would have been resolved more quickly.

Quoting Wing (Reply 7):
In addition to this an video system will be as the the CVR may be interrupted by the other causes as it happened in Swissair MD-11 accident.

I will agree with you that any system can fail.
Does this mean that we have no reason to pursue supplementary systems?

Quoting Wing (Reply 7):
As a result this will not bring the benefit as big as the money invested for it deserves.

I am inclined to agree with you although I disagree strongly with the logic used to arrive at your conclusion.

Quoting Wing (Reply 7):
therefore there won't be a need to spy on the pilots on their work environment.

If you check m-w.com this is highly unlikely to meet the definition of spying under most reasonably foreseeable circumstances.



Speedtape - The asprin of aviation!
User currently offlineJulianUK From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1582 times:

Interesting remarks. I cannot see that a system that allows transmission of voice from the cockpit by interrogation would be expensive as all the radio equipment is there. As long as it is "union proof" where rights of privacy are drawn up - which means that in all circumstances where an interrogative request for listening in shows up with a visual light - the pilots know what it is but a hijacker would not. Imagine air traffic being able to listen to a decompression descent without having to ask any questions - they can hear what the problem is and what the pilot is doing and assist silently. The light on the cockpit saying "you are being listened to" would for me, as a pilot, be very reassuring when in a crisis.

User currently offlineWing From Turkey, joined Oct 2000, 1560 posts, RR: 24
Reply 10, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1582 times:

About the original question with the "remote accessible radio", I couldnt get the purpose it will serve.I mean we have the emergency guard frequency which is common everywhere and when you transmit from there you can talk as much as you want without blocking the othere traffics in the frequency.

I don't think any controller will understand the intentions of the crew from the chatting between the two pilots,even a pilot can not understand it from the outside you should be inside the cockpit,from the very beginning,should have listened to the preflight briefings,even should have an access to the the pilots mind and experiences.

So shortly a pilots job has no relation with a police officers job,therefore what works for that profession may be useless on this area.

Molycote;

I am not suggesting to cut the crash investigations ofcourse.What I am saying a camera in the cockpit will not shed a greater light to any accident investigation more than what we currently have but bringing it to life will cost a lot of money.(I am not even thinking about the privacy issues)

Airlines in general doesnt like the extra expenses unless it will bring them more than the initial investment.This whole camera(s) idea is one of them will cost a fortune and bring them no or very little benefit.

They generally interested(and that is good too) spend money to pilot training,crew training or buying better equipment to help improve safety.

By the way I am curios about the

Quoting Wing (Reply 7):
m-w.com this is highly unlikely

but it doesn't reach to link,can you re-write the webaddress again?Thank you.WING



Widen your world
User currently offlineMolykote From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1340 posts, RR: 29
Reply 11, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1546 times:

Quoting Wing (Reply 10):
but it doesn't reach to link,can you re-write the webaddress again?Thank you.WING

Sorry - The site won't allow a direct link to definitions. www.m-w.com is an online dictionary that will allow you to look up "spy" if you wish (verb).

Quoting Wing (Reply 10):
Molycote;

I am not suggesting to cut the crash investigations ofcourse.What I am saying a camera in the cockpit will not shed a greater light to any accident investigation more than what we currently have but bringing it to life will cost a lot of money.(I am not even thinking about the privacy issues)

Airlines in general doesnt like the extra expenses unless it will bring them more than the initial investment.This whole camera(s) idea is one of them will cost a fortune and bring them no or very little benefit.

They generally interested(and that is good too) spend money to pilot training,crew training or buying better equipment to help improve safety.

By the way I am curios about the

Again - I can agree and disagree with you.

I believe that any additional monitoring equipment can only add value in the event of an incident or accident.

I am not sure that the cost of carrying a certified camera or similar in the flight deck is the best use of money in promoting overall flight safety.

Privacy issues in this matter don't concern me. I'm all for protecting the rights and privacy of people at home and in private life. In a work environment this concern becomes secondary. I provide AOG enginering support to an engine fleet due to the effect that my work can have on other people and the overall operation, all of my computer activity (the major tool in my work), paperwork, and phone activity is logged. Cameras exist throughout our building. None of this monitoring bothers me - If I fall under scrutiny for legal activity (off the clock) that doesn't affect my work then we have a problem.



Speedtape - The asprin of aviation!
User currently onlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17017 posts, RR: 67
Reply 12, posted (8 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1499 times:

Quoting Molykote (Reply 11):
Quoting Wing (Reply 10):
but it doesn't reach to link,can you re-write the webaddress again?Thank you.WING

Sorry - The site won't allow a direct link to definitions. www.m-w.com is an online dictionary that will allow you to look up "spy" if you wish (verb).

Try this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spy



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineMolykote From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1340 posts, RR: 29
Reply 13, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1420 times:

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 12):
Try this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spy

It's nice of you to provide a direct link but with some notable exceptions I prefer to not rely on Wikipedia when possibe.

Wikipedia or Merriam-Webster?  scratchchin 



Speedtape - The asprin of aviation!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Cockpit Voice Surveillance In Emergencies
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


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!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

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


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Cockpit Live Data Download - Emergencies posted Tue Jan 24 2006 21:36:39 by Julesmusician
Automated Cockpit Voice Callouts? posted Wed Jul 13 2005 20:19:51 by Mr Spaceman
Cockpit Voice Recorder posted Mon Oct 22 2001 01:25:06 by Flexwing18
What Is This In The Delta MD-11 Cockpit? posted Mon Oct 30 2006 10:11:58 by MD11Fanatic
Do Pilots Use The Handholds In The Cockpit? posted Tue Aug 8 2006 17:08:56 by MechEngineer
Smoke In The Cockpit posted Mon May 22 2006 09:21:09 by AirWillie6475
Problem In The Cockpit - What Would You Do? posted Fri Jan 6 2006 22:02:10 by Julesmusician
More Than 2 Crew In The Cockpit? posted Thu Dec 22 2005 20:38:33 by Grimey
What Are Those Two Lumps In The 777 Cockpit? posted Wed Aug 17 2005 00:57:48 by FlyingHippo
Cockpit Displays In B717 posted Wed Aug 10 2005 20:44:19 by Corsair2

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format