Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20210
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sat Apr 17, 2021 8:18 am

TWACaptain wrote:
Nothing that Wrigley's crewing gum can't take care of.


That would be incredibly dumb.
 
11C
Posts: 319
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:25 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sat Apr 17, 2021 11:03 am

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
11C wrote:
Gremlinzzzz wrote:
There is a reason I made a rather simple post in response to your response.

Like in every other sector, this will start as something that is used for safety but its utility will not end there, it. This is what has happened in almost every work setting and this in the natural evolution of things. I do not know of a single company that is in the business of leaking stuff and trying to gain bad press, yet it is these extremes that you and other pilots hang onto in this topic.

Fact is that things must get easier with improvements to tech and if the benefits outweigh the few negatives then application of technology should be embraced. No one really gives a damn outside pilots; if this has the potential to improve how accidents are understood, if it leads to better training of pilots, if it leads to better cockpit design, and if it leads to vastly lower accident rates, or gets rid of doubt when it comes to understanding accidents, then there are more benefits gained. This is what we as passengers want, this is what airlines desire, and if the cost is the discomfort of pilots so be it.

I am also not blind to note that each and every regulation comes at some cost. There are winners and there are those that cede ground. This is true for all regulation and it is true for all deregulation. Increased regulation leads to more cost, always. This has to be weighted against the potential gain and if that gain in this case is safer skies, then what the hell are we still arguing about?

In each accident investigation, there are findings as to what went wrong. This is not attaching blame, it is a statement of fact as to what happened. There are accidents that are down to pilot error (the vast majority), the are accidents that come from poor maintenance practices and there are accidents that come from shoddy plane design, or even ATC mistakes etc. No matter what happens, there is always someone who owns that mistake and has to take responsibility, but the net gain is that the industry learn from mistakes so that they are not repeated.

This notion that you can go to work, mess about and not have to deal with the fallout is strange to me. We just had a poorly designed jet where the OEM tried to blame pilots. The jet was grounded for 2 years and is still not flying in parts of the world. The manufacturer has not only dealt with the software at fault, but had to rework a lot of other things, and the financial hit is not yet fully understood. The regulator has come out as being incompetent and impotent. You allocate responsibility for said mistakes and then look for solutions.

What were the mistakes? When did they happen and in what order? And more importantly, why did they happen? How do we ensure it never happens again? This is understanding the underlying issues and looking for solutions.

By the way, pilots are not the only professionals that are highly monitored, there are those that are monitored to a vastly greater degree. And you are damn right they are continually tested, and why shouldn't this be the case? What does this have to do with trying to make aviation safer?


Forgive me for summarizing your argument, but because you sling a lot of verbiage, I find it necessary. You are seemingly arguing that we should spend a substantial amount of money (no, you can’t just stick go pros on an airplane, it will be an expensive STC, or similar certification process) because there are presently unknown benefits to putting cameras in the cockpit that will later reveal themselves. You mention “potential” to improve how accidents are understood. Again, specifics! How exactly would the benefit outweigh the cost? Nobody here ever bothers to say, because, in my opinion, there is no compelling reason at the present time. I’m also very tired of the implication that we are on the flight deck performing any number of unspeakable acts. We all know that there have been the jackasses (clothing optional, political diatribes on stuck mics, etc), but the vast majority of us are professionals doing our jobs. Give up your privacy willingly, but I won’t.
You have no privacy on company time. That they extend it, is a favor they pass onto you.

Cockpit video recorders will come on board, it is only a matter of time. Pilots will complain, they may strike. Once regulation is there, they will work and wait for a salary and if it means you keep opinions to yourself in that environment, so be it. Most of us have learnt how to be politically correct and it has not killed us.


Thanks for all the specifics...
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16461
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sat Apr 17, 2021 12:20 pm

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
You have no privacy on company time.


That is a highly misinformed comment, read this document in its entirety https://www.icao.int/SAM/Documents/2014 ... eement.pdf

There already exists an agreed expectation of privacy in a cockpit. Also if you take the example of passenger trains in the US, they have audio and video recording black boxes, however the law specifically prevents the employers using that data against the employees, the only agency that can use the data is the NTSB. Trains do not cross international boundaries as readily as aircraft do, there are many countries where US flagged aircraft operate to that do not have the similar legal and investigation frameworks, where release of that data can be used for political purposes.

dr1980 wrote:
It really seems crazy to me that they don’t already have them. Very archaic to have to try and interpolate what happened in a cockpit in a crash by using the existing black boxes when a few cameras could make a huge difference.


The cause of a crash can be determined very quickly after data has been downloaded from a FDR, the reason for that is they provide thousands of data points at a high sampling rate from control inputs to aircraft systems. A camera is simply unable to capture that data, for example the seats and pilots would obscure vision of the pilot control inputs or their displays, or the displays are at the wrong angle to be readable like the FMC. People also think cameras are great, however in reality they are very inferior to the human eye, I can see things with my eyes that a camera cannot see, that simply due to the fact that a human eye has a resolution of around 600 megapixel, where a surveillance camera maybe only around 2 megapixel.

OpsCheckNML wrote:
No more sleeping in the cockpit.


Many regulators around the world permit controlled rest in the cockpit, it is also part of the ICAO FRMS, the FAA should adopt the ICAO standard.
https://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/1756.pdf
https://flightsafety.org/wp-content/upl ... d-Rest.pdf

armagnac2010 wrote:
1) A significant proportion of accidents involve human factor issues – the 737Max, AF447, Air Asia etc. Video recordings would have been extremely helpful to quickly and accurately analyse the issues at stake. Please note that human factor issues do not equate to pilot error – most of the time, this is the opposite, a poor design traps the crew into unrecoverable situation (eg the 737). Reconstructing crew actions from the DFDR and CVR is simply not fit for purpose.


This simply is not true, we knew as soon as the FDR was downloaded that the issue was both with the Max and AF447. A camera would not provide any insight into the pilot control inputs as no camera exists that can look through a pilots seat and the pilot.

armagnac2010 wrote:
2) This is not only NTSB – this is also BEA France, AAIB Uk, BFU Germany etc which are repeatedly issuing safety recommendations begging for video recordings.


And yet not a single business case has been presented where a real cost benefit analysis has been made, none of those agencies have unresolved airliner accident investigations.

armagnac2010 wrote:
3) I am not aware of leaked CVRs in recent major accidents. Accident reports typically feature heavily edited transcript. The real stuff can be unbearable, if you are a normal person.


I am aware of a few, with the recent 737 crash in Indonesia, the final moments of another crash was posted on facebook saying it was the the final moments received on that CVR, in reality that CVR was still sitting underwater at the time. IMHO, the final moments of the crew before death has no place as public entrainment or on social media.

armagnac2010 wrote:
4) For intrusive employers, generally in countries where Just culture is just a distant concept, installing a small camera recoding the crew is easy and straightforward. It is already there, no regulation needed.


That is the very slippery slope that this opens the door to. This thread started with the view that video be stored to aid in the investigation of accidents, yet a third or greater of this thread has nothing to do with accident investigation, purely industrial reasons to monitor crew. That will not be an advancement in safety, it will have the opposite effect.

armagnac2010 wrote:
5) In my own opinion, the biggest threat for pilots is not video recording but rather the permanent monitoring of flight parameter, with automatic transmission and analysis. Slightly deviate from the nominal flight path, look for another job. SMS, they call it.


That has been in place for decades, so much misinformation on this thread trying to suggest that somehow crew are acting negligently all the time and not being monitored. I would think every large airline in the US does this.
 
mxaxai
Posts: 2811
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sat Apr 17, 2021 2:31 pm

zeke wrote:
OpsCheckNML wrote:
No more sleeping in the cockpit.


Many regulators around the world permit controlled rest in the cockpit, it is also part of the ICAO FRMS, the FAA should adopt the ICAO standard.
https://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/1756.pdf
https://flightsafety.org/wp-content/upl ... d-Rest.pdf

Some airlines even provide blankets and pillows. Here's a pilot showing off his comfy workplace at SAS https://youtu.be/Ad3ta6Pos2I?t=478
 
ozark1
Posts: 915
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 4:38 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sat Apr 17, 2021 3:12 pm

After the angry recording from the Southwest pilot and his feelings regarding the West Coast plus recording after recording of other, more important statements regarding the status of flight problems, what makes adding video to the mix so invasive? Like that ditching of Air Niugini filmed by a cockpit jumpseater. You saw no ones face, just the instrument readings. ALPA will always be opposed but, to me, additional information gleaned from technical readouts from the instruments would be extremely valuable.
 
hayzel777
Topic Author
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 3:18 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sat Apr 17, 2021 3:35 pm

32andBelow wrote:
goboeing wrote:
Noshow wrote:
Pilots get ranked for fuel used and bad landings and such.


Alright, if you want any credibility whatsoever in this discussion, you're going to now have to tell us about how pilots are ranked for fuel and bad landings and such.

Go ahead, we're waiting.

There’s a system called FOQA.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_ ... _assurance

Any company that uses FOQA to rank pilots like that is a POS company no pilot should fly for. When all is said and done with COVID and there is a pilot shortage again, I encourage pilots working at these awful companies with the opportunity to leave town to leave for greener pastures. You are worth so much more.

My ex-employer used to do this exact thing, but recently removed it after the pilots nearly went on strike over the use of FOQA and the lack of freedom in onboarding fuel as determined by the PIC. They would use FOQA data to "judge" our landings using G meter, VS etc. and our captain upgrade was partially dependent on it. I also understand that a certain ME3 carrier was laying pilots off based on who/how many times one onboarded additional fuel beyond what the dispatcher had originally planned.
 
User avatar
armagnac2010
Posts: 161
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2020 12:45 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sat Apr 17, 2021 3:38 pm

That is the very slippery slope that this opens the door to. This thread started with the view that video be stored to aid in the investigation of accidents, yet a third or greater of this thread has nothing to do with accident investigation, purely industrial reasons to monitor crew. That will not be an advancement in safety, it will have the opposite effect.


Agreed.

Many regulators around the world permit controlled rest in the cockpit, it is also part of the ICAO FRMS, the FAA should adopt the ICAO standard.
https://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/1756.pdf
https://flightsafety.org/wp-content/upl ... d-Rest.pdf


Agreed. The balance of safety clearly lies with allowing some sleep on the flight deck, in controlled manner of course, and not on systematic basis.

This simply is not true, we knew as soon as the FDR was downloaded that the issue was both with the Max and AF447. A camera would not provide any insight into the pilot control inputs as no camera exists that can look through a pilots seat and the pilot.


The video is not there to determine the pilot input, but rather why the pilot input was made (or not made, most of the time). The cause of the cause. Accidents do not have a single cause, this is the swiss cheese model; the crew action is only the last hole before the accident.

And yet not a single business case has been presented where a real cost benefit analysis has been made, none of those agencies have unresolved airliner accident investigations.


Egyptair 804 is an obvious counter example; a video will help to understand if and how a fire destroyed the flight deck. Other accident investigations are still controversial (Egyptair 990, for instance) and a video will resolve any such argument.
Your statement is debatable even considering your understanding of accident investigation stopping at pilot action. More is needed to address systemtic causes and human factor issues.

I am also convinced that had a video recording being made of the first 737Max accident, the evidence from the accident investigation will have prompted more rapid / drastic actions from FAA and Boeing, preventing the second one. This is certainly speculation, but a reasonable one.
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 1731
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sat Apr 17, 2021 3:53 pm

I can think of at least four incidents where I think it would have been useful in determining or providing support to the cause of the crash.

The two Egyptair crashes that armagnac2010 refer to, UPS 1354, and CO 3407. In the latter two, the NTSB strongly suspects that pilot fatigue contributed to the crashes. Having cockpit video to show the physical state of the pilots (yawning, rubbing eyes, nodding off) which are NOT picked up on the CVR or on the FDR unless the pilot was snoring or yawning so loudly as to be captured on the CAM would have been helpful.

We can also throw in any number of crashes where the pilots lost spatial orientation owing to flying into cloud cover. We have weather reports and METAR data but often seeing what the pilots were seeing (or not seeing) can provide a major queue to an investigation. One example of this is US 1493. There is a lot of speculation that because US 1493 was flying directly into the sun for a large portion of the flight that it affected the vision of the pilots as they landed and made it much more difficult for them to see the Metroliner lined up on the runway for an intersection takeoff.

This is a "privacy" versus public interest and necessity debate. Buses have them; train locomotive and control cabs have them; cargo ships and cruise ships have them. Indeed one of the much sought after bits of information in the Ever Given debacle in the Suez is the bridge cam video. Apparently much is being made of the fact that there was a Suez Canal Authority pilot on the bridge of the Ever Given when it went aground. Depending on who was giving orders at the time, billions of dollars in liability may get shifted from party to another.
 
mxaxai
Posts: 2811
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sat Apr 17, 2021 4:11 pm

ozark1 wrote:
After the angry recording from the Southwest pilot and his feelings regarding the West Coast plus recording after recording of other, more important statements regarding the status of flight problems, what makes adding video to the mix so invasive? Like that ditching of Air Niugini filmed by a cockpit jumpseater. You saw no ones face, just the instrument readings. ALPA will always be opposed but, to me, additional information gleaned from technical readouts from the instruments would be extremely valuable.

Instrument readings and control inputs are already captured on the DFDR.

Cockpit Video Recorders would try to observe the pilots, especially their faces. Where are they looking? Where are their hands? What's their emotional and physical state?
They could also show the location of loose items like the Pilots' personal belongings, (electronic) flight bags, food and drinks.

If only a single camera is used, it would likely be placed on the instrument panel, facing the pilots (i. e. rearwards). Probably on the autopilot panel, between the windows or at the forward end of the overhead panel.
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 1731
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sat Apr 17, 2021 4:30 pm

zeke wrote:
The cause of a crash can be determined very quickly after data has been downloaded from a FDR, the reason for that is they provide thousands of data points at a high sampling rate from control inputs to aircraft systems. A camera is simply unable to capture that data, for example the seats and pilots would obscure vision of the pilot control inputs or their displays, or the displays are at the wrong angle to be readable like the FMC. People also think cameras are great, however in reality they are very inferior to the human eye, I can see things with my eyes that a camera cannot see, that simply due to the fact that a human eye has a resolution of around 600 megapixel, where a surveillance camera maybe only around 2 megapixel.


What's ironic about this is that the FDR data shows how it happened, it does not show why it happened. Egypt Air 990 is one example. Heck, there is a difference of opinion about why OZ214 crashed at SFO. Some say pure pilot error; others say that its a Boeing manufacturing defect. Cockpit vid would have provided additional information about both of these incidents.

And frankly, you are insulting our intelligence Zeke. Your average iPhone camera has 12 megapixels of image capture. My HP smartphoto camera from 1999 had 2 megapixels. Please save the fear for important issues. Surveillance cameras are easily obtainable with 8 megapixel ability. You don't need 600 megapixels to see a pilot yawning...
 
acecrackshot
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2020 4:22 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sat Apr 17, 2021 6:08 pm

hayzel777 wrote:
My ex-employer used to do this exact thing, but recently removed it after the pilots nearly went on strike over the use of FOQA and the lack of freedom in onboarding fuel as determined by the PIC. They would use FOQA data to "judge" our landings using G meter, VS etc. and our captain upgrade was partially dependent on it. I also understand that a certain ME3 carrier was laying pilots off based on who/how many times one onboarded additional fuel beyond what the dispatcher had originally planned.


More data for the untrustworthy nature of certain organizations with "safety related" data, and two cases of actual safety endangering activities that demonstrably outweigh the illusionary gains of cameras.

There is so much more other hanging fruit in aviation regarding pilot pushing alone. I do wonder if these cockpit cameras will capture that.
 
kiowa
Posts: 899
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 12:37 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sat Apr 17, 2021 8:10 pm

Chemist wrote:
kiowa wrote:
garpd wrote:

Completely agree on that part.


The government and the NTSB are not capable of not leaking the footage. This is the stuff lawyers salivate over.


So then you would promote the elimination of the CVR then?


I see both sides of that thought. Do surgeons have everything recorded? The black boxes tell much more than the words spoken in the cockpit.
 
KingOrGod
Posts: 194
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2017 3:19 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sat Apr 17, 2021 9:01 pm

acecrackshot wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
I have to wonder why this wasn't proposed after the AC759 near miss (which could have resulted in 3 planes being destroyed). What caused AC759 to ultimately line up with the taxiway was never fully determined, and ATC didn't notice what was wrong even after the landing clearance was challenged.


Land at SFO at night and tell us how befuddling this was.


Lining up with runway centreline is befuddling? Find another job then I guess...
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3963
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sun Apr 18, 2021 3:14 am

KingOrGod wrote:
acecrackshot wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
I have to wonder why this wasn't proposed after the AC759 near miss (which could have resulted in 3 planes being destroyed). What caused AC759 to ultimately line up with the taxiway was never fully determined, and ATC didn't notice what was wrong even after the landing clearance was challenged.


Land at SFO at night and tell us how befuddling this was.


Lining up with runway centreline is befuddling? Find another job then I guess...


There was a review done and the NTSB determined it could be confusing. That is why the audio could have been useful, as a tool for knowing what needs fixing (the pilot did challenge the landing clearance before going around).
 
hayzel777
Topic Author
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 3:18 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sun Apr 18, 2021 2:11 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
KingOrGod wrote:
acecrackshot wrote:

Land at SFO at night and tell us how befuddling this was.


Lining up with runway centreline is befuddling? Find another job then I guess...


There was a review done and the NTSB determined it could be confusing. That is why the audio could have been useful, as a tool for knowing what needs fixing (the pilot did challenge the landing clearance before going around).

Except the pilots were slow to report to the incident so the CVR was written over. If video was taken, it would require a considerable amount of storage. In that case, the video would likely be written over as well.

Safety is a two-way street. If one side doesn't trust the other, the operation is at risk since pilots or other frontliners may tend to hide things. This is part of the reason why the FAA came up with "compliance action" in this decade instead of jumping straight to enforcement action. They had run a survey and the results were abysmal; pilots, mechanics, dispatchers etc. would rather hide things than tell the FAA so they could identify any trends and mitigate them. Unfortunately for the industry, certain management groups have historically abused SMS programs such as FOQA (or FDM) that has eroded pilot trust in them.
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 1731
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sun Apr 18, 2021 2:47 pm

You mean kind of like how ALPA hid the USAir 5050 pilots and refused to divulge their whereabouts?
 
Gremlinzzzz
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:28 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Sun Apr 18, 2021 3:06 pm

zeke wrote:
Gremlinzzzz wrote:
You have no privacy on company time.

There already exists an agreed expectation of privacy in a cockpit. Also if you take the example of passenger trains in the US, they have audio and video recording black boxes, however the law specifically prevents the employers using that data against the employees, the only agency that can use the data is the NTSB. Trains do not cross international boundaries as readily as aircraft do, there are many countries where US flagged aircraft operate to that do not have the similar legal and investigation frameworks, where release of that data can be used for political purposes.
That is your expectation, and it has been entertained. It is not a right. You seem to be confusing the two.
 
LTEN11
Posts: 317
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2020 10:09 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:14 am

washingtonflyer wrote:
zeke wrote:
The cause of a crash can be determined very quickly after data has been downloaded from a FDR, the reason for that is they provide thousands of data points at a high sampling rate from control inputs to aircraft systems. A camera is simply unable to capture that data, for example the seats and pilots would obscure vision of the pilot control inputs or their displays, or the displays are at the wrong angle to be readable like the FMC. People also think cameras are great, however in reality they are very inferior to the human eye, I can see things with my eyes that a camera cannot see, that simply due to the fact that a human eye has a resolution of around 600 megapixel, where a surveillance camera maybe only around 2 megapixel.


What's ironic about this is that the FDR data shows how it happened, it does not show why it happened. Egypt Air 990 is one example. Heck, there is a difference of opinion about why OZ214 crashed at SFO. Some say pure pilot error; others say that its a Boeing manufacturing defect. Cockpit vid would have provided additional information about both of these incidents.

And frankly, you are insulting our intelligence Zeke. Your average iPhone camera has 12 megapixels of image capture. My HP smartphoto camera from 1999 had 2 megapixels. Please save the fear for important issues. Surveillance cameras are easily obtainable with 8 megapixel ability. You don't need 600 megapixels to see a pilot yawning...


Exactly, this crap about 2 megapixel cameras is insulting really. Samsung claim the forward facing camera in the S21 is 40 megapixels, with another 3 cameras taking up a total space of 40mm x 15mm x 10mm. Why the hell would you only have one camera and place it behind the pilot ? 5 or 6 well placed cameras could give complete, clear coverage of what was happening in a cockpit and would be of great value to any investigation team.

Everybody has concerns with privacy issues when it comes to workplace surveillance, but sometimes these reservations have to be put aside for the benefits that they can bring.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4812
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:46 am

LTEN11 wrote:
washingtonflyer wrote:
zeke wrote:
The cause of a crash can be determined very quickly after data has been downloaded from a FDR, the reason for that is they provide thousands of data points at a high sampling rate from control inputs to aircraft systems. A camera is simply unable to capture that data, for example the seats and pilots would obscure vision of the pilot control inputs or their displays, or the displays are at the wrong angle to be readable like the FMC. People also think cameras are great, however in reality they are very inferior to the human eye, I can see things with my eyes that a camera cannot see, that simply due to the fact that a human eye has a resolution of around 600 megapixel, where a surveillance camera maybe only around 2 megapixel.


What's ironic about this is that the FDR data shows how it happened, it does not show why it happened. Egypt Air 990 is one example. Heck, there is a difference of opinion about why OZ214 crashed at SFO. Some say pure pilot error; others say that its a Boeing manufacturing defect. Cockpit vid would have provided additional information about both of these incidents.

And frankly, you are insulting our intelligence Zeke. Your average iPhone camera has 12 megapixels of image capture. My HP smartphoto camera from 1999 had 2 megapixels. Please save the fear for important issues. Surveillance cameras are easily obtainable with 8 megapixel ability. You don't need 600 megapixels to see a pilot yawning...


Exactly, this crap about 2 megapixel cameras is insulting really. Samsung claim the forward facing camera in the S21 is 40 megapixels, with another 3 cameras taking up a total space of 40mm x 15mm x 10mm. Why the hell would you only have one camera and place it behind the pilot ? 5 or 6 well placed cameras could give complete, clear coverage of what was happening in a cockpit and would be of great value to any investigation team.

Everybody has concerns with privacy issues when it comes to workplace surveillance, but sometimes these reservations have to be put aside for the benefits that they can bring.


I used to install security cameras and even top-end professional models are only several megapixels. The power, storage, and bandwidth requirements of super high-res cameras are very costly. Especially in a multi camera setup. I have 6 professional cameras installed in my house (not what you buy at BestBuy), they eat up a LOT of data.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 8602
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Mon Apr 19, 2021 2:09 am

Since the last US airliner crash in 2009, about 400,000 Americans have died on the roads. Surely there are better low-hanging fruit to pick and save more lives than cameras might.
 
LTEN11
Posts: 317
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2020 10:09 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Mon Apr 19, 2021 2:36 am

jetmatt777 wrote:
LTEN11 wrote:
washingtonflyer wrote:

What's ironic about this is that the FDR data shows how it happened, it does not show why it happened. Egypt Air 990 is one example. Heck, there is a difference of opinion about why OZ214 crashed at SFO. Some say pure pilot error; others say that its a Boeing manufacturing defect. Cockpit vid would have provided additional information about both of these incidents.

And frankly, you are insulting our intelligence Zeke. Your average iPhone camera has 12 megapixels of image capture. My HP smartphoto camera from 1999 had 2 megapixels. Please save the fear for important issues. Surveillance cameras are easily obtainable with 8 megapixel ability. You don't need 600 megapixels to see a pilot yawning...


Exactly, this crap about 2 megapixel cameras is insulting really. Samsung claim the forward facing camera in the S21 is 40 megapixels, with another 3 cameras taking up a total space of 40mm x 15mm x 10mm. Why the hell would you only have one camera and place it behind the pilot ? 5 or 6 well placed cameras could give complete, clear coverage of what was happening in a cockpit and would be of great value to any investigation team.

Everybody has concerns with privacy issues when it comes to workplace surveillance, but sometimes these reservations have to be put aside for the benefits that they can bring.


I used to install security cameras and even top-end professional models are only several megapixels. The power, storage, and bandwidth requirements of super high-res cameras are very costly. Especially in a multi camera setup. I have 6 professional cameras installed in my house (not what you buy at BestBuy), they eat up a LOT of data.


Yet aircraft have an FDR recording how many different parameters and storing them, it's not like you're looking to store every minute of an 18 hour flight. Even if the cameras are only "several" megapixels, they are only focused on a small area and coupled with the other data available and knowledge of cockpit layouts, investigators will still get a better picture of what was happening onboard, it's not like it's necessary to see the sweat running off some unfortunate souls brow in an emergency, you just need to get a clearer picture of the crews actions, or inactions. Crews viewing their own actions at a later date maybe surprised at what they had done in a situation, compared to what they thought they had.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4812
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Mon Apr 19, 2021 5:06 am

LTEN11 wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:
LTEN11 wrote:

Exactly, this crap about 2 megapixel cameras is insulting really. Samsung claim the forward facing camera in the S21 is 40 megapixels, with another 3 cameras taking up a total space of 40mm x 15mm x 10mm. Why the hell would you only have one camera and place it behind the pilot ? 5 or 6 well placed cameras could give complete, clear coverage of what was happening in a cockpit and would be of great value to any investigation team.

Everybody has concerns with privacy issues when it comes to workplace surveillance, but sometimes these reservations have to be put aside for the benefits that they can bring.


I used to install security cameras and even top-end professional models are only several megapixels. The power, storage, and bandwidth requirements of super high-res cameras are very costly. Especially in a multi camera setup. I have 6 professional cameras installed in my house (not what you buy at BestBuy), they eat up a LOT of data.


Yet aircraft have an FDR recording how many different parameters and storing them, it's not like you're looking to store every minute of an 18 hour flight. Even if the cameras are only "several" megapixels, they are only focused on a small area and coupled with the other data available and knowledge of cockpit layouts, investigators will still get a better picture of what was happening onboard, it's not like it's necessary to see the sweat running off some unfortunate souls brow in an emergency, you just need to get a clearer picture of the crews actions, or inactions. Crews viewing their own actions at a later date maybe surprised at what they had done in a situation, compared to what they thought they had.


You were the one who suggested super high-res video, not me.
 
LTEN11
Posts: 317
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2020 10:09 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Mon Apr 19, 2021 5:13 am

jetmatt777 wrote:
LTEN11 wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:

I used to install security cameras and even top-end professional models are only several megapixels. The power, storage, and bandwidth requirements of super high-res cameras are very costly. Especially in a multi camera setup. I have 6 professional cameras installed in my house (not what you buy at BestBuy), they eat up a LOT of data.


Yet aircraft have an FDR recording how many different parameters and storing them, it's not like you're looking to store every minute of an 18 hour flight. Even if the cameras are only "several" megapixels, they are only focused on a small area and coupled with the other data available and knowledge of cockpit layouts, investigators will still get a better picture of what was happening onboard, it's not like it's necessary to see the sweat running off some unfortunate souls brow in an emergency, you just need to get a clearer picture of the crews actions, or inactions. Crews viewing their own actions at a later date maybe surprised at what they had done in a situation, compared to what they thought they had.


You were the one who suggested super high-res video, not me.


I highlighted that a phone can have a high quality camera, another poster was claiming nothing more than 2 megapixels was possible, I never said you would need super high res video. Use 2 megapixel cameras, put in 5 or 6 of then and your still going to see everything you need too see.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4812
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Mon Apr 19, 2021 5:27 am

LTEN11 wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:
LTEN11 wrote:

Yet aircraft have an FDR recording how many different parameters and storing them, it's not like you're looking to store every minute of an 18 hour flight. Even if the cameras are only "several" megapixels, they are only focused on a small area and coupled with the other data available and knowledge of cockpit layouts, investigators will still get a better picture of what was happening onboard, it's not like it's necessary to see the sweat running off some unfortunate souls brow in an emergency, you just need to get a clearer picture of the crews actions, or inactions. Crews viewing their own actions at a later date maybe surprised at what they had done in a situation, compared to what they thought they had.


You were the one who suggested super high-res video, not me.


I highlighted that a phone can have a high quality camera, another poster was claiming nothing more than 2 megapixels was possible, I never said you would need super high res video. Use 2 megapixel cameras, put in 5 or 6 of then and your still going to see everything you need too see.


Fair enough.

One aspect for this application that will need to be solved with modern video camera formats (that is usually not impacted with straight-line data feeds such as sensor inputs, audio recordings, etc.) is data-loss in compression. Usually, video interpolates frames to save on file size, this means that one frame has data the next frame needs, and it needs data from the previous frame. This compression allows video to be saved in smaller formats, however it means that a physically damaged file can be completely unusable. For this reason, GoPros record in blocks (which can be stitched together later) where if the memory card is damaged you still get SOME recoverable video, instead of none. For example a 25 minute video may be recorded in 5 chunks. But your GoPro fell off it's mount and tumbled down the side of a cliff. When you finally find it you lost the last 5 minutes because the file corrupted as it was writing at the time it was damaged. But you kept the first 20 minutes because it recorded it in chunks. That would not help a post-crash investigation too much if you missed the critical moments of the emergency.

That is not something that cannot be overcome, but it is one of the other technical challenges to video that doesn't present itself in other formats. Those other formats can largely write data and close files before they are corrupted, where a video file has to process in chunks and then save to the file. A half-processed video will not save.

Perhaps recording chunks could be standardized based on the inertial imputs. Slow and level flight, 5 minute processing chunks may work. If flight behavior begins to get erratic it could revert to 2-3 second chunks. More work for the investigation team stitching together 3 second videos, but the likelihood of those 3 second video files surviving are greater than larger files where just a few corrupted lines in the file can render the video unplayable.

I am not an expert in this field, but I do a lot of video work these days and it can be extremely finicky and data intensive. I think people are under the impression you can tape a gopro up to the CB panel and wire it into a SSD and solve the next crash. That's not so, there would be quite a bit of work involved to make it a reliable data source, and a lot of legal work to make sure the data cannot be abused.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16461
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Mon Apr 19, 2021 6:49 pm

armagnac2010 wrote:
The video is not there to determine the pilot input, but rather why the pilot input was made (or not made, most of the time).


A video does not show why something happened, it records what happened, same as a FDR.

armagnac2010 wrote:
Egyptair 804 is an obvious counter example; a video will help to understand if and how a fire destroyed the flight deck. Other accident investigations are still controversial (Egyptair 990, for instance) and a video will resolve any such argument. Your statement is debatable even considering your understanding of accident investigation stopping at pilot action. More is needed to address systemtic causes and human factor issues.


Firstly the NTSB did not investigate these accidents, nor are these FAA registered aircraft, so adding this requirement in the US would have had no impact on the investigation.

You may or may not recall that both recorders on MS804 were found to be damaged initially, and unable to be read, it took some repair to get them into a state to be able to retrieve the data. CCTV style camera installed in a cockpit cannot see through smoke, they cannot see be behind panels, or behind the instruments. I don't think camera could provide anything that normal forensic techniques would provide.

You have claimed that there are "systematic (sic) causes and human factor issues", for that to be true aircraft of various types would need to be crashing for the same reasons, however the fact is that airliner accidents are very rare, and the causes are different, claims like this are totally baseless in fact,

armagnac2010 wrote:
I am also convinced that had a video recording being made of the first 737Max accident, the evidence from the accident investigation will have prompted more rapid / drastic actions from FAA and Boeing, preventing the second one. This is certainly speculation, but a reasonable one.


I think the exact opposite, we had numerous current 737 pilots on here already stating that the reason for the crashes was because of the incompetent 3rd world pilots. Adding a video which shows the same actions as what was on the FDR would only compound these issues because they would claim they were not doing the trim runaway procedure when it wasn't a trim runaway. We only found the real cause of the Max accident when the senate held a hearing into the certification process. The accident report told us what happened, the reason why it happened was not even on the aircraft at the time.

washingtonflyer wrote:
We can also throw in any number of crashes where the pilots lost spatial orientation owing to flying into cloud cover. We have weather reports and METAR data but often seeing what the pilots were seeing (or not seeing) can provide a major queue to an investigation. One example of this is US 1493. There is a lot of speculation that because US 1493 was flying directly into the sun for a large portion of the flight that it affected the vision of the pilots as they landed and made it much more difficult for them to see the Metroliner lined up on the runway for an intersection takeoff.


More false facts, the investigation found ATC at fault there.

washingtonflyer wrote:
Buses have them; train locomotive and control cabs have them; cargo ships and cruise ships have them.


Your facts claimed here are not true, trains do not have inwards facing cameras they only have outwards facing cameras, the reason for them is to capture the signals displayed and switches on the tracks. Trains and aircraft come under the same industrial legislation in the US due to the importance on them for interstate commerce. As the train network is being upgraded with Positive Train Control (PTC) technology, it will address the root cause for rail accidents.

KingOrGod wrote:
Lining up with runway centreline is befuddling? Find another job then I guess...


I suspect you are ignorant of the facts. Firstly SFO and the surrounding areas has a lot of light pollution, ie the airport lighting competes with all the other ground lighting. the pilots were cleared for a visual approach at night, to them the visual picture they were looking for was still two parallel runways The airport had turned off all the lights on one of the parallel runways, there was no red illuminated cross placed on the closed runway. What their brain was seeing was still two parallel runways, where one was actually a runway, and the other the parallel taxiway taxiway. This sort of thing has happened many times before, it is a well understood limitation of human vision at night, something pilots learn about during their ATP. Despite that, ATC still clear aircraft at night for visual approaches. Why did they clear them for a visual approach when a perfectly serviceable ILS was available, it would have reduced airport movements per hour which were already reduced because of one runway being shut, so the economic benefit of a few more movements overrides the additional safety it brings. Do you see the irony in the call for installing cameras would not stop airports putting economics ahead of safety ? When was the last time any major airport in the US actually invested in additional infrastructure to increase capacity ?

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
That is your expectation, and it has been entertained. It is not a right. You seem to be confusing the two.


Please cite the law which supports your position, the requirements under the Railway Labor Act is very clear to everyone in industry. Employers cannot change that agreement I posted above without bargaining with employee representatives. Those employee representative will not be relaxing the stipulations in that agreement because of the misuse of the data that has been collected thus far. Pilots have already posted on this thread how employers are misusing the data to "grade" pilots on their landings for promotion. An absolutely ridiculous concept as it is ignoring environmental conditions.

LTEN11 wrote:
Exactly, this crap about 2 megapixel cameras is insulting really. Samsung claim the forward facing camera in the S21 is 40 megapixels, with another 3 cameras taking up a total space of 40mm x 15mm x 10mm. Why the hell would you only have one camera and place it behind the pilot ? 5 or 6 well placed cameras could give complete, clear coverage of what was happening in a cockpit and would be of great value to any investigation team.


There is a difference between video and photos, most industrial video cameras I am aware of record at 1080, which is 1920 x 1080-pixel resolution, or 2 megapixels. The S21 will not record video at 40 megapixels, the highest resolution it will record at is 8K video recording at 24 fps (7680x4320), or 33 megapixel. That is still way behind what a human eye can capture at around 600 megapixel.

Where I work we are permitted by regulations and company policy to use electronic devices in the cockpit (for example our aircraft technical log is an ipad, our charts are on ipads), the cameras on those devices are that that good at capturing photos or videos in the cockpit. Common issues are the refresh rate on CRT screens work for our eyes, however look like blank screens (not an issue with LCDs), and often the camera would focus on an object that was at a different focal distance.

jetmatt777 wrote:
I used to install security cameras and even top-end professional models are only several megapixels. The power, storage, and bandwidth requirements of super high-res cameras are very costly. Especially in a multi camera setup. I have 6 professional cameras installed in my house (not what you buy at BestBuy), they eat up a LOT of data.


I would think if they were ever installed they would only store the last 30 minutes like the CVR so the data is only used for the intended purpose. The additional aspect for aircraft is they would need to be engineered to work in the most degraded state, which means when the aircraft is flying on batteries only.

LTEN11 wrote:
I highlighted that a phone can have a high quality camera, another poster was claiming nothing more than 2 megapixels was possible, I never said you would need super high res video. Use 2 megapixel cameras, put in 5 or 6 of then and your still going to see everything you need too see.


Aircraft are not throw away consumer products that are replaced every year or two. Most industrial video cameras I see available are not above 1080 (2 megapixel), if you look at existing cameras on aircraft like those on taxi cameras and cockpit door security at even lower resolution than 1080. They are selected for longevity over picture quality.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 8602
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Mon Apr 19, 2021 8:36 pm

I’d bet a certified camera installation on Part 25 types would be $250,000, so 10,000 in-production Part 25 planes in the US, it’s a $2.5 billion ask for no increase in safety. Brilliant!
 
oldJoe
Posts: 704
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:04 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Mon Apr 19, 2021 8:54 pm

zeke in well respect to you !
"A video does not show why something happened, it records what happened, same as a FDR. "
Flight 4U 9525 could have spend much less $$$ if there was a camera on board, does it ?
I don`t understand why pilots are so against it ! Is there something to hide when you are using a muli- million asset of your employe ?
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1745
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:58 pm

One wonders why pilots are so opposed to the idea? What are they hiding?

And lest anyone think that pilots and their unions are looking out for the best interests of the industry, they were wrong on removal of the flight engineer, and they were wrong on ETOPS.

As the information revolution has flowed out, it's been interesting to see what people want to hide or protect. US ATC, and their union, for example, didn't want airlines or anyone else to have the radar feed for their ASD's (aircraft situational display). And then there were the automotive executives who flew on their private jets to DC to beg for a government hand out.. Now corporate operators can block their callsigns.

It so seems ironic that this issue is coming up just as the first seeds of the end of the pilot profession come to fruition (I'm referring to UAVs).
 
LTEN11
Posts: 317
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2020 10:09 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 12:16 am

jetmatt777 wrote:
LTEN11 wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:

You were the one who suggested super high-res video, not me.


I highlighted that a phone can have a high quality camera, another poster was claiming nothing more than 2 megapixels was possible, I never said you would need super high res video. Use 2 megapixel cameras, put in 5 or 6 of then and your still going to see everything you need too see.


Fair enough.

One aspect for this application that will need to be solved with modern video camera formats (that is usually not impacted with straight-line data feeds such as sensor inputs, audio recordings, etc.) is data-loss in compression. Usually, video interpolates frames to save on file size, this means that one frame has data the next frame needs, and it needs data from the previous frame. This compression allows video to be saved in smaller formats, however it means that a physically damaged file can be completely unusable. For this reason, GoPros record in blocks (which can be stitched together later) where if the memory card is damaged you still get SOME recoverable video, instead of none. For example a 25 minute video may be recorded in 5 chunks. But your GoPro fell off it's mount and tumbled down the side of a cliff. When you finally find it you lost the last 5 minutes because the file corrupted as it was writing at the time it was damaged. But you kept the first 20 minutes because it recorded it in chunks. That would not help a post-crash investigation too much if you missed the critical moments of the emergency.

That is not something that cannot be overcome, but it is one of the other technical challenges to video that doesn't present itself in other formats. Those other formats can largely write data and close files before they are corrupted, where a video file has to process in chunks and then save to the file. A half-processed video will not save.

Perhaps recording chunks could be standardized based on the inertial imputs. Slow and level flight, 5 minute processing chunks may work. If flight behavior begins to get erratic it could revert to 2-3 second chunks. More work for the investigation team stitching together 3 second videos, but the likelihood of those 3 second video files surviving are greater than larger files where just a few corrupted lines in the file can render the video unplayable.

I am not an expert in this field, but I do a lot of video work these days and it can be extremely finicky and data intensive. I think people are under the impression you can tape a gopro up to the CB panel and wire it into a SSD and solve the next crash. That's not so, there would be quite a bit of work involved to make it a reliable data source, and a lot of legal work to make sure the data cannot be abused.


Interesting, thank you.

I think most people realise it wouldn't be as simple as sticking any camera in and letting it record away, but the technical challenges shouldn't be insurmountable. The legal side of course is another matter entirely.

Can anybody tell me if simulator sessions are currently recorded and if they are, what sort of system is used ? ie : single camera, multiple cameras and their locations ?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16461
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 5:47 am

oldJoe wrote:
zeke in well respect to you !
"A video does not show why something happened, it records what happened, same as a FDR. "
Flight 4U 9525 could have spend much less $$$ if there was a camera on board, does it ?


A camera in that Germanwings aircraft would likely have not shown much at all, with the seat blocking view of the sidestick. We knew very soon after the even what happened, it took the investigation some time to do get the background on the FOs medical history. A camera cannot see into someone's mind.

oldJoe wrote:
I don`t understand why pilots are so against it ! Is there something to hide when you are using a muli- million asset of your employe ?


Every airline in the US already monitors their aircraft and pilots, and has been for decades. They are able to pull up thousands of parameters for flights from literally years ago. There is no other industry that has the same level of scrutiny. The issue is management has been abusing this data for a long time for industrial reasons, like the thread starter mentioned in their airline they used the data to grade landings as a key basis for promotion. They send us little graphs on how much fuel we use, our delays etc. We are also tested almost every 12 weeks, the training record system has marks over our entire career, they have a score for all of our reports.

SteelChair wrote:
One wonders why pilots are so opposed to the idea? What are they hiding?


Nothing is being hidden, its already being monitored. That has been stated multiple times over.

SteelChair wrote:
And lest anyone think that pilots and their unions are looking out for the best interests of the industry, they were wrong on removal of the flight engineer, and they were wrong on ETOPS.


Give us a break, pilots didn't advocate for that, the people who advocate for that are the same sort of people who use flight data analysis to stifle pilots careers today. If you knew anything about my posting history, I have always been a very strong advocate of quads. Numerous times I have told on here by bean counter/MBA types that quads are less safe than twins because they have more chance of an engine failure. Fact is engine failures happen so rarely that there is no tangible difference.

SteelChair wrote:
Now corporate operators can block their callsigns.


I dont have a problem with private aircraft having the ability to block their movements, likewise I don't have a problem with private vehicles not being tracked despite the fact they are involved in the majority of road deaths, crashes, and crime.

SteelChair wrote:
It so seems ironic that this issue is coming up just as the first seeds of the end of the pilot profession come to fruition (I'm referring to UAVs).


You are kidding, myself and my children will have long passed before airliners become pilotless. Ill probably have passed before driverless cars are even on the road.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16461
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 6:03 am

LTEN11 wrote:
Can anybody tell me if simulator sessions are currently recorded and if they are, what sort of system is used ? ie : single camera, multiple cameras and their locations ?


We used to use a single camera on the ceiling, basically above they instructor station. It was a low resolution black and white camera, and stored on a betamax tape. A single tape would not be long enough to store a normal simulator session. Stopped using them years ago as they were useless.
 
Gremlinzzzz
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:28 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 7:15 am

zeke wrote:
oldJoe wrote:
zeke in well respect to you !
"A video does not show why something happened, it records what happened, same as a FDR. "
Flight 4U 9525 could have spend much less $$$ if there was a camera on board, does it ?


A camera in that Germanwings aircraft would likely have not shown much at all, with the seat blocking view of the sidestick. We knew very soon after the even what happened, it took the investigation some time to do get the background on the FOs medical history. A camera cannot see into someone's mind.

oldJoe wrote:
I don`t understand why pilots are so against it ! Is there something to hide when you are using a muli- million asset of your employe ?


Every airline in the US already monitors their aircraft and pilots, and has been for decades. They are able to pull up thousands of parameters for flights from literally years ago. There is no other industry that has the same level of scrutiny. The issue is management has been abusing this data for a long time for industrial reasons, like the thread starter mentioned in their airline they used the data to grade landings as a key basis for promotion. They send us little graphs on how much fuel we use, our delays etc. We are also tested almost every 12 weeks, the training record system has marks over our entire career, they have a score for all of our reports.

SteelChair wrote:
One wonders why pilots are so opposed to the idea? What are they hiding?


Nothing is being hidden, its already being monitored. That has been stated multiple times over.

SteelChair wrote:
And lest anyone think that pilots and their unions are looking out for the best interests of the industry, they were wrong on removal of the flight engineer, and they were wrong on ETOPS.


Give us a break, pilots didn't advocate for that, the people who advocate for that are the same sort of people who use flight data analysis to stifle pilots careers today. If you knew anything about my posting history, I have always been a very strong advocate of quads. Numerous times I have told on here by bean counter/MBA types that quads are less safe than twins because they have more chance of an engine failure. Fact is engine failures happen so rarely that there is no tangible difference.

SteelChair wrote:
Now corporate operators can block their callsigns.


I dont have a problem with private aircraft having the ability to block their movements, likewise I don't have a problem with private vehicles not being tracked despite the fact they are involved in the majority of road deaths, crashes, and crime.

SteelChair wrote:
It so seems ironic that this issue is coming up just as the first seeds of the end of the pilot profession come to fruition (I'm referring to UAVs).


You are kidding, myself and my children will have long passed before airliners become pilotless. Ill probably have passed before driverless cars are even on the road.
No one gives a damn that tellers are monitored on camera, their every action captured on banking systems. No one gives a damn that police are monitored on video, and audio and no one cares that cameras have been installed on different work setups.

No one outside entitled pilots and their unions will give a damn the moment these changes are presented as necessary to improve safety, or how investigators understand accidents.

Finally, data is used everywhere, even your local grocery stall knows what times to increase supply and when to decrease it. Why different airlines use different data, and whether they implement it in the wrong on right way is another topic altogether. However, all businesses seem to stumble on this and then get better with time.
 
KingOrGod
Posts: 194
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2017 3:19 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 7:18 am

zeke wrote:

Even in my *very* limited time up front IFR, we had the ILS tuned as a backup on a visual for cross-checking. Evidently they're better than me
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16461
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 8:23 am

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
No one gives a damn that tellers are monitored on camera, their every action captured on banking systems.


They are areas which are generally open to the public, anyone can use a camera in there, there is no expectation of privacy. The reason why the cameras are there to capture members of the public committing a crime.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
No one gives a damn that police are monitored on video, and audio and no one cares that cameras have been installed on different work setups.


Police dont have their cameras on all the time, and it very common for them to cover up the microphone so they cannot be heard. They are public servants mainly operating in the public, where anyone is allowed to use a camera. Courtrooms are areas where members of the public are generally not permitted, there is no first amendment right of access to civil proceedings, and when they are permitted it is by the invitation of the court which can be revoked at any time. Members of the public are not allowed to film in court rooms.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
No one outside entitled pilots and their unions will give a damn the moment these changes are presented as necessary to improve safety, or how investigators understand accidents.


Clearly displaying an axe to grind against pilots, it is now clear what your motivation for your contributions on this thread are, and it is not safety related. I asked you for the basis under the law for your claims that cameras will be installed, you have not been able cite anything. There is no proof it will improve safety, installing a camera will not prevent an accident.

Investing in infrastructure, investing in training, investing in ATC, improving certification standards and processes is what prevents accidents.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
Finally, data is used everywhere, even your local grocery stall knows what times to increase supply and when to decrease it. Why different airlines use different data, and whether they implement it in the wrong on right way is another topic altogether. However, all businesses seem to stumble on this and then get better with time.


Sure shops use data they generate all the time, however as I pay with cash, and dont use store rewards cards, they have no idea who is making those purchases so they cannot profile me or annoy men with useless advertising. I dont use social media either. I dont understand some people fascination of sharing with the world every location they visit, and every meal they consume. Guess what, without having to tell the world where I have been, what I have eaten, and tell the shops what I am buying, I manage not to starve to death, keep a roof over my head, and keep warm. I have the right not to participate in mass corporate surveillance, if you want to, fine, fill your boots.

KingOrGod wrote:
Even in my *very* limited time up front IFR, we had the ILS tuned as a backup on a visual for cross-checking. Evidently they're better than me


I use the ILS/GLS to backup a visual as well, most people do. On the A320 the ILS is normally auto tuned by the FMC based on the runway selected. The report indicated that they did not have the ILS tuned for the runway which to me means they FMC had a different runway selected. Probably they expected one runway and ATC gave them a visual for another, instead of going heads down changing the runway in the FMC they kept flying visually, which is what they were cleared to do.

It will not be the last time it will happen.
 
Gremlinzzzz
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:28 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 9:33 am

zeke wrote:
They are areas which are generally open to the public, anyone can use a camera in there, there is no expectation of privacy. The reason why the cameras are there to capture members of the public committing a crime.
Expectation is not a right. You still seem to be confusing these two things.

zeke wrote:
Police dont have their cameras on all the time, and it very common for them to cover up the microphone so they cannot be heard. They are public servants mainly operating in the public, where anyone is allowed to use a camera. Courtrooms are areas where members of the public are generally not permitted, there is no first amendment right of access to civil proceedings, and when they are permitted it is by the invitation of the court which can be revoked at any time. Members of the public are not allowed to film in court rooms.
Pilots will not be under the camera full time, just when they are flying the plane.


zeke wrote:
Clearly displaying an axe to grind against pilots, it is now clear what your motivation for your contributions on this thread are, and it is not safety related. I asked you for the basis under the law for your claims that cameras will be installed, you have not been able cite anything. There is no proof it will improve safety, installing a camera will not prevent an accident.

Investing in infrastructure, investing in training, investing in ATC, improving certification standards and processes is what prevents accidents.
No one is saying that cameras will stop accidents. NTSB wants them to expedite the investigation process, to better understand what went on so that we can have a safer flying environment be it better training, better cockpit design etc. This is what leads to lower accident rates.

As a regulator, investigator, flight attendant, passenger, someone related to someone who flies a lot, what is there not to love? You need to get rid of this sky god mentality that aviation should center around pilots and start viewing it as a service that is paid for by clients. Those same people, including those that do not fly are busy bailing out your behinds at a time when many are losing jobs. So, zip it.

zeke wrote:
Sure shops use data they generate all the time, however as I pay with cash, and dont use store rewards cards, they have no idea who is making those purchases so they cannot profile me or annoy men with useless advertising. I dont use social media either. I dont understand some people fascination of sharing with the world every location they visit, and every meal they consume. Guess what, without having to tell the world where I have been, what I have eaten, and tell the shops what I am buying, I manage not to starve to death, keep a roof over my head, and keep warm. I have the right not to participate in mass corporate surveillance, if you want to, fine, fill your boots.

And yet the airlines will collect consumer data and act on it as they see fit. Be it when we check in, historical data on people that cancel flights, passenger preferences especially in premium cabins etc. When your employers do that, it is trying to better understand market needs. When they monitor your performance, it is surveillance.

Surely, the hypocrisy is mind bending.
 
CRJockey
Posts: 354
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2020 11:54 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 11:08 am

oldJoe wrote:
zeke in well respect to you !
"A video does not show why something happened, it records what happened, same as a FDR. "
Flight 4U 9525 could have spend much less $$$ if there was a camera on board, does it ?
I don`t understand why pilots are so against it ! Is there something to hide when you are using a muli- million asset of your employe ?


Flight 4U9525 inestigation would have saved no cent with a camera. It was clear from the moment the CVR was being heard. And yes: first hand information.

Pilots are against it, because we value some kind of privacy at the workplace, same as everybody else. And in conjunction with the fact, that next to no investigation of accidents would have been materially different in outcome and recommendation with some camera pictures, the scale tips towards leaving a bit of privacy.
 
Gremlinzzzz
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:28 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 12:16 pm

CRJockey wrote:
Flight 4U9525 inestigation would have saved no cent with a camera. It was clear from the moment the CVR was being heard. And yes: first hand information.

Pilots are against it, because we value some kind of privacy at the workplace, same as everybody else. And in conjunction with the fact, that next to no investigation of accidents would have been materially different in outcome and recommendation with some camera pictures, the scale tips towards leaving a bit of privacy.
This is what I said when I stated that pilots are one of the most entitled employees I have seen in my life.

You do not know that accident investigations would not have been materially different in outcome and recommendation because there is nothing you compare it to. This is not an argument, it is fact.

If there is a chance, even a slight one that aviation will get better with some cameras on the cockpit, common sense states that the expectation of pilot privacy must perish. Our lives on what is a paid service must matter more than your valuation of some kind of privacy.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16461
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 12:53 pm

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
Expectation is not a right. You still seem to be confusing these two things.


This is a forum for factual discussion, not for political grandstanding. I have provided the agreement nd the legislation which is relevant, and yet every time I have asked you to produce the law that that states that employees do not have rights in the workplace, I am reposed with unsupported opinion.

The owner and members of this site require you though the forum rules to produce the information that supports the comments you make. If you are unable to provide that information, you MUST clearly state what you are posting is your personal opinion, and not statement fact.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
Pilots will not be under the camera full time, just when they are flying the plane.


What exactly do you think pilots do ?

Can you describe a setting where pilots would not be under camera surveillance then ? Definitely not at the airport, not on the ramp, not in the carpark, not at the office, these are all under surveillance

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
No one is saying that cameras will stop accidents..


By definition that means there is no safety benefit.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
NTSB wants them to expedite the investigation process, to better understand what went on so that we can have a safer flying environment be it better training, better cockpit design etc. This is what leads to lower accident rates.


Rubbish, cameras would not make anything quicker, especially when the NTSB have no active airliner accidents to investigate. The majority of accidents have a cause that wasn't even on the aircraft. Besides, producing a report in 11 months instead of 12 months does not prevent another crash. If you read the NTSB finding from the last decade, we knew the reasons for these accidents from previous events, they just keep reoccurring because instead of investing where it actually makes a difference people just are looking for someone to blame. Blame does not prevent accidents.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
As a regulator, investigator, flight attendant, passenger, someone related to someone who flies a lot, what is there not to love?


Its a garbage justification like WMDs were garbage justification for Iraq. There is no business case for this. How many airliner accidents in the US in the last year, still sitting at zero ? How many people killed with car accidents or guns ?

The last accident someone died in an airliner in the US was 17 October 2019, that was a turboprop landing on windy icy runway in Alaska.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
You need to get rid of this sky god mentality that aviation should center around pilots and start viewing it as a service that is paid for by clients. Those same people, including those that do not fly are busy bailing out your behinds at a time when many are losing jobs. So, zip it.


I never once have been condescending to you, I have consistently been providing factual information which you have consistently brushed off like it does not exist. There is no outstanding airliner accidents in the US, there is not rush to finish investigations, there is no systemic pilot cause of accidents. There is monitoring of pilots, and has been for decades.

The only person coming across as being verdictive is you, you are the one throwing around labels like "elitist" and "sky gods". I wasn't born yesterday, I have seen this style of behavior many times before. Everyone reading your posts can see you have no real interest in improving safety.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
And yet the airlines will collect consumer data and act on it as they see fit. Be it when we check in, historical data on people that cancel flights, passenger preferences especially in premium cabins etc. When your employers do that, it is trying to better understand market needs. When they monitor your performance, it is surveillance.

Surely, the hypocrisy is mind bending.


Again this is another false allegation, airlines do not operate ticketing systems or check-in systems, these are provided by a handful of third parties like Amadeus and Sabre (there are also others). For someone to have a record which is known to the system, they would need to sign up a frequent flyer program (which they agree to their flights being recoded), it is like any other customer loyalty program. There is no requirement to sign up to these programs in order to fly.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
You do not know that accident investigations would not have been materially different in outcome and recommendation because there is nothing you compare it to. This is not an argument, it is fact.


Provide the evidence.

What you do not understand is the majority of incidents are not investigated by the NTSB, they are investigated by airlines. Investigator courses are offered to pilots regularly, the person you are lecturing maybe a fully qualified investigator. The majority of investigators in the US are not employed by the NTSB, they are employed by the airlines.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
If there is a chance, even a slight one that aviation will get better with some cameras on the cockpit, common sense states that the expectation of pilot privacy must perish. Our lives on what is a paid service must matter more than your valuation of some kind of privacy.


Under the constitution any person in the US, being a citizen or not, do not have their rights diminished if they are at work. Your repeated claims that people have no rights at work are false.
 
Virtual737
Posts: 1240
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 12:57 pm

jetmatt777 wrote:
I used to install security cameras and even top-end professional models are only several megapixels. The power, storage, and bandwidth requirements of super high-res cameras are very costly. Especially in a multi camera setup. I have 6 professional cameras installed in my house (not what you buy at BestBuy), they eat up a LOT of data.


Yet storage technology has advanced at least as quickly as camera technology. I have 8 x 8MP cameras around my house and a single 2TB nVME drive which costs less than a 0.5TB SSD drive did 2 years ago and is the size of a stick of gum can store many days' worth of recordings. A cockpit camera only needs to pick up detail from a few feet away, whereas my home cameras need to see detail at many 10s of feet potentially.

10 megapixels would easily give enough resolution to cover the vast majority of cases. You'd even be able to read the smallest text on the PFD. I'd argue that 5 megapixel cameras were up to the job.

There are many arguments to be made for and against video recording, but resolution, storage or technology in general shouldn't be anywhere near the top. It's not a world away from voice recording which already exists. IFE was a bigger challenge, let alone composite fuselages or a myriad of other technologies in modern aircraft.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16461
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 1:09 pm

Virtual737 wrote:
I have 8 x 8MP cameras around my house.


I bet you have something like a 8MP IMX219 sensor in that camera, I would wager it will only be be doing 30 fps @ 1080p video which is 2mp. A lot of these camera state they can do higher resolution which is technically true however not practically. It comes at the expense of frame rates (like 15 fps), compression, transmission, and storage.
 
Virtual737
Posts: 1240
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 1:21 pm

zeke wrote:
Virtual737 wrote:
I have 8 x 8MP cameras around my house.


I bet you have something like a 8MP IMX219 sensor in that camera, I would wager it will only be be doing 30 Hz @ 1080p video which is 2mp. A lot of these camera state they can do higher resolution which is technically true however not practically. It comes at the expense of frame rates (like 15 fps), compression, transmission, and storage.


My Logitech webcam did 2MP @ 30fps 20 years ago. Like I said, technology is not a barrier. We'd be giving the challenge to people who can make 300 tons of modern technology fly 10 miles above ground for 15 hours at 500 knots. If they can't get an aviation rated VCR to work well then we're all doomed. Even the tail mounted cameras already installed on the A380 would give a good visual representation of what was going on in the cockpit. 2 million pixels is 2 million more than zero. Real 5 megapixel is not cutting edge or anywhere near it. NASA are sending us high res images from Mars and somehow we're trying to suggest that technology is a barrier this side of the Moon.

Let's be totally honest and at least try and be upfront with our biases. If I were a commercial pilot I would almost certainly be against the idea. The thought of being filmed in my workplace would worry the hell out of me. I have little doubt that it was the same for locomotive drivers who were already on the job for years before the technology was introduced there.

However, can you honestly say that it would not further help in accident investigations? Upthread there have been several examples given where assumptions were made, or best guesses taken. Video could very well fill in the blanks and lead to better recommendations.

We're talking about an industry that treats pilot error very differently than it did even 10 years ago. If a pilot finds themselves working for a business that is actively looking for ways to trip them up rather than to improve their operational performance and safety, then that battle is already lost.
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 1731
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 2:14 pm

zeke wrote:
washingtonflyer wrote:
Buses have them; train locomotive and control cabs have them; cargo ships and cruise ships have them.


Your facts claimed here are not true, trains do not have inwards facing cameras they only have outwards facing cameras, the reason for them is to capture the signals displayed and switches on the tracks. Trains and aircraft come under the same industrial legislation in the US due to the importance on them for interstate commerce. As the train network is being upgraded with Positive Train Control (PTC) technology, it will address the root cause for rail accidents.
[/quote]

Here you are flat-out incorrect:

https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/blo ... eo-cameras
    Nearly a decade ago, 24 passengers on a Metrolink commuter train were killed along with an engineer who was distracted by text messaging, ran a red signal and collided head on with a freight train. In the aftermath of the crash and while I was chairman of Metrolink Board of Directors, we installed and started using the inward facing cameras even before the NTSB report on the accident formally suggested doing so. The cameras help enlighten accident investigations and, even more importantly, lessen the likelihood that a rogue engineer might do something unsafe in the first place.

https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews ... clnk&gl=us
    CHARLESTON, W.Va. — The two eastern Class I railroads are taking additional steps to improve safety with plans to equip more locomotives with inward facing cameras and cell phone detection technology. ...“We plan to install cameras in additional units in 2017,” says NS representative Susan Terpay. “Active cell phone detection technology was added to a small number of locomotives in 2016, and we will continue this program in future years,” Terpay says.

http://media.amtrak.com/wp-content/uplo ... b-2021.pdf
    Amtrak began installation of inward-facing video cameras in Amtrak locomotive cabs in 2015. Amtrak has installed inward-facing video cameras on Amtrak Cities Sprinter (ACS-64) electric locomotives, and a portion of its diesel locomotives. Charger (SC-44) diesel locomotives were delivered to the Midwest and Western states in 2017 equipped with inward-facing video camera technology.
 
Gremlinzzzz
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:28 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 2:20 pm

zeke wrote:
Gremlinzzzz wrote:
Expectation is not a right. You still seem to be confusing these two things.


This is a forum for factual discussion, not for political grandstanding. I have provided the agreement nd the legislation which is relevant, and yet every time I have asked you to produce the law that that states that employees do not have rights in the workplace, I am reposed with unsupported opinion.

The owner and members of this site require you though the forum rules to produce the information that supports the comments you make. If you are unable to provide that information, you MUST clearly state what you are posting is your personal opinion, and not statement fact.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
Pilots will not be under the camera full time, just when they are flying the plane.


What exactly do you think pilots do ?

Can you describe a setting where pilots would not be under camera surveillance then ? Definitely not at the airport, not on the ramp, not in the carpark, not at the office, these are all under surveillance

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
No one is saying that cameras will stop accidents..


By definition that means there is no safety benefit.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
NTSB wants them to expedite the investigation process, to better understand what went on so that we can have a safer flying environment be it better training, better cockpit design etc. This is what leads to lower accident rates.


Rubbish, cameras would not make anything quicker, especially when the NTSB have no active airliner accidents to investigate. The majority of accidents have a cause that wasn't even on the aircraft. Besides, producing a report in 11 months instead of 12 months does not prevent another crash. If you read the NTSB finding from the last decade, we knew the reasons for these accidents from previous events, they just keep reoccurring because instead of investing where it actually makes a difference people just are looking for someone to blame. Blame does not prevent accidents.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
As a regulator, investigator, flight attendant, passenger, someone related to someone who flies a lot, what is there not to love?


Its a garbage justification like WMDs were garbage justification for Iraq. There is no business case for this. How many airliner accidents in the US in the last year, still sitting at zero ? How many people killed with car accidents or guns ?

The last accident someone died in an airliner in the US was 17 October 2019, that was a turboprop landing on windy icy runway in Alaska.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
You need to get rid of this sky god mentality that aviation should center around pilots and start viewing it as a service that is paid for by clients. Those same people, including those that do not fly are busy bailing out your behinds at a time when many are losing jobs. So, zip it.


I never once have been condescending to you, I have consistently been providing factual information which you have consistently brushed off like it does not exist. There is no outstanding airliner accidents in the US, there is not rush to finish investigations, there is no systemic pilot cause of accidents. There is monitoring of pilots, and has been for decades.

The only person coming across as being verdictive is you, you are the one throwing around labels like "elitist" and "sky gods". I wasn't born yesterday, I have seen this style of behavior many times before. Everyone reading your posts can see you have no real interest in improving safety.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
And yet the airlines will collect consumer data and act on it as they see fit. Be it when we check in, historical data on people that cancel flights, passenger preferences especially in premium cabins etc. When your employers do that, it is trying to better understand market needs. When they monitor your performance, it is surveillance.

Surely, the hypocrisy is mind bending.


Again this is another false allegation, airlines do not operate ticketing systems or check-in systems, these are provided by a handful of third parties like Amadeus and Sabre (there are also others). For someone to have a record which is known to the system, they would need to sign up a frequent flyer program (which they agree to their flights being recoded), it is like any other customer loyalty program. There is no requirement to sign up to these programs in order to fly.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
You do not know that accident investigations would not have been materially different in outcome and recommendation because there is nothing you compare it to. This is not an argument, it is fact.


Provide the evidence.

What you do not understand is the majority of incidents are not investigated by the NTSB, they are investigated by airlines. Investigator courses are offered to pilots regularly, the person you are lecturing maybe a fully qualified investigator. The majority of investigators in the US are not employed by the NTSB, they are employed by the airlines.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
If there is a chance, even a slight one that aviation will get better with some cameras on the cockpit, common sense states that the expectation of pilot privacy must perish. Our lives on what is a paid service must matter more than your valuation of some kind of privacy.


Under the constitution any person in the US, being a citizen or not, do not have their rights diminished if they are at work. Your repeated claims that people have no rights at work are false.

1. You gave me a link and you stated that the expectation was privacy. That is expectation, not a right. The moment I read that, I did not bother read what was in the link.

2. Cameras are not going to stop accidents, but neither are FDR or CVR. They come in post fact to try and determine what went wrong; that it might be understood, and that the industry might learn from it. Do we also get rid of those because this is the type of reasoning you are employing.

3. It does not matter that a lot of accidents are not investigated by the NTSB. That is not the point. The crux is whether this would be a great addition to better enhance safety. If there is a small chance that this could be the case, then it has to be pursued.

4. We have professionals that are monitored everywhere. It is not a violation of rights. Ever go into a government building and they tell you that you are under surveillance? You private life is just that, private. Your time under your employer is their time and it looks like you understand that you are monitored at employer bases, airports, ramps........the cockpit is an extension of that.
Choose one hill and die on it if that is the case. What you should not do, is argue both sides.

5. Saber, Amadeus are middleware. They provide a platform that airlines, who are not good software engineers leverage. The systems are operated by the airlines, the data belongs to the airlines. We used to have this in the financial sector too, just to a greater degree because there are a huge amount of systems to choose from the core banking system, a separate system linked to the bank that shows settlements etc. There are a huge swathe of software solutions for data analytics in the science space too.

6. NTSB and other investigators know what works for them and what they need. They do not need entitled people who have been wrong before dictating what they should and should not do. Have you heard American Airlines releasing an accident report? Or Delta? Southwest? I know I am being pedantic, but there is a reason this is the case.

7. You really should not be reading me site rules riot act when you are selling your opinion as fact. So much of what you have posted on this topic is flat out wrong.
Last edited by Gremlinzzzz on Tue Apr 20, 2021 2:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
CRJockey
Posts: 354
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2020 11:54 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 2:35 pm

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
CRJockey wrote:
Flight 4U9525 inestigation would have saved no cent with a camera. It was clear from the moment the CVR was being heard. And yes: first hand information.

Pilots are against it, because we value some kind of privacy at the workplace, same as everybody else. And in conjunction with the fact, that next to no investigation of accidents would have been materially different in outcome and recommendation with some camera pictures, the scale tips towards leaving a bit of privacy.
This is what I said when I stated that pilots are one of the most entitled employees I have seen in my life.

You do not know that accident investigations would not have been materially different in outcome and recommendation because there is nothing you compare it to. This is not an argument, it is fact.

If there is a chance, even a slight one that aviation will get better with some cameras on the cockpit, common sense states that the expectation of pilot privacy must perish. Our lives on what is a paid service must matter more than your valuation of some kind of privacy.


Actually I have spent far more professional time in my life not being a pilot. And still now, I am not only pilot. So while not arguing your right to feel about pilots whatever way you like, I have seen this sense of entitlement in people. Of all professional levels and in various fields of expertise.
And by the way, me and all my colleagues pretty much liked not having had a camera (not even voice recording, mind you) behind our desks. You know, those that can so tremendously improve safety just in case we make serious mistakes leading to loss of life by opening up the first hole in the swiss cheese model. So yes, people do mind privacy and they should. We are not in communist Romania.

And yes, I do know that accident investigations would not have materially different outcomes most of the time. Because I happen to have been part of some, well informed about many and I can conclude that whenever the root cause has been found, the root cause has been found. No need to see the FO of 4U not opening the door when you can deduct all necessary information from CVR and FDR data. No need to see how the three in the AF447 cockpit did not understand the situation for various reasons when you can deduct the necessary information from CVR and FDR data and, well, common sense. I could go on, but it is tiring me.

But for the sake of argument: I have been involved in trying to understand accidents and near accidents or accidents waiting to happen which were simple but blatant mistakes by maintenance personnel. Are you suggesting as well, we put a camera (or personal VR) on every mechanic just in case?

So whatever you feel you are entitled to as a paying customer, you are not. And life, as usual, is about keeping a balance. Flying is so incredibly safe, in my opinion as a professional in the industry and a pilot, putting cameras in cockpits do only little for improving anything, but have a whole lot of reason not to be there. The balance is not right.

But of course, you and your (kinda strong) opinion are valid just as well, everybody can have one.

And the NTSB might lobby for cameras just as unions and pilots representatives as well as regulation about privacy might lobby against it, for good reason. If that makes you feel unsafe in plane, please drive. But beware, it is kinda dangerous.
 
Gremlinzzzz
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:28 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 2:57 pm

CRJockey wrote:
Actually I have spent far more professional time in my life not being a pilot. And still now, I am not only pilot. So while not arguing your right to feel about pilots whatever way you like, I have seen this sense of entitlement in people. Of all professional levels and in various fields of expertise.
And by the way, me and all my colleagues pretty much liked not having had a camera (not even voice recording, mind you) behind our desks. You know, those that can so tremendously improve safety just in case we make serious mistakes leading to loss of life by opening up the first hole in the swiss cheese model. So yes, people do mind privacy and they should. We are not in communist Romania.

And yes, I do know that accident investigations would not have materially different outcomes most of the time. Because I happen to have been part of some, well informed about many and I can conclude that whenever the root cause has been found, the root cause has been found. No need to see the FO of 4U not opening the door when you can deduct all necessary information from CVR and FDR data. No need to see how the three in the AF447 cockpit did not understand the situation for various reasons when you can deduct the necessary information from CVR and FDR data and, well, common sense. I could go on, but it is tiring me.

But for the sake of argument: I have been involved in trying to understand accidents and near accidents or accidents waiting to happen which were simple but blatant mistakes by maintenance personnel. Are you suggesting as well, we put a camera (or personal VR) on every mechanic just in case?

So whatever you feel you are entitled to as a paying customer, you are not. And life, as usual, is about keeping a balance. Flying is so incredibly safe, in my opinion as a professional in the industry and a pilot, putting cameras in cockpits do only little for improving anything, but have a whole lot of reason not to be there. The balance is not right.

But of course, you and your (kinda strong) opinion are valid just as well, everybody can have one.

And the NTSB might lobby for cameras just as unions and pilots representatives as well as regulation about privacy might lobby against it, for good reason. If that makes you feel unsafe in plane, please drive. But beware, it is kinda dangerous.

I am not working in aviation, but I have had the opportunity to work with catering companies. I have friends that work at the terminals and several that work as flight attendants, I had a late uncle who ran an entire operation for what used to be a major market for one airline.

It is a highly regulated industry and it should be. I would have cameras everywhere not called the passenger cabin if it were my airline. You are being entrusted with equipment that costs tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. You are operating equipment that needs one to make the right decision should something go wrong to save lives. This is monumental responsibility and we are sitting here arguing how much pilot privacy is? I have seen accident investigations where something shortcuts in maintenance led to horrible loss of life, where manufacturing errors that were avoidable or not dealt with on time led to the same. I would have cameras absolutely everywhere.

Maybe I come from the medical field where a mistake in how samples are collected, analyzed and justified has huge ramifications and we value detail. Maybe I have experience in finance and once saw how an extra zero and non balancing accounts had us going through almost 100,000 transactions to understand if it was a singular mistake or mistakes that piled up in the IPO process.

Employees are monitored not because it is the best thing to do but because it is the right thing to do. People can be greedy (and as a business owner, I know what too much freedom leads to; I lost way too much cash), people can be careless (and I have seen this each and every place I have worked), and sometimes, honest people doing their best make mistakes. Monitoring tends to lessen instances of greed and lack of care.This is not the only thing they achieve though. Doctors will tell you they do not like being baby sat through operations, but the monitoring is for the benefit of the patient and not the doctor. It adds cost, but who cares? Banks implement technology and at great cost, but it is for the benefit of the client and the food industry does a lot of testing to ensure that they get it right and avoid contaminated product in the market, all at great cost.

If everyone is taking such measures, what makes it so pervasive that we cannot have cameras in the cockpit even for marginal gains (aviation safety is a marginal gain business)?
 
Virtual737
Posts: 1240
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 3:28 pm

CRJockey wrote:
...putting cameras in cockpits do only little for improving anything, but have a whole lot of reason not to be there. The balance is not right.


Out of interest, do you think the reasons not to add the cameras would also apply to locomotives where they have already been installed? If so, would you mind elaborating? Not a loaded question in any way.

Thanks.
 
CRJockey
Posts: 354
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2020 11:54 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 3:45 pm

Gremlinzzzz wrote:
CRJockey wrote:
Actually I have spent far more professional time in my life not being a pilot. And still now, I am not only pilot. So while not arguing your right to feel about pilots whatever way you like, I have seen this sense of entitlement in people. Of all professional levels and in various fields of expertise.
And by the way, me and all my colleagues pretty much liked not having had a camera (not even voice recording, mind you) behind our desks. You know, those that can so tremendously improve safety just in case we make serious mistakes leading to loss of life by opening up the first hole in the swiss cheese model. So yes, people do mind privacy and they should. We are not in communist Romania.

And yes, I do know that accident investigations would not have materially different outcomes most of the time. Because I happen to have been part of some, well informed about many and I can conclude that whenever the root cause has been found, the root cause has been found. No need to see the FO of 4U not opening the door when you can deduct all necessary information from CVR and FDR data. No need to see how the three in the AF447 cockpit did not understand the situation for various reasons when you can deduct the necessary information from CVR and FDR data and, well, common sense. I could go on, but it is tiring me.

But for the sake of argument: I have been involved in trying to understand accidents and near accidents or accidents waiting to happen which were simple but blatant mistakes by maintenance personnel. Are you suggesting as well, we put a camera (or personal VR) on every mechanic just in case?

So whatever you feel you are entitled to as a paying customer, you are not. And life, as usual, is about keeping a balance. Flying is so incredibly safe, in my opinion as a professional in the industry and a pilot, putting cameras in cockpits do only little for improving anything, but have a whole lot of reason not to be there. The balance is not right.

But of course, you and your (kinda strong) opinion are valid just as well, everybody can have one.

And the NTSB might lobby for cameras just as unions and pilots representatives as well as regulation about privacy might lobby against it, for good reason. If that makes you feel unsafe in plane, please drive. But beware, it is kinda dangerous.

I am not working in aviation, but I have had the opportunity to work with catering companies. I have friends that work at the terminals and several that work as flight attendants, I had a late uncle who ran an entire operation for what used to be a major market for one airline.

It is a highly regulated industry and it should be. I would have cameras everywhere not called the passenger cabin if it were my airline. You are being entrusted with equipment that costs tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. You are operating equipment that needs one to make the right decision should something go wrong to save lives. This is monumental responsibility and we are sitting here arguing how much pilot privacy is? I have seen accident investigations where something shortcuts in maintenance led to horrible loss of life, where manufacturing errors that were avoidable or not dealt with on time led to the same. I would have cameras absolutely everywhere.

Maybe I come from the medical field where a mistake in how samples are collected, analyzed and justified has huge ramifications and we value detail. Maybe I have experience in finance and once saw how an extra zero and non balancing accounts had us going through almost 100,000 transactions to understand if it was a singular mistake or mistakes that piled up in the IPO process.

Employees are monitored not because it is the best thing to do but because it is the right thing to do. People can be greedy (and as a business owner, I know what too much freedom leads to; I lost way too much cash), people can be careless (and I have seen this each and every place I have worked), and sometimes, honest people doing their best make mistakes. Monitoring tends to lessen instances of greed and lack of care.This is not the only thing they achieve though. Doctors will tell you they do not like being baby sat through operations, but the monitoring is for the benefit of the patient and not the doctor. It adds cost, but who cares? Banks implement technology and at great cost, but it is for the benefit of the client and the food industry does a lot of testing to ensure that they get it right and avoid contaminated product in the market, all at great cost.

If everyone is taking such measures, what makes it so pervasive that we cannot have cameras in the cockpit even for marginal gains (aviation safety is a marginal gain business)?


First of all I'd like to thank you for the civil discussion, even in disagreement. Rare these days on a.net.

I can see your points and accept them as valid opinion, but wholeheartedly disagree with the approach. Monitoring does, in my experience and consequently opinion, fundamentally lead to blind following of whatever set of rules given. And the rules given that are most strict and are, through FDM, tightly monitored at several carriers I might not call out but have first hand information about, are not to enhance safety. They are to enhance the balance sheet to the detriment of safety.

Company culture and a set of rules and mindset taking your employees on the journey to improve safety, honesty, precision, etc., are in my experience so strong a tool to improve safety across the board, that cameras seem like such a wrong solution for a problem hardly existing. Because we do solve all accidents where we find the aircraft, the FDR and the CVR. If we don't find those, we certainly won't find a camera data recorder with higher probability.

In that light and with all stated above, yes, in my book, privacy for employees of all sort is of superior importance in societies caring for civil rights and liberties.
 
CRJockey
Posts: 354
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2020 11:54 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 3:51 pm

Virtual737 wrote:
CRJockey wrote:
...putting cameras in cockpits do only little for improving anything, but have a whole lot of reason not to be there. The balance is not right.


Out of interest, do you think the reasons not to add the cameras would also apply to locomotives where they have already been installed? If so, would you mind elaborating? Not a loaded question in any way.

Thanks.


Interesting question I can hardly answer, unfortunately. My experience with rail safety is marginal and I fear I am not really qualified to answer.

Do cameras in locos exist across the board over all continents, as FDR, CVR do in aviation? Do loco data recorders exist? I guess yes but have no idea.
Why do they exist in the first place in locos? Not as strong a lobby against it as pilots?

I suggest if, as in aviation, reasonable means exist to identify root causes for accidents with equal precision, cameras shouldn't have a place either. Privacy is a human right after all, not a right for a certain profession.
 
Virtual737
Posts: 1240
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 3:55 pm

CRJockey wrote:

Interesting question I can hardly answer, unfortunately. My experience with rail safety is marginal and I fear I am not really qualified to answer.

Do cameras in locos exist across the board over all continents, as FDR, CVR do in aviation? Do loco data recorders exist? I guess yes but have no idea.
Why do they exist in the first place in locos? Not as strong a lobby against it as pilots?

I suggest if, as in aviation, reasonable means exist to identify root causes for accidents with equal precision, cameras shouldn't have a place either. Privacy is a human right after all, not a right for a certain profession.


Thanks for the reply. My main reason for the question was that my first guess would be most people involved in accident investigations would likely be for their introduction and, of course, the NTSB themselves would appear to be pushing for it. Then you come along and prove my initial assumption wrong )
 
mxaxai
Posts: 2811
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: NTSB Renews Calls for Cockpit Video Recorders

Tue Apr 20, 2021 4:57 pm

CRJockey wrote:
Virtual737 wrote:
Out of interest, do you think the reasons not to add the cameras would also apply to locomotives where they have already been installed? If so, would you mind elaborating? Not a loaded question in any way.

Thanks.


Interesting question I can hardly answer, unfortunately. My experience with rail safety is marginal and I fear I am not really qualified to answer.

Do cameras in locos exist across the board over all continents, as FDR, CVR do in aviation? Do loco data recorders exist? I guess yes but have no idea.
Why do they exist in the first place in locos? Not as strong a lobby against it as pilots?

Trains are often equipped with FDR-like recorders, at least in North America, Europe and countries with similar regulations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Train_event_recorder
Driver cameras aren't as common. On light rail and busses, the driver is often filmed but only because they're at risk from passenger aggression (especially if they sell tickets). It's for their own safety.

There's far less room for operator errors on railways. Most trains nowadays have some form of automatic control that stops the train if a signal is missed or if the driver is incapacitated.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos