Two people in the cockpit.
Mar 26, 2015, 12:21 pm
#2
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: AGH
Posts: 5,971
Seriously?
Anyway, I guess all airlines will implement a new policy very soon which requires two crew in the cockpit at all times. Norwegian confirmed today they'll implement this as of now.
So far I don't think there is a similar policy on SK.
Anyway, I guess all airlines will implement a new policy very soon which requires two crew in the cockpit at all times. Norwegian confirmed today they'll implement this as of now.
So far I don't think there is a similar policy on SK.
Mar 26, 2015, 12:34 pm
#3
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 624
Last edited by Prospero; Mar 29, 2015 at 5:20 pm Reason: Remove inflammatory comments
Mar 26, 2015, 1:23 pm
#7
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Koala Lemur
Programs: SK EBD LTG (*G)
Posts: 2,447
Mar 27, 2015, 12:27 am
#8
Join Date: Oct 2011
Programs: EuroBonus Diamond, Delta Skymiles 360, BAEC LTG, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Ambassador
Posts: 2,827
No need to change the rules out of nowhere due to one incident. That is one of the biggest problems today in Sweden, one incident and the rest of the country becomes the victim of a new set of rules. We have enough unnecessary rules and sources of inconvenience for no good reason today. I hope SK doesn't jump on the hype, the odds of it happening again are seriously low enough to ignore it.
Mar 27, 2015, 12:45 am
#9
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Koala Lemur
Programs: SK EBD LTG (*G)
Posts: 2,447
Its not a question of being indifferent. I deeply care. This incident has happened because 10 years ago someone introduced a rule that cockpit doors need to be lockable (I am also not saying that this was a wrong rule). I am saying that it is extremely difficult to fix a very complex phenomenon by introducing rules. Especially if you have only one case to base them on.
I do for once support traffic code rules and air-traffic safety rules (I am not an anarchist, I am trying to be rational, which is not easy given the circumstances).
I do for once support traffic code rules and air-traffic safety rules (I am not an anarchist, I am trying to be rational, which is not easy given the circumstances).
Last edited by Prospero; Mar 29, 2015 at 5:23 pm Reason: remove quotation from deleted post
Mar 27, 2015, 2:20 am
#10
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 624
No need to change the rules out of nowhere due to one incident. That is one of the biggest problems today in Sweden, one incident and the rest of the country becomes the victim of a new set of rules. We have enough unnecessary rules and sources of inconvenience for no good reason today. I hope SK doesn't jump on the hype, the odds of it happening again are seriously low enough to ignore it.
I fully expect SAS to implement this rule (as the last airlines, probably) and frankly, I would demand it as a customer - as it makes sense. Sure, there aren't many fires on board an aircraft, but it still makes sense to carry an extinguisher.
Btw.: I'm not hopped up on all these crazy measures generally; I'm all for abolishing airport security and letting airlines set rules for which passengers they want to fly with instead.
We're getting all the wrong security here and requiring two pilots in the cockpit isn't trading freedom for security, it's demanding something from your airline provider. That's utterly fine to do.
Mar 27, 2015, 2:35 am
#11
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
I expect that SAS will be (or will be made into) another industry lemming to do the same thing with a "2 person in cockpit" rule of some sort.
.... and then after a future incident where it is alleged and bought that a flight attendant incapacitated the remaining pilot in the cokcpit and locked out the other pilot from the cockpit, then what? Another rule change to undo this rule change?
.... and then after a future incident where it is alleged and bought that a flight attendant incapacitated the remaining pilot in the cokcpit and locked out the other pilot from the cockpit, then what? Another rule change to undo this rule change?
Mar 27, 2015, 2:37 am
#12
Join Date: May 2008
Location: ARN
Posts: 3,470
The problem is that if a pilot is really intent on committing suicide, these kinds of rules won't prevent them from doing it. FedEx 705 is an example of that. In any airplane with two pilots, if one of those pilots chooses to do a FedEx 705, he would be able to take the plane down.
If you want to prevent FedEx 705 incidents, you need three pilots on board and a cockpit door that cannot be locked.
If you want to prevent FedEx 705 incidents, you need three pilots on board and a cockpit door that cannot be locked.
Mar 27, 2015, 3:03 am
#13
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Koala Lemur
Programs: SK EBD LTG (*G)
Posts: 2,447
I am not against the rules. But introducing rules should be done carefully after a detailed and cool minded risk analysis. Not after a few over excited journalists got a bit over emotional in the media. It is easy to introduce a rule that actually increases the risks not decreases.
Unfortunately, I see this a lot, in politics, and particularly so in Denmark. There is a lot of strange rules that have been introduced because someone made something utterly stupid. Politicians then feel an immediate urge to benefit by demonstrating to the shocked public that they are willing to act. In this case, airlines are politicians that will use it as a PR trick. I would prefer that people cool down and involve specialists to analyze the matters in depths, based on data, before hasty decisions are made.
MH370 should not be used as data in this case. There is no evidence yet, whether this was a deliberate crash whatsoever. I would rather not have rules that govern safety of my life several times a week, be introduced based on such speculations.
[off topic: about 10 days ago, Danish media were very appalled that so many young people are rejected from studying at the university because they high school grades are not good enough. As a result of this hysteria in media decided to put pressure on universities, not to admit more students (because the government would have to pay for that) but to admit students not based on their academic results. This is of course incomparable to the U4 tragedy (!), but it is the same irrational mechanism that is in place]
Unfortunately, I see this a lot, in politics, and particularly so in Denmark. There is a lot of strange rules that have been introduced because someone made something utterly stupid. Politicians then feel an immediate urge to benefit by demonstrating to the shocked public that they are willing to act. In this case, airlines are politicians that will use it as a PR trick. I would prefer that people cool down and involve specialists to analyze the matters in depths, based on data, before hasty decisions are made.
MH370 should not be used as data in this case. There is no evidence yet, whether this was a deliberate crash whatsoever. I would rather not have rules that govern safety of my life several times a week, be introduced based on such speculations.
[off topic: about 10 days ago, Danish media were very appalled that so many young people are rejected from studying at the university because they high school grades are not good enough. As a result of this hysteria in media decided to put pressure on universities, not to admit more students (because the government would have to pay for that) but to admit students not based on their academic results. This is of course incomparable to the U4 tragedy (!), but it is the same irrational mechanism that is in place]