Comments on: Pilots Fight Video Recorders in Cockpits https://national.news21.com Just another WordPress site Sat, 25 Jun 2011 17:21:35 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: flynblu https://national.news21.com/2010-2/cockpit-video-recorders-resisted-ntsb#comment-110 flynblu Tue, 28 Sep 2010 16:40:43 +0000 https://national.news21.com/?page_id=447#comment-110 Imagine going to work in your office cubicle under 24-hour video surveillance watching your every action. Imagine driving your car down the road with every moment under constant video scrutiny. As a retired military pilot and current Airline Transport rated pilot with over 35 years of experience and thousands of flight hours, I strongly doubt that the possible, unproven, contribution to flight safety would justify such an egregious invasion of privacy. Would cockpit video improve safety, possibly, but only when combined with a Flight Data Recorder (FDR). What if some of the cockpit instrumentation had failed and was providing erroneous information to the pilots (I have had that happen several times); that could be difficult to determine solely from a video recording showing all is well. And you would need multiple cameras on the aircraft showing what the pilot sees outside as well as inside. Also a 360-degree view around the aircraft in case of mid-air collisions or structural problems. Video without the context of the current flight conditions and parameters would be very difficult to extract meaningful information from. And the distraction provided by the presence of the video recorder, especially in the early stages of adoption, would be a much greater detriment to safety. What is needed far all new aircraft is an inexpensive FDR system designed into the aircraft from the start and provided as standard equipment at the factory. And a system of small remote sensors wirelessly providing data inputs to a FDR on older aircraft does not seem to be beyond the capabilities of present technology. This would provide far more useful information to an investigation team. Sensed flight control inputs could tell the investigators what the pilots were doing far better than out-of-context video ever would. Our society seems to be fixated on protecting all citizens from the dangers and woes of the world. Reclining suspended in an earthquake-proof tank of nutrient goo while being fed intravenously and provided only happy thoughts fed electronically to our brains may be the safest way to go, but would provide only existence, not life. Trading our privacy and freedom for illusory increases in safety just because it sounds good in the face of sensationalized media stories are more big steps down that Dark Path. Be careful, Big Brother could be watching. Imagine going to work in your office cubicle under 24-hour video surveillance watching your every action. Imagine driving your car down the road with every moment under constant video scrutiny. As a retired military pilot and current Airline Transport rated pilot with over 35 years of experience and thousands of flight hours, I strongly doubt that the possible, unproven, contribution to flight safety would justify such an egregious invasion of privacy. Would cockpit video improve safety, possibly, but only when combined with a Flight Data Recorder (FDR). What if some of the cockpit instrumentation had failed and was providing erroneous information to the pilots (I have had that happen several times); that could be difficult to determine solely from a video recording showing all is well. And you would need multiple cameras on the aircraft showing what the pilot sees outside as well as inside. Also a 360-degree view around the aircraft in case of mid-air collisions or structural problems. Video without the context of the current flight conditions and parameters would be very difficult to extract meaningful information from. And the distraction provided by the presence of the video recorder, especially in the early stages of adoption, would be a much greater detriment to safety.

What is needed far all new aircraft is an inexpensive FDR system designed into the aircraft from the start and provided as standard equipment at the factory. And a system of small remote sensors wirelessly providing data inputs to a FDR on older aircraft does not seem to be beyond the capabilities of present technology. This would provide far more useful information to an investigation team. Sensed flight control inputs could tell the investigators what the pilots were doing far better than out-of-context video ever would.

Our society seems to be fixated on protecting all citizens from the dangers and woes of the world. Reclining suspended in an earthquake-proof tank of nutrient goo while being fed intravenously and provided only happy thoughts fed electronically to our brains may be the safest way to go, but would provide only existence, not life. Trading our privacy and freedom for illusory increases in safety just because it sounds good in the face of sensationalized media stories are more big steps down that Dark Path. Be careful, Big Brother could be watching.

]]> By: Glen Gates https://national.news21.com/2010-2/cockpit-video-recorders-resisted-ntsb#comment-109 Glen Gates Tue, 28 Sep 2010 13:02:39 +0000 https://national.news21.com/?page_id=447#comment-109 I was impressed by the reporter's level of reporting and accuracy. One of my pet peeves is how commercial news media handle aviation news. Because crashes are newsworthy and papers/TV stations need headlines to sell news, what often happens is a reporter will seek the story and print "facts" without checking the details. Eye witness reports, breathlessly recorded and edited for the news audience are usually inaccurate. The NTSB rarely makes any conclusions based on eye witness reports published or broadcast, especially if the witness is not technically trained in aviation. Non-pilots will say what they believe they saw which editors rush to publish or broadcast as "breaking news" without making sure the details are reported accurately. The rush to be first often ends up being the first to make journalistic mistakes. Ken Kaye @ Sun Sentinal in Ft. Lauderdale is an example of good aviation reporting. he and his staff make sure the stories published are accurate. He happens to have had a career as commercial pilot flying cancelled checks in Colorado so he knows what he is writing about. I was impressed by the reporter’s level of reporting and accuracy. One of my pet peeves is how commercial news media handle aviation news. Because crashes are newsworthy and papers/TV stations need headlines to sell news, what often happens is a reporter will seek the story and print “facts” without checking the details. Eye witness reports, breathlessly recorded and edited for the news audience are usually inaccurate. The NTSB rarely makes any conclusions based on eye witness reports published or broadcast, especially if the witness is not technically trained in aviation. Non-pilots will say what they believe they saw which editors rush to publish or broadcast as “breaking news” without making sure the details are reported accurately. The rush to be first often ends up being the first to make journalistic mistakes. Ken Kaye @ Sun Sentinal in Ft. Lauderdale is an example of good aviation reporting. he and his staff make sure the stories published are accurate. He happens to have had a career as commercial pilot flying cancelled checks in Colorado so he knows what he is writing about.

]]>