Pilot who overshot airport denies crew was napping

[Astronuc]

Talk about distraction on the job.

Pilot who overshot airport denies crew was napping
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091024/ap_on_bi_ge/us_northwest_airport_overflown

MINNEAPOLIS – The first officer of the Northwest Airlines jet that missed its destination by 150 miles says there was no fight in the cockpit, neither he nor the captain had fallen asleep and the passengers were never in any danger.

But in an interview with The Associated Press two days after he and a colleague blew past their destination as air traffic controllers tried frantically to reach them, pilot Richard Cole would not say just what it was that led to them to forget to land Flight 188.

"It was not a serious event, from a safety issue," Cole said in front of his Salem, Ore., home. "I would tell you more, but I've already told you way too much."
. . . .

The pilot and first officer were apparently having a heated discussion and did not realize they were approaching their destination.

http://www.marketwatch.com/video/asset/pilots-argue-at-37000-feet/CEE2B5A4-5EA0-4DCF-975A-AC8CF5BF52F2

 

[Moonbear]

It's hard to believe it was an argument distracting them. Afterall, wouldn't the communication from the tower asking them where the heck they were going when they missed their landing have gotten their attention?

I don't really think it matters either way, though. That's a pretty major error to be distracted or napping or something else for a half hour past your destination and out of communication with the towers for that entire time.

I did get a good laugh from the speculation of one person who commented on one of the many news stories about this...that person asked, "Were the pilots of opposite sexes?" (I suppose the implication could be the same for same sex pilots, but the question did a nice job of getting the point across of what they were suspecting was going on in the cockpit without coming right out and saying it.)

 

[Astronuc]

Post 9/11, a plane going off-course is pretty serious. Apparently the Air Force had 4 fighter jets ready to chase the plane!

It's not clear at the moment why they didn't respond to the tower, but perhaps they did not have their headphones on - so they could argue.


Experts Puzzle Over How Flight Overshot Airport

Two aviation officials credited a flight attendant with calling the pilots’ attention to their location.

Once the repeated attempts to contact the plane were unsuccessful, federal agencies increased their efforts. The North American Aerospace Defense Command readied four fighter jets and had them on “runway alert” in the vicinity, Mike Kucharek, a spokesman for the command, said Friday. Meanwhile, the Transportation Security Administration took part in conference calls with other federal agencies, and checked for “possible screening anomalies” at the San Diego airport, said Sterling Payne, a spokeswoman for the agency.
. . . .

 

[BobG]

Lucky. In 1972, one of the instrument lights burnt out in an L-1011 flying over the everglades. The crew had trouble figuring out how to reinsert the lens cover after replacing the bulb. They were all so involved in solving that problem, that no one noticed the alarm indicating the plane was losing altitude. http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19721229-0#

Apparently, the discussion was about the Delta-Northwest airlines merger and how it will affect pilot seniority (there might be some clause that arguing in the cockpit will cost a pilot all of their seniority). Situations like these are why pilots are banned from internet forums while flying a plane. http://xkcd.com/386/

 

[Moonbear]

Post 9/11, a plane going off-course is pretty serious. Apparently the Air Force had 4 fighter jets ready to chase the plane!

From what I read, it wasn't really evident that it was a post-9/11 type rule. Afterall, ON 9/11, they were scrambling fighter jets to track down the stray planes too. It sounded more like it was a longer standing rule to check on a plane, and even confirm it's location, when communication is lost. When the cockpit isn't responding to air traffic control, I'm sure they have to assume anything and everything from a hijacked plane to a malfunction of electrical or communications systems to pilots asleep at the controls.

 

[edward]

There is a second oops to all of this. The FFA failed to notify NORAD when they should have.

At issue, according to a senior U.S. official directly familiar with the timeline of the incident, is the FAA's apparent delay in notifying NORAD that the Northwest jet was not in contact with controllers.

The official, who declined to be identified because both the military and the FAA are reviewing the entire incident, said that the FAA's request for military involvement came after the plane passed the Minneapolis airport. NORAD scrambled fighter jets at two locations. But as they approached the runway for takeoff, the FAA reported being back in contact with the Northwest flight, and the fighters stayed on the ground.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/10/23/airliner.fly.by/

 

[Moonbear]

From the article edward posted, it looks like the first officer has realized that claiming they were distracted by an argument isn't any better of a defense than sleeping, since he's now denying it.

In retrospect, and with everyone safely on the ground, it may be a good thing this happened. It is now bringing to light problems with responses on more than one level to get them fixed before there's a serious problem, such as a hijacking.

Another thing that comes to mind is that perhaps someone needs to do a more thorough background check on both the pilots and the air traffic controller who didn't report the incident. If someone WAS thinking about hijacking a plane, or trying to repeat a 9/11 type scenario, wouldn't this be the test you'd want to try? Find out how long and how far off course you can go before fighter jets can respond or get to the plane? This is probably the least likely explanation, but with something this bizarre, perhaps no stone should be left unturned.

 

[russ_watters]

In retrospect, and with everyone safely on the ground, it may be a good thing this happened. It is now bringing to light problems with responses on more than one level to get them fixed before there's a serious problem, such as a hijacking.

Not sure I agree: this is a pretty well documented problem among pilots and a facet of human nature that is difficult to overcome. Most plane crashes involve a component of pilot inattentiveness. So regulators, manufacturers and airlines are all pretty vigilant in fighting the problem.

 

[Andre]

Hm, in my past job, I would have launched those fighters immediately. Loss of radio contact & aircraft not following flight planned route = highest alert state. Automatic "scramble".

There may have been considerations though, that are not released.

 

[Moonbear]

Not sure I agree: this is a pretty well documented problem among pilots and a facet of human nature that is difficult to overcome. Most plane crashes involve a component of pilot inattentiveness. So regulators, manufacturers and airlines are all pretty vigilant in fighting the problem.

I was referring more to the added problem that the FAA was slow to report that there WAS a problem.

In a case like this, is there a way for anyone on the ground to bypass the cockpit and directly contact the flight attendants in the cabin? For example, so they would know there was a potential problem and go knock on the cockpit door...maybe they could have gotten the attention of a distracted pilot that way, or if there was still no response, consider that it could have been a medical emergency leaving them incapacitated to respond (not sure what would afflict two pilots at once, but perhaps a fume or something might). This wasn't a case of zoning out for 5-10 minutes (also potentially dangerous if it was the wrong 5 minutes, but well within normal ranges of human attention spans), but I think altogether it was over an hour that they were out of communication and unable to be roused by radio calls too them. While we have no idea what was happening in that cockpit, there WERE people on the ground fully alert and aware of the problem, and they too did not follow procedures they were supposed to follow in a timely manner. That person on the ground is supposed to be the safety net for when something goes wrong on board the plane, and that failed in this case too.

 

[turbo]

Hm, in my past job, I would have launched those fighters immediately. Loss of radio contact & aircraft not following flight planned route = highest alert state. Automatic "scramble".

There may have been considerations though, that are not released.

I wonder what will shake out. F-16s were scrambled when Payne Stewart's rented Learjet went off flight-plan in Florida air-space, and there was a series of rendezvous by other F-16s until the plane ran out of fuel and crashed in South Dakota. That plane had only 2 passengers and 2 crew, so how does an off-course airliner with about 150 passengers not get jets scrambled for investigation and escort?

 

[Moonbear]

Hm, in my past job, I would have launched those fighters immediately. Loss of radio contact & aircraft not following flight planned route = highest alert state. Automatic "scramble".

There may have been considerations though, that are not released.

They probably were still on course with auto pilot engaged until they overflew the airport, which is when the articles say they did contact NORAD. What is the protocol for loss of communication, but flight still on planned route? What if the problem was loss of radio communication? How does the plane get guided to the ground in such a case? Is it the same thing, that you'd have a fighter jet escort to lead the way? Or does some other protocol kick in? I assume part of it would be to clear other flights out of the way in case they can't hear instructions even if all else were working right and they were fully awake.

 

[Vanadium 50]

It gets worse - there are cases where the pilots managed to somehow land the aircraft at the wrong airport. In 2004 Northwest did this at Rapid City, and in 1995 Northwest also did this at Brussels (instead of Frankfurt).

Hmmm...I'm sensing a pattern. What airline was this again?

 

[Moonbear]

It gets worse - there are cases where the pilots managed to somehow land the aircraft at the wrong airport. In 2004 Northwest did this at Rapid City, and in 1995 Northwest also did this at Brussels (instead of Frankfurt).

Hmmm...I'm sensing a pattern. What airline was this again?

Yep, Northwest. Apparently, they have trouble flying in other directions.

 

[turbo]

Yep, Northwest. Apparently, they have trouble flying in other directions.

That's the direction Stewart's Lear jet flew went it went off flight-plan. Conspiracy?

 

[Sorry!]

They probably were still on course with auto pilot engaged until they overflew the airport, which is when the articles say they did contact NORAD. What is the protocol for loss of communication, but flight still on planned route? What if the problem was loss of radio communication? How does the plane get guided to the ground in such a case? Is it the same thing, that you'd have a fighter jet escort to lead the way? Or does some other protocol kick in? I assume part of it would be to clear other flights out of the way in case they can't hear instructions even if all else were working right and they were fully awake.

Well if a plane goes out of contact I'm pretty sure it's assumed the plane has gone down. Fighter are of course scrambled for a 'search and rescue' as well as local police and other agencies.(assuming by contact you meant all contact including the transponder) The pilots are of course trained for these situations and have a huuuuuuge book which is on board that they have to go through step-by-step. I'm pretty sure that controllers losing contact with the plane would force the pilots to have to fly below a certain altitude and make an emergency landing ASAP. A plane flying around an airport at regular altitude is a major accident waiting to happen which is why they have to reduce altitude and land. (say to 5000 feet vs what the plane was flying at when communcations was lost... 37 000 ft).

If it is just the radio communications that goes down they probably have to remain in a holding pattern somewhere. Fights would of course be scrambled ready to intercept... once radio contact is re-established they would go through protocols to ensure that it was in fact the pilots in control and then the plane would be allowed to land.

 

[NeoDevin]

They should just improve the autopilot and replace the co-pilot with a dog. The pilot's job will be to feed the dog, and the dog's job to bite the pilot when he tries to touch the controls.

 

[Astronuc]

From what I read, it wasn't really evident that it was a post-9/11 type rule. Afterall, ON 9/11, they were scrambling fighter jets to track down the stray planes too.

The first fighter jets were scrambled after the first aircraft (FLT 11) hit the WTC (0845 EDT).

The two F-15 fighter jets launched from Otis Air National Guard Base in Cape Cod respond to the hijacking of Flight 11, but there will be conflicting accounts regarding their initial destination. The fighters were scrambled at 8:46 (see 8:46 a.m. September 11, 2001), and are airborne by 8:53 (see 8:53 a.m. September 11, 2001). [9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 20]

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a852otisscramble#a852otisscramble

At the time NORAD was apparently doing some unrelated exercise. They didn't immediately realize what was happening.

Now, whenever a plane deviates from flight plan, they system responds, although it appears with the current incident there was a delay.

 

[Astronuc]

Wayward pilots were working on their laptops
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Wayward-pilots-were-working-apf-1739616008.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Two Northwest Airlines pilots have told federal investigators that they were going over schedules using their laptop computers in violation of company policy while their plane overflew their Minneapolis destination by 150 miles, the National Transportation Safety Board said Monday.

The pilots -- Richard Cole of Salem, Ore., the first officer, and Timothy Cheney of Gig Harbor, Wash., the captain -- said in interviews conducted over the weekend that they were not fatigued and didn't fall asleep, the board said in a statement.

Instead, Cole and Cheney told investigators that they both had their laptops out while the first officer, who had more experience with scheduling, instructed the captain on monthly flight crew scheduling. The pilots were out of communication with air traffic controllers and their airline for more than an hour and didn't realize their mistake until contacted by a flight attendant, the board said.

Many aviation safety experts had said it was more plausible that the pilots had fallen asleep during the cruise phase of their flight last Wednesday night than that they had become so focused on a conversation that they lost awareness of their surroundings for such a lengthy period of time.. Air traffic controllers in Denver and Minneapolis repeatedly tried without success to raise the pilots of the San Diego-to-Minneapolis flight by radio. Other pilots in the vicinity tried reaching the plane on other radio frequencies. Their airline tried contacting them using a radio text message that chimes.

. . . .

Good thing they weren't logged into PF. :rofl:

 

[Moonbear]

Okay, I've lost track of time working on my computer before, but how do you end up completely oblivious to people trying to contact you? Good thing they weren't watching some football game or cartoons; they might not have heard anyone calling their name until they were swimming in the Atlantic. (The women will understand that one. )

 

[Saladsamurai]

<snip>
Apparently, the discussion was about the Delta-Northwest airlines merger and how it will affect pilot seniority (there might be some clause that arguing in the cockpit will cost a pilot all of their seniority). http://xkcd.com/386/

Wayward pilots were working on their laptops
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Wayward-pilots-were-working-apf-1739616008.html
:

So which one is it? Are these guys just going to keep changing their stories?

They should have to surrender their laptops for investigation. Surely some nerd can tell if they were using them at the time they claimed they were on them.

 

[turbo]

So which one is it? Are these guys just going to keep changing their stories?

They should have to surrender their laptops for investigation. Surely some nerd can tell if they were using them at the time they claimed they were on them.

They were doing it for "the show". :tongue:

 

[DaveC426913]

No, this happened because the pilots are both contestants in the show "Wife Swap".

 

[Sorry!]

No, this happened because the pilots are both contestants in the show "Wife Swap".

What? They were busy going through the plane looking for a child that jumped out the door? (Which is currently still sealed)

 

[Office_Shredder]

It's sealed because the body of the child exploded upon leaving the pressurized cabin, forcing the door closed again and the blood splattered into the doorjam, where it froze the door shut.

 

[DaveC426913]

What? They were busy going through the plane looking for a child that jumped out the door? (Which is currently still sealed)

They're just out for their 15 minutes of fame.