Pilots Who Missed Minnesota Were Too Engrossed In Laptops To Land The Plane
There is a reason that I am not a pilot and the reason is this: I am afraid I would get bored, start messing around with my laptop and miss Minnesota. Unfortunately for Northwest Airlines, they don't hire people who utilize my rigorous program of self-doubt.
The Wall Street Journal says the pilots of Northwest Flight 188 "told investigators that they were poring over their personal laptops in the cockpit while frantic air-traffic controllers were trying to establish contact."
The in-flight distractions also included bathroom breaks (understandable) and some chit chatting with a flight attendant.
The WSJ says:
The missteps began when a female flight attendant brought meals into the cockpit and the captain ducked out for a bathroom break, according to people familiar with the details
The flight attendant stayed inside the cockpit for a brief chat, just as controllers were instructing the crew to switch to another radio frequency. The co-pilot, engaged in conversation with her, missed the instruction, and the captain didn't return until later, according to consultant Greg Feith, a former safety board investigator.
As the plane crossed state lines, neither pilot realized the jet no longer was on the correct radio frequency and that controllers were growing worried about their failure to stay in contact.
As they flew past Minnesota, the crew started a heated discussion about a new scheduling system.
Both pilots retrieved their laptops, and the first officer demonstrated to the captain how the new scheduling system worked.
During what the safety board described as a "concentrated period of discussion," neither pilot monitored the progress of the airplane nor air-traffic control communications. The pilots failed to notice when Northwest dispatchers sent repeated messages that popped up on the cockpit display screens.
Eventually a flight attendant asked them if they should prepare for landing and they realized they'd blown past Minnesota. That must have been one hell of an interesting scheduling system.
Laptops Cited For Pilot Inattention [WSJ]
(Photo:So Cal Metro)
Post a comment
Comments:
I'm just waiting for this to turn into a ban on passenger laptops in the cabin.
Shouldn't the planes have a GPS, cant they give text to speech for the GPS that will say something like you have reached your destination, it is time to land the plane.
This way even if there not focusing, they will hear the warning and get back to work.
@Razor512: They shouldn't be not focusing in the first place! They're flying a plane with a ton of people on board. The LAST thing they need to be doing is not paying attention...
Another reason for no free wi-fi on planes!
So talking on your cell phone and texting while driving is bad, but both pilots being on their personal laptops is ok?
So wait, we can't start up our laptops because they may interfere with the instruments, but the people closest to the actual instruments themselves can? Uhhhhhhhhh.
Or, maybe these guys should have been eating brownies, and, um, maybe pizza:
Hold the mayo? Not when it comes to astute pilots
GRAND FORKS, N.D. - Running a marathon, grab a carbohydrate bar. Lifting weights, gulp a protein shake. But climbing into a fighter jet? Butter-soaked lobster might help.
That was the surprising finding of a new military-funded study that sought to figure out what types of foods were best for pilots when missions restricted when or what they could eat. University of North Dakota researchers found that pilots who ate the fattiest foods such as butter or gravy had the quickest response times in mental tests and made fewer mistakes when flying in tricky cloud conditions.
Full story here: [www.ajc.com]
@treimel: they changed the story didn't they? I thought they originally were too engrossed in a conversation about company policy to notice minnesota.
I think they were leveling up in World Of Warcraft.
@Razor512: Seriously! I know Grumpy Garmin gets really irritated with me when I'm not paying attention and don't turn where she wants me to. She just keeps saying "Recalculating... recalculating...turn around idiot" Seems they would have something similar when the masses have something that simple.
Urgleglurk pretty much called it--they were indeed talking about the effect of the NWA/Delta merger, though on scheduling rather than senority: [www.nytimes.com]
@xay: Contrary to popular belief the pilots are not in full on Top Gun mode for an entire flight. Autopilot actually flies the plane the majority of the time. I don't think you can compare it to driving a car at all.
The flight data recorder erases over itself and it only saves the final 30 minutes. I bet they just kept flying in silence to erase what happened when the flight attendant entered the cockpit.
I'm just picturing what they were REALLLLLLY talking about that they had to "overshoot" and clear out the audio recording.
Clarence Oveur: Do you want to see the cool new logo for the plane I designed? It's drawn in vector.
Victor: Huh?
Roger Murdock:: And did you see my new bag? I didn't think my lappy would fit in, but it has just enough clearance.
Clarence Oveur: Wha?
Any other ideas?
@The Porkchop Express: It's not so much that they changed it--they're still saying they were talking about company policy--as the original version omitted the key detail of the (forbidden) laptop use. Presumably there's scheduling software or rules or something that they were going over.
@treimel: There was controversy and the pilots weren't coming clean. People were speculating they were asleep at the wheel.
@dwasifar: Yes, because the pilots are going to come into the passenger cabin and TAKE SOMEONE'S LAPTOP.
@GitEmSteveDave_FullOfEvilClowns: Mythbusters proved pretty much beyond a shadow of a doubt that a cell phone does jack to avionics. Having been on numerous planes recently where people just tuck their phones away and don't turn them off, I would tend to agree.
Though of course, my experience does not negate whatever real evidence (if any) there is out there, and tbh I haven't looked.
I'd say they *added* to their story--but I see your point; their initial explanation was incomplete, if not misleading.
@Oranges w/ Cheese wants it to be winter already: On older planes the CVR only keeps a buffer going of 30 minutes of conversation - which in the event of a crash is all they would technically need I suppose. Newer planes have models that now can record an entire flight.
@veronykah: The pilots missed their destination and did not notice air traffic control communications. I think the severe lack of attention is comparable to driving a car while texting or on your cell.
After the Colgan Air tragedy earlier this year, people came out of the woodwork screaming about FAA regulations about excessive and extraneous chatter during flight. I'm curious because I haven't seen a single similar statement about this incident, just jokes about pr0n and WOW.
@Razor512:
I think it's expected that you're paying attention, especially as you approach your destination. For such a system to work properly, it would have to alert you x number of miles out, which would depend entirely on aircraft speed, altitude and capabilities.
@Oranges w/ Cheese wants it to be winter already:
I haven't seen that Mythbusters, but I can tell you from personal experience that some cellphones produce at least mild radio interference.
Back when I used to flight instruct, I had a student who was a contractor. He carried a Sprint/Nextel phone with the two-way capability. Anytime anyone tried to get in touch with him, it would make the radios in the plane buzz. Not really a huge deal, but enough to be annoying and could be problematic if we were on a busy frequency and couldn't hear a call because of the interference.
@Caged Wisdom: Oh, I see. And since they were still in flight it only got the last 30 minutes. Well I think this little escapade is going to get most of those replaced ASAP.
First, the phrase "my rigorous program of self-doubt" is the best thing I've read all day.
Second, "new scheduling system" must be code for "porn".
I need to call hogwash on this laptop excuse. While it's completely reprehensible on its own, aren't there reports that contact was attempted not only via ATC but also via company phone and from other aircraft in the vicinity? Not only that, but the autopilot (while not exactly having a "you have arrived at your destination" chime), would have had an indication that they had reached their T/D (top of descent) point in their flight plan. There are simply too many alerts and too much time that passed for me to believe they were just chatting about company policy over their computers.
How does a change radio frequency instruction work? I guess I'd expect some sort of acknowledgment from the flight that they received and executed the change frequency instruction before assuming that they were on the new frequency.
@Oranges w/ Cheese wants it to be winter already: What, you think they won't do it just because it doesn't make any sense? Have you looked at some of the other things they do, like, say, barring coach passengers from using the forward lavatory? Airline policies are in a constant state of wild overreaction. I don't really think they will ban passenger laptops, but it wouldn't surprise me if they did.
@Bitter_Old_Punk: Hey now, you can't expect people to drop in the middle of a raid just because they have to land a plane.
@Hank Scorpio: I am no longer vaguely ashamed that I was thinking "they were probably looking at porn".
I just can't buy this story. Pilots know what they're doing, they know how long flights last, they would have flown over radio markers that would signal them, they would have noticed a lack of radio communication if they were on the wrong frequency.
I feel like, unless someone can prove otherwise, I will always assume the pilots were asleep. (e.g., did the flight DATA recorder show that the pilots made any adjustments or touched the controls whatsoever during their "blackout"?)
@Wuhao:
Controller says "Flight xxxxx, change to Minneapolis Center, 128.25"
crew should respond, "Roger, Flight xxxx over to Minneapolis at 128.25"
if no response, the controller shouldn't assume they changed.
That story sounds a LOT better than:
"I stepped out of the cabin for 45 minutes while the co-pilot railed the flight attendant. No one was paying attention to piloting the plane."
This clarifies it a little bit that they requested a frequency change. I was wondering how in the heck they could ignore radio communications for 150 miles, but if there were none then I can sort of understand.
What I don't get is that the pilots thought they could *lie* about it. Cockpit voice recorder helooo?