Pages

Wednesday, July 17, 2013

The Asiana Crash and Swiss Cheese

     After any airline incident, especially a crash, I am always asked by anyone who knows or finds out what I do for a living about what happened, as if my insight into flying would provide some magic answer.  I am certain that every airline pilot gets asked the same thing.
The bottom line is that you know as much about what happened as I do and I can only speculate as to what happened.  I won't necessarily divulge what my thoughts are.  Also, I will be the last person to throw another pilot under the bus.  There, but for the grace of God go I, I often say.
     As a Navy trained Aviation Safety Officer, I was taught to look at facts with no preconceived notions or agendas.  The facts of this incident are not all known.  They will be eventually.  They have an abundance of resources.  The crew survived, most of the passengers survived and the bulk of the aircraft is available for investigation, unlike the Air France Airbus lost tin the south Atlantic.
S2S     So when I hear people telling me what they think happened, I ask them if they are pilots.  Usually they are not, so I ask them how they are deriving their opinions.  I get some very interesting responses.  Until the investigation is complete and published we really won't know why or how.  In the past, these things were done quietly without public disclosure until it was complete.  Now, there are press conferences detailing every aspect and discovery as a result of the investigation.   Pundits and talking heads all begin to formulate the why and how.  In Naval Aviation, "mishaps," (as they were called) were investigated in relative secrecy.  It wasn't until the "Mishap Report" was published that the investigative board's conclusions were published.  If there was an apparent failure of some part or procedure, typically these things would be scrutinized and airplanes would be immediately grounded or a procedure quickly modified as a result of certain obvious discoveries.
     What I do know is this:  regardless of what and how an accident happened, it will always be the pilot's fault; "pilot error."  Ultimately it comes down to the pilot and his or her ability to fly a good plane correctly or a bad plane safely.  
      It is important to know that pilots, even though they are supposed to be "in control," are often out of control of a lot of things that they rely on.  It is vital that others do their jobs correctly and attentively in order for them to be successful.  Flying and operating an airliner is part of a system that has many checks and balances.  Just as in Naval Aviation (and Air Force too, though I can only speak from my experience), there is a support system for pilots operating aircraft, there is a support system for airline pilots.
     In the safety world, we talk about the "swiss cheese" model.  The Swiss Cheese model of accident causation is a model used in the risk analysis and risk management of human systems, commonly aviation, engineering, and healthcare. It likens human systems to multiple slices of swiss cheese, stacked together, side by side. It was originally propounded by Dante Orlandella and James T. Reason of the University of Manchester (Reason 1990), and has since gained widespread acceptance and use in healthcare, in the aviation safety industry, and in emergency service organizations. It is sometimes called the cumulative act effect.
     The theory is that most accidents can be traced to one or more of four levels of failure: Organizational influences, unsafe supervision, preconditions for unsafe acts, and the unsafe acts themselves. In the Swiss Cheese model, an organization's defenses against failure are modeled as a series of barriers, represented as slices of Swiss cheese. The holes in the cheese slices represent individual weaknesses in individual parts of the system, and are continually varying in size and position in all slices. The system as a whole produces failures when all of the holes in each of the slices momentarily align, permitting (in Reason's words) "a trajectory of accident opportunity", so that a hazard passes through all of the holes in all of the defenses, leading to a failure.
     I won't bore you with more safety theories, but I understand that we all want to know the why and how of the Asiana crash.  Ultimately, the only thing that people will hear about is "pilot error," but I hope that this at least begins to make you aware of the fact that any accident involves more than the "mistakes" of just one or two people, especially if those two people are the pilots.









Monday, July 15, 2013

New FAA Rule Will Hurt Small City Air Service - >> The Cranky Flier

New FAA Rule Will Hurt Small City Air Service - >> The Cranky Flier:

Express Pilots


'via Blog this'

Re-Blogging this from "The Cranky Flier."  I blogged about these new requirements and the impending pilot shortage last year (The Upcoming Pilot Shortage...... Made Worse by the Federal Government, July 25. 2012).  In my humble opinion, it is not just the "small city air service," which will suffer, but everyone.  We (taxpayers) already spend billions subsidizing "small city air service."  Hey, if you live in or near a city or town that cannot sustain a profitable air carrier service, and you really need it, then perhaps its time you thought about moving or seeking another form of transportation.
In any case, what the author of this says is correct.  No one is going to pay over 100K to learn how to fly AND then build up 1500 hours just to make 22K per year.  Government is always about the good intentions, but never considers the unintended consequences or the actual outcome of their legislation.  As long as everyone "feels good," and that they are least "doing something," then the outcome doesn't matter.
Just sayin.....

Sunday, May 5, 2013

Boston, Reverence and Revelry (Revere too)


I was actually scheduled for this layover long before the bombings occurred.  Now I was to arrive nine days after the vicious terror bombings of APR 15th.  It was a beautiful Spring day and though still chilly, a great day for a walk.  Our hotel was one block from the site of the second bomb.  I took a circuitous route, walking towards Copley Square and avoiding Boylston Street as I would walk back that way.  The city was alive with blossoms of spring and lots of tourists.  There was a reverence in the air and by the time I got to Copley Square, the mood quickly changed as I neared the makeshift memorial created there by the people.  Everywhere were "Boston Strong" signs and the somberness of those walking among the memorabilia was so reminiscent of NYC after 9-11 near the site of the twin towers.  The street had just been opened the day before and the sites were no longer cordoned off.  
Site of first bombing near the finish line.



Second Bombing site
I continued my walk and was able to see the second site.  I kept walking on Boylston street with Fenway Park as my destination.  I had been there once, many years ago to see a game.  I actually lived outside of Boston after graduating from college.  Boston is a great town and on prior layovers, I was able to see Old Ironsides and the commons, as well as eat at a terrific oyster bar.  The Summer Shack is across from our hotel and I can highly recommend it for oysters.  As I got to Fenway, there were preparations underway for that evenings game.  I relaxed and decided to get a "Tasty Burger," enjoying it at a table outside.  My stroll back was easy as I took in the sunshine, the sights and noted some places to try for future visits to Bean Town, a great place to go, especially in the Spring and Summer months.                                            

Copley Square & Memorial in the background
Fenway



Statue of Paul Revere

Tasty Burger & Fenway Park In the Background

Under the "Green Monster" on Lansdown St.


Memorial memorabilia

NYC and Eataly


On approach to LGA
OK, What can you write about NYC that hasn't already been written?  We are put up in a downtown Manhattan hotel, near West 35th street.  It is easy walking distance to everything, really.  It was a beautiful Spring day, temps around upper 60's.  My goal was to put a couple of "checks in the block" so to speak and to do some things that I had not done on prior visits to New York City.  Going to the top of the Empire State and checking out Times Square at night were two of those things, but my priority was, of course, food. That is how I found myself walking to Eataly, ( http://www.eataly.com ) the pantheon of Italian foods this side of the Atlantic.  It was founded by Oscar Farinette, Joe Bastianich, Lidia  Bastianich, Mario Batalli, and Adam and Alex Saper.  For me, my real discovery of Italian food was when I was stationed in Naples, during one of my Navy assignments.  I was the Officer in Charge of a Helicopter detachment that provided support services to the Mediterranean Sixth Fleet.  We were housed in a tourist/camping complex that also had one of the most popular restaurants in the area.  It is here where I had my first taste of Mozarella di Bufala.  I was hooked.  Naples (not New York as some like to say) is where pizza was born.  Combine the chewy, blistered dough with a perfect Marinara sauce and real buffalo mozzarella and you have pizza perfection.  That is what I had here at Eataly.  That and the delight of simply "touring" the place and seeing all that it has to offer in Italian gastronomic delights.  Having "checked that off and spending over an hour here, I then set off to continue my exploration.   I decided to wait in the lines for the Empire State tour.  They were long, but I could see that they could have been longer.  It took a lot of patience from me to stick it out, since my views of the city as I fly into LGA are pretty fantastic (and free), but this was one of the "checks in the block" that I was determined to get.  If you can tolerate the crowds (and NYC is all about crowds), then it is still worth doing.  From there I walked to Times Square, checked that off and then dragged my self back to the hotel, where I poured myself into bed, exhausted and fulfilled.   
Eataly, in the Flatiron district
The Flatiron Building

Empire State Building

View from the top

Times Square 

Thursday, April 11, 2013

The hacker who claims he can crash your plane......and other Science Fiction


The hacker who claims he can crash your plane

"You can use this system to modify approximately everything related to the navigation of the plane... that includes a lot of nasty things"
Hugo Teso, a security researcher from German consultancy agency N.Runs, claims he can hijack an airplane's navigation systems using a smartphone app, radio transmitter, and flight software he purchased off eBay.
Speaking at this week's Hack in the Box conference in Amsterdam, Tesso "employed a Samsung Galaxy smartphone to demonstrate how he could adjust the heading, altitude, and speed of a virtual airplane by sending it false navigation data,"reports InformationWeek.
"You can use this system to modify approximately everything related to the navigation of the plane," Teso tells Forbes. "That includes a lot of nasty things."
The smartphone app he developed, nicknamed PlaneSploit, takes advantage of a plane's Aircraft Communications Addressing and Report System (ACARS), which uses short transmissions to beam data between aircraft and satellites. The problem, says Teso, is that "ACARS has no security at all." Anyone can transmit fake data to alter an aircraft's trajectory.
The airplane has no means to know if the messages it receives are valid or not. So they accept them and you can use them to upload data to the airplane that triggers these vulnerabilities. And then it's game over.   What kind of damage are we talking about, exactly? Here's Computerworld with the rundown:
Once he was into the airplane's computer, he was able to manipulate the steering of a Boeing jet while the aircraft was in "autopilot" mode. The only countermeasure available to pilots, if they even realized they were being hacked, would be to turn off autopilot. Yet many planes no longer have old analog instruments for manual flying. Teso said he could take control of most all airplane systems; he could even cause the plane to crash by setting it on a collision course with another plane. He could also give the passengers a serious adrenaline rush by making the oxygen masks drop down.[Computerworld]
Honeywell, one of the aerospace companies behind the ACARS system, says that it is taking the alleged exploit very seriously, and confirmed that it's been in talks with N.Runs to review Teso's research. However, a Honeywell spokesperson says Teso's ability to commandeer an aircraft remotely may be overblown.
The software is "normally available as an online pilot training aid," a Honeywell rep tellsInformationWeek. "In other words, what Teso did was hack a PC-based training version of [the flight management system] that's used to simulate the flight environment, not the actual certified flight software installed on an aircraft." 
Teso says his firm has alerted the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the European Aviation Safety Administration (EASA), and is working with them to fix the vulnerabilities.

Monday, March 25, 2013

Closed Control Towers and Airport Operations (The Sequestration Scare)

View the full size photo! Control Tower LIBD Airport Bari - Palese (Karol Wojtyla) - LIBD     With all the news reports of airport control towers closing and the implied looming disaster that would occur because of that, I felt obliged to comment on this.  For those of you who are pilots, I am certain that you have received similar questions.  A friend of mine asked me the other night if I had landed at an airports with closed towers recently.  He asked this in a way that implied that this was going to be something new and dangerous to my profession as an airline pilot.
     He was quite surprised when I told him that, yes, I have in fact landed at airports with closed control towers.  I have landed at airports that had no control towers.  Airports operating without a control tower is not unusual.  As long as aviation has existed, pilots have been landing without speaking to or needing a controller in a tower.  Obviously, extremely busy airports that have very vibrant and important control towers (ATL, ORD, LAX, etc) are not the ones that are being closed to save money. In fact, all of the airports that are closing are not even operated by FAA personnel.  They are so-called "contract" towers.
They are towers that are manned and operated by employees of companies that have been contracted by the FAA to operate the towers at a significant cost savings to the FAA, which means you and me, the taxpayer.   
     There are many reasons for this.  Most of, if not all of the 149 airports that will have their towers closed were airports that had previously operated without towers.  In order to "increase the margin of safety," a tower and controllers were added under the "contract" program because it simply was not cost effective to put a full time FAA government employee there.  All of these contract tower airports that will be closed have fewer than 150 thousand flight operations per year.  That is among ALL of them.  That averages out to about 83 operations per month.  The most dangerous things these contract operators do is battle boredom.
Are these places now more dangerous to fly into? No. Does having a tower operator improve safety? Sure, if that person is alert (remember the controller who fell asleep at Washington National?) and if the flight operations occur during the operating times of the tower.  If a pilot is landing at the airport after the tower operating hours, then he is landing at an "uncontrolled airport."  Which is something that even commercial airline pilots do frequently.  Sometimes, on very early morning departures, we have to take off before the tower is opened.  We get our flight "release" from air traffic control center and self announce on a Common Traffic Advisory Frequency (CTAF) to communicate with any other aircraft that may be on or around the airport.  We coordinate among ourselves as to who is where and who will go first and from what runway, then we take off making an announcement on the same frequency before we switch to the "center" frequency.  
     The same is true if we arrive at an airport after the tower has closed.  We coordinate with the "center" and self announce on CTAF to sequence ourselves in if there is other traffic arriving or departing.  This is how most non commercial airports operate.  At all of these "sequester" airports, fewer than 10 thousand commercial passenger flight operations occur each year.  

In fact, at Pocatella, Idaho, (PIH), one of the 149 slated to have their control tower closed, this is the announcement on the airport website:

“The FAA announced today that the Air Traffic Control Tower at Pocatello Regional Airport will be closed sometime after April 7, 2013.  The airport itself will remain open and continue to operate normally.  The tower closure does not impair or jeopardize the safety and security of regular air service and passengers will not detect any change.  Most other general aviation traffic will also be unaffected. 
 A well-tested protocol for operating at an uncontrolled airport is already in place at Pocatello because the tower closes each evening. 
The other towers to be closed in Idaho are located in Hailey, Idaho Falls, and Lewiston.  Twin Falls’ tower will remain open for now because it has federal employees that provide a special service for Burley airport.
Again, Pocatello Regional Airport will remain open and safety and security are not compromised. 

     All of this statement is true.  They are alluding to the CTAF procedures I just mentioned.  THAT is the well-tested protocol already in place.  As they mention, the tower closes each evening.  Planes still come and go.  Lighting for the runways and taxiways is controlled by the pilot using the CTAF radio frequency via a series of clicks on the microphone.   They have three daily scheduled commercial flights that will continue to operate.
     As a pilot, so much responsibility is placed on us anyway.  The Lexington, KY (LEX) crash in August of 2006 occurred at an airport with an operating control tower (that was open) and had the controller been paying attention, he could have prevented that crash by informing the crew that they were lined up on the incorrect runway.  This was noted in the accident report, but ultimately the cause was "pilot error."  They also noted the configuration of the airport, which, at the time, made it easy for this mistake to occur if you were not paying attention (the airport has since been redesigned).
     So without getting into the politics of all of this, (and trust me, there are politics involved) you can relax amid the noise and confusion and "the sky is falling!" (a little pun there) rhetoric you are hearing.  Every Control Tower where it is vital to have controllers will remain open.  All of these are operated by FAA personnel.  The real casualty is the job of the contract controller who, more than likely, was a retired FAA controller anyway receiving a government pension (though I am speculating about that).   

Thursday, March 21, 2013

"Flight".....The movie and Reality



OK, I give.  After numerous questions about this movie, I finally was able to watch it after downloading it to my DVR.  I watched about half of it before turning it off and going to bed.  I am very sensitive when it comes to alcohol and drug abuse in our industry.  I and 99.9% of every airline pilot are professionals and very strict rule followers when it comes to procedures, checklists and safety.  It is ingrained into our DNA the moment we start flight training.  For those of us who have prior military experience, even more so.  Certainly, there have been those who have been caught and when it happens, they get a lot of publicity since airline crew are so highly scrutinized.  Occasionally, you will learn about other transportation professionals who were caught drinking or abusing drugs (train, bus, ship drivers for example).  Addiction is a non discriminatory disease and education, training and environmental development makes no difference.    BUT..........remember folks, this is Hollywood, NOT reality.  Several points:

1.   We, like many professions are subject to random drug and alcohol tests.  Just last week, between flights, I was subjected to a breathalyzer and urinalysis.  Whip Whitaker would never have gotten to become a senior captain at an airline, because at some point in time, he would have been caught.  Could he have escaped through sheer luck and been able to avoid any screening?  It is possible, but not likely.  Peers would have brought his behavior up to a chief pilot, who would have addressed the issue right away.   Drug and alcohol abuse by a crew member is taken VERY seriously and addressed immediately.  If caught, they are fired.  If they self report, they are given treatment.

2.  Jokes about the pilot drinking as you board or after you are on board ARE NOT FUNNY.  You might as well be joking about a bomb being on board.  I was once standing in the cockpit door greeting passengers drinking a soft drink in a cup with ice when a boarding passenger said, "I hope that's just a coke."  I looked at him with a very serious look and told him, "Sir, we don't even joke about that."  He was taken aback and a bit upset, but frankly I didn't care.  What if the passenger behind him had overheard that remark and didn't realize that he was making a joke?  Suddenly one passenger has a "suspicion or a doubt."  If that issue is raised and rumors begin or it is mentioned to a fight attendant, I am walking off the plane and going straight to the testing facility.  The flight is delayed while another pilot is found and my reputation, my profession, my livelihood is intact.  Joking about the pilots drinking when you are on the airplane is not funny nor wise.  Needless to say, I don't even drink water in view of passengers anymore.  In fact, on the few occasions when I make my PA to passengers standing in the aisle, (which I do when there is an unusual delay and I want to be sure that the passengers understand what is going on) now I make sure that my hands are visible to the passengers so they don't think I am pulling a "Whip Whitaker," and pouring myself a cocktail while I talk to them...sheeesh!  

3.  Can an airliner really fly "upside down?"   Of course.  While not a fighter jet or an aerobatic airplane, airliners ARE airplanes and can fly inverted.  We practice getting out of this condition (known as an unusual attitude) in our annual simulator sessions.  When Boeing introduced the 707 and was demonstrating its capabilities to potential buyers at the International Air Transport Association (IATA) gathering in Seattle, when it was a prototype and before it became the backbone of most airlines, the test pilot Tex Johnson actually "rolled" it.  I have a link to the video below.  The boss of Boeing was not pleased, but they certainly sold a lot of 707's. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ra_khhzuFlE   Now, the odds of this actually happening on an airliner are extremely remote.  There was an accident off the coast of California where a jack screw failed on an Alaska Airlines flight.  That fatal crash spurred significant changes in the maintenance of elevator jack screws.

4.  Taking off with a line of thunderstorms in front of you is stupid.  I don't care how well you can read a radar, you don't fly through a thunderstorm and try to "find a clear area," behind it.  That is a recipe for disaster.  Often times, radar will mask a tornado, hail or more severe weather in area that appears clear. If we see an area of storms, we avoid them.  Staying on the ground until it passes is the most prudent thing to do and is what we all do since most storms move very quickly.  Will there be some turbulence as we bypass a storm?  Possibly, but it won't be severe like it would be inside of an area of thunderstorms.

5.  Most portrayals of airline pilots in the movies are incorrect (except that we are all handsome) ;-).  Much of the dialogue on the radios they show are not realistic and we don't sit there constantly staring out the front gripping the yoke (flight control).  We also don't fall asleep and turn over all responsibilities to the other pilot.  We do drink coffee to stay alert, and get up to stretch.  Staying alert, sharp and maintaining situational awareness while we are flying is paramount and that is why there are two of us and we will never be replaced by a computer.

So, as you watch these movies, be entertained and know that much of what you see is fictional and unrealistic as it has to be, otherwise you would be bored.  Flying is hours of boredom punctuated by rare moments of excitement.  As my Navy CO used to say, "Boring is good."