JetBlue CEO on pilot’s mid-air meltdown: ‘It started medical, but clearly wasn’t’

[gringo]

I still think its an appropriate term. I will give you loosely appropriate, but I still think appropriate. And the reason for it was because he locked the Captain out. Mutiny has to do with any "ship" and overthrowing a captain.

But you tell me what word would be more appropriate.

All right, Simon, since you insist on doubling down on stupid, I'll walk down this path with you.

As you pointed out from my previous post, "Mutiny is a conspiracy among members of a group of similarly situated individuals..."

Lets look up the word "conspiracy", shall we?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conspiracy?s=t

Specifically, #2:

"an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot."

So, going with your Harvey Birdman inspired train of thought, here's what must have happened:

The First Officer, prior to the flight, had some bad inkling about the Captain. So he got together with a) all three flight attendants, b) the deadheading Captain in the back and c) 4 or 5 beefy security types who happened to be riding along, and told them (before the flight, mind you) "hey, this Captain is going to get us all killed (or something). I won't let that happen. So here's the plan!

1) At 30,000', I'll give the Captain a reason to leave the cockpit.
2) He'll start acting erratically, where
3) you three Flight Atendants call out to have him "subdued"
4) giving Beefy Security Guys an opportunity to tackle him laving
5) an opening for the deadheading Captain to make his way up front,
6) making us all look like heroes.

What say you??!? Yeah!!!"

Pretty ridiculous, no? But that's exactly what would have had to have happened for this to be a "mutiny".

What the First Officer did is what EVERY first officer is authorized to do- he "relieved the Captain of his command". Period. This isn't India, where you're expected to watch the Captain fly the airplane into the side of a mountain, and we didn't suddenly time warp back to United Airlines circa 1970.

It's called the Chain of Command, and if the Captain becomes incapacitated, the FO is authorized and expected to assume command of the ship. Whether it's listed in your GOM or FOM or not, you as an FO are expected to assume command when necessary. And when the Captain starts acting erratically, that's when it's time to put on your big boy pants and do what you're trained to do.

In conclusion, relieving the Captain of his/her command is certainly a component of a mutiny, but it does not make it in itself, a mutiny.

 

[Mr Hat]

The First Officer should be commended for his actions. He very well may have saved over a hundred peoples lives. Who knows what would have happened if the Captain was allowed to stay at the controls while his breakdown progressed.
The Captain clearly had an emotional breakdown of some kind. I think the charges are a little ********************ty considering that the guy is pretty clearly in need of help, not punishment. I feel bad for him and hope he has a full recovery though his flying days are probably over.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

Simply saying yes doesn't make it so. What reference would you point me to.

Real simple,.....
Flight controls were on the other side of a locked door.
The former PIC was babbling like Jimmy Swaggert at a snake handling fest.
The reference would be, "due to ranting and raving, the PIC of record was medically disqualified and demoted to a passenger"

 

[InTransit]

I would agree.

The question is when and who relieved the Captain from being the Captain. The FO? Can the FO relieve the Captain from being the Captain? Granted the Captain could no longer pilot the aircraft but he is still a crewmember. Then ask yourself this. What if an FO or Captain locks out the other person without a valid cause or with what they think is a valid cause but it doesn't deem locking them away from the controls or their assigned seat. I find this aurgument facinating. This JB FO organized and performed a mutiny against the Captain. Rightfully so, but he still performed a mutiny.

Anyway you slice it I think the Captain is getting a raw deal with any pending criminal charges. I truly feel for the guy and really wish I could help.

If there are any JB guys reading this and know of an assistance fund I would gladly donate. Not only to help the family financially but to show the family that they are supported.

Very well put. I can definitely see the captain being medically unfit in this circumstance and unaware of his condition at the time. To be held with criminal charges is absurd.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

All right, Simon, since you insist on doubling down on stupid, I'll walk down this path with you.

As you pointed out from my previous post, "Mutiny is a conspiracy among members of a group of similarly situated individuals..."

Lets look up the word "conspiracy", shall we?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conspiracy?s=t

Specifically, #2:

"an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot."

So, going with your Harvey Birdman inspired train of thought, here's what must have happened:

The First Officer, prior to the flight, had some bad inkling about the Captain. So he got together with a) all three flight attendants, b) the deadheading Captain in the back and c) 4 or 5 beefy security types who happened to be riding along, and told them (before the flight, mind you) "hey, this Captain is going to get us all killed (or something). I won't let that happen. So here's the plan!

1) At 30,000', I'll give the Captain a reason to leave the cockpit.
2) He'll start acting erratically, where
3) you three Flight Atendants call out to have him "subdued"
4) giving Beefy Security Guys an opportunity to tackle him laving
5) an opening for the deadheading Captain to make his way up front,
6) making us all look like heroes.

What say you??!? Yeah!!!"

Pretty ridiculous, no? But that's exactly what would have had to have happened for this to be a "mutiny".

What the First Officer did is what EVERY first officer is authorized to do- he "relieved the Captain of his command". Period. This isn't India, where you're expected to watch the Captain fly the airplane into the side of a mountain, and we didn't suddenly time warp back to United Airlines circa 1970.

It's called the Chain of Command, and if the Captain becomes incapacitated, the FO is authorized and expected to assume command of the ship. Whether it's listed in your GOM or FOM or not, you as an FO are expected to assume command when necessary. And when the Captain starts acting erratically, that's when it's time to put on your big boy pants and do what you're trained to do.

In conclusion, relieving the Captain of his/her command is certainly a component of a mutiny, but it does not make it in itself, a mutiny.

I think the real question that begs to be asked,


Did the F/O get to log PIC for the time the former Capt. was under a stack of passengers?

Separate logbook column?

Opine?

 

[coogebeachhotel]

Come on Simon. You are really hung up on the "captain is God" thing. This isn't a nuclear submarine.... He was clearly mentally incapacitated and the FO did the right thing. Period...

You seem to be the only one that doesn't understand that the captain doesn't have the right to bring down the airplane, simply because he is the captian.

With a complex like yours, I am glad I never flew with you. Wouldn't be enough room in the cockpit for both our heads.

This FO did an amazing job. +1

 

[gringo]

I think the real question that begs to be asked,


Did the F/O get to log PIC for the time the former Capt. was under a stack of passengers?

Separate logbook column?

Opine?

It's like the famous old interview question:

Q: "You're at 36,000' over the Atlantic, and the Captain slumps over, dead. What do you do?"

A: "You mean, after I move him out of my seat?"

 

[pal]

From what I gather, he was into fitness/healthy lifestyle. He also sold ViSalus products (drinks, vitamins, etc - centered around shake mix meals) on the side. I don't think there's a link between what happened to him and the products. He had been on ViSalus products since 20 July 2011 (that information came from his ViSalus webpage).
He has a ViSalus distributor webpage but I'm not going to post a link to it because it contains his phone number and other personal information, including photos. There are also hints on his webpage that he is deeply religious - but I don't think that there are any connections between his religious beliefs and this incident.

For those who want more information/are curious about ViSalus products, here's a link: http://www.visalusshakes.com/

One thing is almost certain, he was clearly influenced by some interruption of proper brain function. This individual, like most, would have never behaved in such a way otherwise. I personally think he was as much a victim of circumstance as the passengers of the aircraft. It may sound odd, but my first thought was whether his "diet" may have induced blood sugar issues... Hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) can be very dangerous and has a list of symptoms it takes a book to document. Unfortunately, if his blood sugar stabilized by the time anyone thinks to check it, if at all, he could appear to be free of a medical problem which might lead to misdiagnosis. Obviously, there are a number of other ailments that can impact brain function. I just hope they figure this out and are able to help the guy.

 

[SplitBar]

Still against the rules!!

Not all rules apply when under an emergency. Ever hear of deviation authority?

 

[IBNAV8R]

Not faulting the F/O as there is no question as to the Captain's "incapacitation." But I don't see how the Captain can be charged with interfering.

FAR121.533(e)
"Each pilot in command has full control and authority in the operation of the aircraft, without limitation, over other crewmembers and their duties during flight time, whether or not he holds valid certificates authorizing him to perform the duties of those crewmembers."

 

[Bringupthebird]

Anyone remember Egypt Air?

 

[wscrj]

Couple thoughts,

Once the FO assumed command, the CA was no longer the CA. I'm sure even a lawyer could make that point.

Second, and more open ended here. Would we feel differently about this incident if it was the Non-reving pilot who lost it? Or any of the passengers in back?

I don't like seeing him charged. I think it's obvious he didn't premeditate this event.

I think the system worked very well. Crew and pax took immediate and appropriate action to end the undesired state. We don't need to change a thing.

 

[satpak77]

I didn't know the FO's actions was this hard to understand.

 

[B-atch]

I think the real question that begs to be asked,


Did the F/O get to log PIC for the time the former Capt. was under a stack of passengers?

Separate logbook column?

Opine?

...Yes, but he is only allowed to log the landing....
and only if he sat in the left seat and attempted to adjust the vertical with the WRONG hand..

 

[BigMeat]

Luckily since the JB pilots are dressed pretty much like their flight attendants the cabin just thought it was another nutso flight attendant and remained calm...