CVR? can the DO pull it at any time?

[classof75]

I work for a 121 airline.
We have a new DO who has a unique way of doing things.
He has recently (secretely) pulled the cvr tapes and received the transscipts of a recording during a particular take off.
The aircraft was not damaged in any way the only problem was that there was an inoperative instrument which the crew did not detect until after starting the take off role....the captain elected to continue the take off.
The new D.O. wants to fire this captain.

Under the regs can the D.O pull the cvr tapes for his own private enjoyment when the aircraft has not been damaged in anyway?

 

[Hose A. Jiminez]

...crew did not detect until after starting the take off role....

What is a take off role?

 

[classof75]

yes it was a take off role but I think the main issue here is does a D.O. have the right to listen to the cvr and produce a transcript.

Is the faa and the ntsb ok with just anyone pulling the cvr?

 

[classof75]

role=roll

 

[canyonblue737]

it depends on your airline and your contract, but nothing in the FARs that i am aware of DOESN'T allow your company to pull and review CVRs and use them against you. the only rules are the FAA can't use the info to go after you, nothing about your company... so unless your contract etc. forbids it then i think he had the right.

now what your pilot group feels about it, and the backlash he might create might not be worth his actions... but that is a different story.

 

[Fly2Scuba]

yes it was a take off role but I think the main issue here is does a D.O. have the right to listen to the cvr and produce a transcript.

Is the faa and the ntsb ok with just anyone pulling the cvr?

you must of inhaled back in the classof75. Thankfully, it's been so long, it won't show up on a recent drug test. Anyways, the crew's takeoff role would be to line up on the centerline, advance the thrust levers, yadda, yadda, yadda. I think you want roll.

 

[Ty Webb]

As has often been pointed out before, this is a Message Board, not a Spelling Bee.

I was a lot more interested in the topic than your ill-advised study of homophones (and, no, that's not a Nokia that has the ringer set to "It's Raining Men").

 

[classof75]

our contract does not allow it to be used againist the pilot. As was pointed out the backlash from the pilot group might be the way to go.



(Scuba...I corrected the spelling mistake prior to your post)

 

[Oakum_Boy]

ALPA can file a grievance and probably get this guy's job back if he does get fired. If the FAA gets wind of this and wants to get involved, it could backfire on the DO. We had a new DO who tried similar sh1t and he didn't last but about 6 months. Either way, not a good way to do business with your pilots...

 

[Donsa320]

Umm, dumb question but how did the CVR tape get preserved. Most are only 30 minutes long and unless the crew made an immediate return and pulled the C/B or shut off electrical power rather quickly it should have over ridden itself. Sounds like there is more to the story than we are getting.

~DC

 

[FoxHunter]

Umm, dumb question but how did the CVR tape get preserved. Most are only 30 minutes long and unless the crew made an immediate return and pulled the C/B or shut off electrical power rather quickly it should have over ridden itself. Sounds like there is more to the story than we are getting.

~DC

Most new CVRs record at least two hours. I've been told second hand some have found that they record a lot longer than that. The other thing is with the new flight recorders there are no secrets on new aircraft. No matter what you have done there is a record, with some reports sent via ACARS.

 

[Donsa320]

Most new CVRs record at least two hours. I've been told second hand some have found that they record a lot longer than that. The other thing is with the new flight recorders there are no secrets on new aircraft. No matter what you have done there is a record, with some reports sent via ACARS.

Ah, yeah, but his bio says 73, 75, 76....sounds like period equipment to me, not state of the art. We'll see what he says.

~DC

 

[ultrarunner]

...but nothing in the FARs that i am aware of DOESN'T allow your company to pull and review CVRs...

Trying to follow the thread...should this say: "nothing in the FAR's....which would prevent your company....


I'm thrown by the 'doesn't allow'

 

[~~~^~~~]

Companies can and do listen to their CVR's at will. Some contracts stipulate that the CVR will not be used against a pilot. However, ASA has published memos to let pilots know that the CVR's will be reviewed from time to time and any irregularities followed up on.

 

[ultrarunner]

No different than companies monitoring their employees use of email, etc..

 

[jhill]

I work for a 121 airline.
We have a new DO who has a unique way of doing things.
He has recently (secretely) pulled the cvr tapes and received the transscipts of a recording during a particular take off.
The aircraft was not damaged in any way the only problem was that there was an inoperative instrument which the crew did not detect until after starting the take off role....the captain elected to continue the take off.
The new D.O. wants to fire this captain.

Under the regs can the D.O pull the cvr tapes for his own private enjoyment when the aircraft has not been damaged in anyway?

The answer is no. These are very protected recordings and while flight data can be looked at by the carrier the cvr data may not. I think only the NTSB can and then the FAA but only for accident investigation purposes. The NTSB defines acidents. Your DO will have to find another reason to fire the guy. Personally I would love to be fired for unathorized cvr data. If you are not a union carrier I would contact an attorney.

 

[Rattler71]

No different than companies monitoring their employees use of email, etc..

Well, yea there is a difference. It is one thing to write an e-mail, another to carry on a casual conversation with a person you are sitting next to for hours at a time.

 

[GogglesPisano]

No different than companies monitoring their employees use of email, etc..

That would be recording of the ACARS. Pulling the CVR is equivalent to recording what goes on in an emmployee's office.

The FARs only prohibit the FAA and NTSB from listening without cause (accident/incident.)


This DO sounds like a hell of a guy.

 

[classof75]

Thank you for the constructive input.
Can see one point to specific paragraph in the regs or some ntsb policy.

I have called the faa hotline and they have requested the trip number / date / N-number etc.

Yes, this DO is bad news.

 

[ilinipilot]

Another thing to consider, once the aircraft moves by its own power it is considered to be in flight. If this instrument failed on the takeoff roll then the plane per FARs is considered to be in flight, so shouldnt you just write it up when you arrive in your destination. Since it failed in flight and is no different than a light burning out in flight

Just an opinon, and if I am quoting the fars incorrectly I apologize

D

 

[SlapShot]

Some airlines have something that is called a Flight Operations Quality Assurance Program. This program calls for periodic downloading of CVRs and/or FDRs to identify deficiencies in an airline’s operation. This program is in place with approximately 13 US airlines.

The DO may have used this as an excuse to download the information.

However the information obtained via a FOQAP is protected from disclosure under 49 U.S.C. 40123 and part 193.

 

[classof75]

slapshot, thank you for an actual refrnc......

Is that an faa or ntsb deal?
How should I call about it (other than the union and the poi)
As far as I know we are not one of those 13 airlines.
The DO has the "hots" for firing this captain and decided to pull the cvr to see if he could find anything. He found something so he felt justified in trying usable evidence.

The captain is not a bad pilot/captain...just average like the rest of us.

thanks again

 

[SlapShot]

Well that actual FOQAP is a FAA thing.

I am not sure you should call your POI about it. If the DO wants to fire the guy, I would imagine he did do something incorrect. I am not sure if you (a line pilot) should draw attention to it.

The FAA reference about the FOQAP is FAA Advisory Circular 120.82

 

[classof75]

perfect.

I agree calling the poi would be a bad move on my part.

thanks again.
I will update this post as the story hopefully develops

 

[canyonblue737]

Trying to follow the thread...should this say: "nothing in the FAR's....which would prevent your company....


I'm thrown by the 'doesn't allow'

sorry i was unclear. as far as i am aware any company has the basic right to pull CVRs and DFDRs and use there information as they see fit, including actions against crews up to termination.

now at MOST companies they either A) have written into a collective bargining agreement that information from CVRs/DFDRs can NOT be used against pilots or B) they will not use information on CVRs/DFDRs on principle since it might create an unnecessary adversarial relationship with pilots. if at the first poster's company that don't have A. and don't believe in B. then the pilots could be out of luck. The best strategy might be to get the pilot group as a whole to complain about such tactics.

 

[classof75]

canyonblue....
We have A in our contract.
B not there....
Thanks for the input

 

[canyonblue737]

The answer is no. These are very protected recordings and while flight data can be looked at by the carrier the cvr data may not. I think only the NTSB can and then the FAA but only for accident investigation purposes. The NTSB defines acidents. Your DO will have to find another reason to fire the guy. Personally I would love to be fired for unathorized cvr data. If you are not a union carrier I would contact an attorney.

I don't think you are right. The FAA can NOT use CVR data to go after pilots but airlines DO have the right to pull and use CVR info against pilots. The reason this is hard to believe is because hardly ANY airline does so. The vast majority have union contracts that forbid it. Nearly all the rest simply won't do it on principle. But you certainly can pull CVR data, at my last company they pulled the CVR and DFDR and listened to the tapes after nearly every declared emergency to improve training and help the pilots with any improvements they could have used. They would NOT use it to punish the pilots but that was company principle, not because they couldn't. at my current carrier they can't because of the union contract forbidding it.

 

[canyonblue737]

canyonblue....
We have A in our contract.
B not there....
Thanks for the input

if that's the case grieve it, i doubt the pilots can be touched.

 

[Jim Smyth]

Weather companies can or cant pull the CVR tapes shouldnt be the question. It should not be allowed by your company period! End of story!

The CVR was put into thew cockpit for accident investigation purposes only. That was why they were allowed to be installed in the first place. If the CVR starts getting abused by your company,the judge or media, they should then be removed ASAP!

Then you have judges playing the Pilots last words/screams into the CVR just prior to a crash for the media to hear and put on CNN. Total Bull$hit!

I was told by some old timers at the pub many years ago that in the old days when the CVRs were first installed they put them on the lower center counsel. The story goes that the Captain would order 2 cups of coffee on the first leg every morning. One he would drink and the other one he would pour down the speaker of the CVR! They then had to move the CVRs to the ceiling to stop it.

Now they want TV cameras in the cockpit so when something happens, in the heat of battle. You will have a friggin lawyer analizing every move you make in slow motion to Hang your A$$! No Thanks..........If this is ever allowed to happen it will be a very sad day.

 

[bafanguy]

there was an inoperative instrument which the crew did not detect until after starting the take off role....the captain elected to continue the take off.

Kind of an interesting story...in a kind of frightening, Orwellian way. Can you tell us what the instrument in question was ? And what the MEL says about that instrument ? And what your MEL says about when it ( the MEL ) is binding ?

The last MEL I operated under contained the statement in the preamble that the MEL applied "...until the throttles were advanced for the purpose of taking off ( the takeoff event )."

There is some room for "discussion" about just what that means, I suppose ( I'm not trying to start that discussion, by the way ). But, I'd be interested to know the details of the case you describe. Witch hunts are unfortunate.

Sometimes I'm sad to be retired...sometimes I'm glad to be retired. Tonight: I'm glad.