USAF Officer Takes FO's Place During Medical Emergency

[saabcaptain]

There is no way the CA takes heat for it. It was a good decision clearly and the pilot put in the right seat was simply running checklists and such, not actually flying.

 

[T-Gates]

If the Captain did in fact declare an emergency, he can deviate from all FAR's, ops Specs, etc..... Nobody could touch him.....

 

[sf3boy]

Yeah, yeah PIC emergency, deviation all that stuff. Personally, I would be more scared than ever to fly in the future with a captain who can't put it on the ground alone. Although, maybe he just wanted someone to talk to. Maybe the autopilot was MEL'd.

Can TSA still confiscate our certificates? Mesaba Airlines does a sh$@!y job at best of keeping up with security directives and all.

 

[Joe Jet Pilot]

Any Bets

You think this AF guy will get an interview at some point? I would say that he passed the sim check. I hope all is well with the FO on this flight.

 

[avbug]

If the Captain did in fact declare an emergency, he can deviate from all FAR's, ops Specs, etc..... Nobody could touch him.....

WRONG!!!!!


Using the magic "e" word does nothing to insulate anybody from enforcement action of any kind. Nothing. We've been through this recently in detail, and this is one of the pitfalls of seeing the concept of a formal declaration of emergency status as some kind of holy grail. It isn't.

Making a pronunciation of an emergency formall does nothing to alleviate one from adherence to the regulation, nor to insulate one from enforcement action. Further, making a formal declaration is NOT necessary to exercise the emergency authority as pilot in command.

 

[IFlyGC]

But I'll guarantee that guy filled out an ASAP/NASA form (or both) after he landed and that WILL insulate his behind from enforcement action.

 

[Dr Pokenhiemer]

Can you imagine what was going through the Captain's head after seeing his FO sieze out? No wonder he wanted someone to help run the checklists. I would've done the same thing (probably).

 

[avbug]

Can you imagine what was going through the Captain's head after seeing his FO sieze out?

Probably something along the lines of, "Gee, I had the fish, too..."

But I'll guarantee that guy filled out an ASAP/NASA form (or both) after he landed and that WILL insulate his behind from enforcement action.

Absolutely incorrect, and a common misconception. The ASRS program does not insulate one from enforcement action. In fact, you may very well receive a violation; the difference between one who has legitimately filed a timely report and one who hasn't is that the person who filed the report still receives the violation, but doesn't pay the penalty.

The ASRS program does not insulate one from knowing violations, and illegal actions.

In this case, if the case were made that the pilot was aware that allowing an unauthorized individual on the flight deck was illegal, not only would filing the report do him or her no good, but the report itself could be used against the pilot. Further, if it were determined that the action itself was a violation of law (criminal act), the report would also be invalid, and could be used as evidence against the pilot. Finally, the report itself could be the catalyst for proceeding in enforcement action against the pilot, if either of those two former conditions are met.

If the pilot is going to fill one out, it should be kept quiet until the FAA is talking enforcement action and the pilot receives a letter of investigation.

Many pilots are also unaware that while the body of the report is protected from use in enforcement action (unless the violation was done intentionally/knowingly, or if the violation involved a criminal act), the subject/title line and header that are returned to the pilot are NOT protected, and may be used to discover the violation, and may also be used against the pilot.

Can TSA still confiscate our certificates?

TSA never did. The regulation permitted TSA to require the FAA to suspend a pilot's certificates, if the TSA determined the pilot was a security risk. That regulation has been suspended pending review.

 

[ironwedge]

Yes, this reaks of security problems...TSA should have fun with this one.

I think the TSA is going to make dog meat outta the guy who admitted ANYONE into the cockpit (other than a crewmember on that flight), it'll be interesting to see how this goes.

On one hand you have Emergency Authority, on the other hand you have the retards at the TSA.

 

[IFlyGC]

Avbug,
The airlines ASAP program pretty much allows you to get away with anything with the exception of repeatedly making the same violation.
As for "criminal"...you should try reading 91.3 sometime. The captain felt it was necessary to exercise his emerency authority to ensure the safety of flight. A zero body count afterwards proves he made the right call. You wouldn't exactly need OJ Simpsons lawyers to get away with this one!

If the pilot is going to fill one out, it should be kept quiet until the FAA is talking enforcement action and the pilot receives a letter of investigation.

That's the very LAST thing you want to do. What if you don't recieve the letter from the Fed's until the 31st day? Well guess what.....you now can't file a NASA form because the time limit has expired. (Not true for the airlines and the ASAP system)

For the rest of you out there who are all parnoid because you filled a NASA form and now regretting it, DON'T PANIC. If you had an emergency or even if you just plain screwed up, file your NASA form prompty and relax. If no-one was killed, you were sober and didn't perform the mistake intentionally you will be fine.

As for emergencies.......do the right thing. Save lives before saving the plane. If you can stand up in court (as this Capt. could) and say with a straight face why you did what you did you'll be ok.

 

[RideTheWind]

If the Air Force copilot wears a rag on his head than the captain has no worries, on the other hand if the Air Force copilot is white than the captain is in deep **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** with the TSA. From my experience the TSA is only interested in harassing white people and letting all the middle east looking terrorists go right on to wherever they want to go on the airport.

 

[USMCAirWinger]

You dudes make me sick...no backbone. Here is a captain that makes the call to replace his copilot with another pilot and your main concern is the TSA and possible violations. I hope that I never get to fly in the back when one of you guys have to make a command desicion during an emergency....(perhaps your first thought will be of how you may not making it to a majors or lose your job due to a violation).
This reminds me of the captain that during a ground fire, he pops the hatch and runs as fast as he can while leaving the pax and the fo in the A/C... I'm pretty sure he was running to get the CFR boys.

Sad.

 

[sf3boy]

As stated before, nobody should be needed to help the captain get the plane on the ground. He made the decision to violate security directives put in place by the airlines and TSA. While I applaud the captain for making a command decision that resulted in a safe outcome, it was still a decision that did not need to be made. We are all spinless today, USMCAirwinger, because the of the airline/government/attorney's policies of do as your told. Do not disobey orders. Now me never being in the USMC, I am only guessing that when someone does not follow orders for legit reasons or not, there is still some explaining to do.

 

[USMCAirWinger]

Since you bring up the military. I cannot speak for all the services, but in the Corps we truly believe in leadership by example, initiative, courage, and doing whatever it takes to get the mission accomplished. You want a great example, just pick up Time magazine and look at some of the Weapons the Marines are carrying...they sure look like AK's and last time I checked we didnt have too many of those in our inventory. The next question is, are they violating some kind of policy...may be. Does it matter?....Well they are the ones getting shot at by weapons of a higher caliber. Whenever you have 7.62 rounds flying over your head and all you have is 120 rounds of NATO 5.56 you want to even out the odds a bit, not only due to caliber size but also for the over abundance of the AK's and rounds. So my point is, Should we critique my fellow marine's decisions at the time of war even though they may be violating some reg somewhere. It's not like they are pillaging villages and raping the women and children and the same holds true for an airline crew during an emergency. Now I know you are going to argue that the 737-800 can be flown single pilot...blah..blah..blah.. but like I said, neither of us were in the cockpit when it happened so lets just be thankful that it turned out alright.


Peace.

 

[Otto]

Yes, this reaks of security problems. As someone said before, a 737 should be able to return to land safely with one guy at the controls, especially a guy typed in make and model. Dude should have stayed in his coach seat.

I find this nice since us 121 employed/trained pilots are not allowed in jumpseats of other airlines or our own airlines on an international flight, but yet this seems to be just fine. TSA should have fun with this one.

I disagree. Anyone who flags the Captain on security with this guy needs to have their head examined. If this AF Lt. Col. flew B-1's and B-2's, he has a top secret clearance meaning he's been through ten times the amount of background checks as any normal 121 pilot or for that matter any TSA bonehead that would investigate him. He was probably traveling in uniform and if the Captain checked his military ID, I'd say he absolutely did the right thing by putting him in the seat. I hope common sense will prevail but this is TSA we are talking about.

 

[Ty Webb]

As stated before, nobody should be needed to help the captain get the plane on the ground. He made the decision to violate security directives put in place by the airlines and TSA.

Puh-leaze. You have a lot of friggin' crust second-guessing the actions of this Captain, especially with the vast amount of experience you indicate in your profile.

As a former EMT and current 737 pilot, I have no problem whatsoever with the way that this Captain decided to handle this extremely challenging situation. You have no idea what transpired in that cockpit, what the conditions were, yet here you sit in your chair, loudly expressing how wrong he was and how right you are. Give me a break .

Single-pilot operation is possible, but was not necessary. This Captain made a command decision, and the outcome was the best that anyone could hope for- safe landing, medical assistance rendered promptly, etc.

 

[avbug]

That's the very LAST thing you want to do. What if you don't recieve the letter from the Fed's until the 31st day? Well guess what.....you now can't file a NASA form because the time limit has expired. (Not true for the airlines and the ASAP system)

You should learn to read. I advised that if one files the report, one should keep one's trap shut. File the report, say nothing. Get it? I did not advise failing to file a report, but did provide cautions that most pilots don't seem to understand; filing the report can be used against you if it involved a wilfull violation (intentional or knowing violation), or a criminal act.

In this case, any criminality will be decided after the fact. I'm crystal clear on 91.3, trust me. However, many pilots foolishly believe that experiencing an emergency is carte blanche authority to sidestep any regulation, and therefore feel immune from enforcement action. Not so. A pilot is only permitted to deviate to the extent necessary to meet the demands of that emergency; that the extent necessary may be determined by the FAA retroactively. In other words, merely because a pilot feels he must do something at the time, doesn't mean he's safe, nor that he made the right decision. You can always be second-guessed, and enforcement action pressed.

As a glaring example, a pilot experiences a warning light. He makes an emergency descent, landing on a crowded city street. No one is hurt, but the aircraft receives substantial damage.

Upon learning of the situation, the FAA determines that the pilots actions were not justified for the inverter light; he acted outside the scope of what was necessary to meet the demands of the "emergency." The FAA pursues enforcement action based on 91.13.

A nearly infinite number of examples are possible. The point isn't lame examples or maudlin logic, it's this: Dont' feel that participation in a safety program, reporting via ASRS, or 91.3 will necessarily insulate you.

As I stated before, the captain here acted within his discretion in his actions. Is he subject later to second guessing, scrutiny, and potential reprisal? Yes. However, I doubt very much that any FAA legal counsel will be able to press the issue that the captain acted outside his discretion when faced with an incapacitated crew member.

Something no one has addressed here, and should be obvious, is that the captain acted in the best interest of his aircraft, passengers, and company. No indication is given that the captain knew what had caused the siezure in his first officer. With no information in this regard, and only one pilot remaining on the flight deck, who is to say that the one remaining pilot may become incapacitated? That he may fly the airplane single-pilot is irrelevant. The airplane was never certified as a single pilot airplane, and is under multiple layers of regulation requiring more than one pilot.

Who is to say that whatever caused injury to the copilot might not do the same to the captain? It could be internal, or external. You don't know, I don't know, and I'm betting the captain didn't know. He brougt another pilot into the cockpit, and in my opinion, made a good, safe, legal call.

Additionally, with the distraction of just having experienced your copilot have a siezure, adding a crewmember to help run checklists and take the load off the captain is a prudent move.

Anybody aside from me, here, ever have someone in their right seat lose consciousness? I did; the person experienced a heart attack. If you don't think that can be an ongoing distraction that may possibly detract from your overall attention (to detail), then think again. It does. Bringing someone else on board, especially an experienced, disciplined pilot, is a wise action.

A zero body count afterwards proves he made the right call.

By that logic, I can put the cold muzzle of a revolver against your temple and squeeze the trigger. When it goes "click," instead of "bang," I can walk away and chuckle. Because there's no body count. Your logic is truly dizzying.

For the rest of you out there who are all parnoid because you filled a NASA form and now regretting it, DON'T PANIC. If you had an emergency or even if you just plain screwed up, file your NASA form prompty and relax. If no-one was killed, you were sober and didn't perform the mistake intentionally you will be fine.

Such bad advice from someone who bases correctness on the body count. (You've seen too much rambo). Nowhere in the ASRS program does the issue of passenger death arise. Nor does sobriety. Don't go spouting off advice or information on a topic you don't understand, because it could cost someone their career.

You dudes make me sick...no backbone.

You are addressing the entire room with that smart remark, mate?

 

[IFlyGC]

You should learn to read.

Well obviously if I misinterpreted what you were saying it should be up to the author to construct more explainatory sentences!

As a glaring example, a pilot experiences a warning light. He makes an emergency descent, landing on a crowded city street. No one is hurt, but the aircraft receives substantial damage.

As I previously mentioned....if you can say with a straight face to a judge that you did the right thing then you DID THE RIGHT THING! What was the warning light? Maybe it WAS justified to land on a busy street. Stupid pilots make stupid decisions and they deserve to be reprimanded for it......but most stupid pilots will admit they screwed up when the time comes.

By that logic, I can put the cold muzzle of a revolver against your temple and squeeze the trigger. When it goes "click," instead of "bang," I can walk away and chuckle. Because there's no body count. Your logic is truly dizzying.

You try to make an educated post and then make yourself look foolish by trying to compare attempted murder to a sucessfully handled emergency. So a pilot handles the emergency by the book and a hundred people die.....he keeps his license and there are 100 dead people. A pilot does WHAT'S NECESSARY and everybody survives but he gets a 30 day blip on his radar from the NTSB....we'll never know if the "book" way would have had the same outcome but at least everyone is around to thank the guy/gal up front afterwards!

Nowhere in the ASRS program does the issue of passenger death arise. Nor does sobriety. Don't go spouting off advice or information on a topic you don't understand, because it could cost someone their career.

Last time I checked the FAR's were law.....14CFR if memory serves me right....last time I checked, there were FAR's regarding operating an aircraft in a reckless and dangerous manner as well as operating the aircraft while under the influence of alcohol. Operating under either or these cannot be excused by the ASRS program as they are done with criminal intent! You don't accidentally fly under the influence! You don't accidentally operate dangerously! The ASRS's program is designed for ACCIDENTAL mistakes like altitude deviations and landing on the wrong runway!

As for spouting off bad advice.....if I had a nickel for every piece of incorrect nonsense you've said on here I could change my last name to Gates and have people call me Bill.

 

[TonyC]

...if I had a nickel for every piece of incorrect nonsense you've said on here I could change my last name to Gates and have people call me Bill.

And like the real Bill Gates, you'd still be wrong.

 

[IFlyGC]

awwwwww.....what's poor bill done to you??? Your not a Mac/Netscape fan are ya?