4 ms·

It could have been a book, an ipad, a phone, camera, anything really... I wonder if the general design could be changed to help prevent anything from falling be

It could have been a book, an ipad, a phone, camera, anything really... I wonder if the general design could be changed to help prevent anything from falling between the pedal and the wall...

unilynx 3y ago
But if you know there's always going to be an iPad around the cockpit, you can advise the pilots to have a fixed method of securing it Of course there's always something else that can go wrong, but a big part of why flying is so safe today is that they've gone through a lot of trouble to enumerate and mitigate everything that has gone wrong in the past
- Etrnl_President 3y ago
  A lanyard securing it to airframe or wrist, with a quick-disconnect in case of entanglement?
  - alistairSH 3y ago
    It common to use a "kneeboard"[1] to secure an EFB to the pilot's thigh. I'm surprised it's not standard practice and that a loose EFB is ever acceptable. 1 - https://www.67d.com/cdn/shop/files/KneeboardwithiPad11Pro-2260_750x750.png?v=1687818196 https://www.67d.com/cdn/shop/files/KneeboardwithiPad11Pro-22...
    - nsxwolf 3y ago
      When I used to fly (pre-iPad) I used a kneeboard for my paper charts, pencils, etc. Great to know that everything is right there and isn't falling on the floor.
    - kgilpin 3y ago
      Some people don't like knee boards because you have to move your head up-down-up-down to use it, and that can be disorienting, especially in poor visibility conditions (when external visual references are minimal). There are other types of mounts available, such as suction mounts, that mount the device closer to eye level, but while robust these are not as secure as built-in equipment. The overheat problem is real as well, but having your iPad shut down in flight is nowhere near as big a deal as having it jam in the rudder pedals. Further reading: https://airfactsjournal.com/2018/10/how-spatial-disorientation-can-trap-pilots/ https://airfactsjournal.com/2018/10/how-spatial-disorientati...
nntwozz 3y ago
Maybe Apple Vision Pro (sometime in the future)?
- buildbot 3y ago
  The military version of this is basically the F35 helmet: https://www.radiantvisionsystems.com/blog/worlds-most-advanced-hmd https://www.radiantvisionsystems.com/blog/worlds-most-advanc...
- Someone 3y ago
  The pilot could drop its battery pack. Also, if the battery pack were to come loose or the device would loose power in another way, I guess the pilot would rapidly take it off without much regard for where it ends up. And of course, it would require a specialized version, as the pilot was already wearing a flight helmet.
simias 3y ago
My software dev mind went elsewhere, I wonder if the long term solution might not be to make all these controls inputs to some computer ("fly-by-wire") that could be toggled to some failsafe mode if the physical devices jam somehow. You could decouple the pilot's inputs from the copilot for instance. Of course as we've seen in the past that can introduce its own issues, for instance during the AF447 crash: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447 >Confused, Bonin exclaimed, "I don't have control of the airplane any more now", and two seconds later, "I don't have control of the airplane at all!" Robert responded to this by saying, "controls to the left", and took over control of the aircraft. He pushed his side-stick forward to lower the nose and recover from the stall; however, Bonin was still pulling his side-stick back. The inputs cancelled each other out and triggered an audible "dual input" warning.
- nerdponx 3y ago
  This story is horrifying, but it seems more like catastrophic pilot error than a problem with the fly by wire system.
  - Mawr 3y ago
    Unless the plan is to remove pilots altogether, this line of thinking is just going to lead to more incidents. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36725176 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36725176
    - nerdponx 3y ago
      That's not my point. I don't see where the fly by wire system specifically caused the problem in this particular accident. Maybe there was insufficient cockpit indication that the aircraft switched to alternate law? Maybe the pilots were insufficiently trained on the scenario of icing leading to auto pilot disengagement? Maybe the pitot tube design was problematic and led to excessive ice buildup? Maybe the pilot was having a psychological problem, or was too fatigued? Etc
      - 3y ago
andrewstuart2 3y ago
The fact that it was an ipad and not a book probably contributed to the fact that they could identify the gouge marks. If it was a book this might still be more of a mystery. The takeaway in the last paragraph seems to be a good one: > “Hopefully this accident will prompt operators to have a long hard look at all possible loose articles in cockpits and robustly securing valuable tools and sources of situational awareness like EFBs,” he told Vertical by email. My understanding is that iPads are super popular for pilots, especially of non-commercial jets, because at the price point, plus buying a few apps, the experience and utility is pretty unmached. Aviation-grade equipment is super expensive because it goes through many regulatory hurdles which are, unfortunately, written in blood as this one might be. But I would hope to see regulators, if they do something, take a pragmatic and balanced approach given the benefits of accessible electronics.
- pc86 3y ago
  I think it's unlikely that there be any additional regulations from this, especially in the Part 91 / GA arena (which this flight was not), but I've been surprised before.
- dghlsakjg 3y ago
  I think some airlines are now requiring iPads for their pilots since it can replace all of the paper manuals and charts that need to be in the cockpit[1]. [1]https://www.engadget.com/2013-06-24-ipad-now-being-used-in-every-american-airlines-cockpit.html https://www.engadget.com/2013-06-24-ipad-now-being-used-in-e...
  - kayodelycaon 3y ago
    Minor clarification as I was initially confused: The airline provides the iPads. Pilots aren't allowed to use their personal devices.
- xp84 3y ago
  It seems like if there's a device important enough to warrant being in the cockpit, it ought to be secured semi-permanently to a purpose-built mount while the aircraft is in motion. > take a pragmatic and balanced approach given the benefits of accessible electronics A very solid ProClipUSA mount for an iPad can be had for under $200, so assuming a 3x multiplier for regulatory certification, I don't think that requirement would make anything less accessible. I hope that devices flopping about the cockpit like this is a practice that will be phased out.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
CodeWriter23 3y ago
I think it would be SOP to have all objects mounted or restrained in a helicopter cockpit.
rolph 3y ago
in an aircraft, its best to minimize the number and type of unsecured items. its all relative, if the vehicle shifts place in the air relative to momentum, loose things get tossed around in the cabin/the cabin gets tossed around against loose items. this was exacerbated by the tight cabinspace, and probably about a half second to get the obstruction out. i used to see a lot of something like, a beverage bottle, or a coffee mug, roll up under the pedals of a vehicle, after falling out of the beverage holder.

It could have been a book, an ipad, a phone, camera, anything really... I wonder if the general design could be changed to help prevent anything from falling between the pedal and the wall...

unilynx 3y ago

But if you know there's always going to be an iPad around the cockpit, you can advise the pilots to have a fixed method of securing it Of course there's always something else that can go wrong, but a big part of why flying is so safe today is that they've gone through a lot of trouble to enumerate and mitigate everything that has gone wrong in the past

Etrnl_President 3y ago
A lanyard securing it to airframe or wrist, with a quick-disconnect in case of entanglement?
- alistairSH 3y ago
  It common to use a "kneeboard"[1] to secure an EFB to the pilot's thigh. I'm surprised it's not standard practice and that a loose EFB is ever acceptable. 1 - https://www.67d.com/cdn/shop/files/KneeboardwithiPad11Pro-2260_750x750.png?v=1687818196 https://www.67d.com/cdn/shop/files/KneeboardwithiPad11Pro-22...
  - nsxwolf 3y ago
    When I used to fly (pre-iPad) I used a kneeboard for my paper charts, pencils, etc. Great to know that everything is right there and isn't falling on the floor.
  - kgilpin 3y ago
    Some people don't like knee boards because you have to move your head up-down-up-down to use it, and that can be disorienting, especially in poor visibility conditions (when external visual references are minimal). There are other types of mounts available, such as suction mounts, that mount the device closer to eye level, but while robust these are not as secure as built-in equipment. The overheat problem is real as well, but having your iPad shut down in flight is nowhere near as big a deal as having it jam in the rudder pedals. Further reading: https://airfactsjournal.com/2018/10/how-spatial-disorientation-can-trap-pilots/ https://airfactsjournal.com/2018/10/how-spatial-disorientati...

nntwozz 3y ago

Maybe Apple Vision Pro (sometime in the future)?

buildbot 3y ago
The military version of this is basically the F35 helmet: https://www.radiantvisionsystems.com/blog/worlds-most-advanced-hmd https://www.radiantvisionsystems.com/blog/worlds-most-advanc...
Someone 3y ago
The pilot could drop its battery pack. Also, if the battery pack were to come loose or the device would loose power in another way, I guess the pilot would rapidly take it off without much regard for where it ends up. And of course, it would require a specialized version, as the pilot was already wearing a flight helmet.

simias 3y ago

My software dev mind went elsewhere, I wonder if the long term solution might not be to make all these controls inputs to some computer ("fly-by-wire") that could be toggled to some failsafe mode if the physical devices jam somehow. You could decouple the pilot's inputs from the copilot for instance. Of course as we've seen in the past that can introduce its own issues, for instance during the AF447 crash: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447 >Confused, Bonin exclaimed, "I don't have control of the airplane any more now", and two seconds later, "I don't have control of the airplane at all!" Robert responded to this by saying, "controls to the left", and took over control of the aircraft. He pushed his side-stick forward to lower the nose and recover from the stall; however, Bonin was still pulling his side-stick back. The inputs cancelled each other out and triggered an audible "dual input" warning.

nerdponx 3y ago
This story is horrifying, but it seems more like catastrophic pilot error than a problem with the fly by wire system.
- Mawr 3y ago
  Unless the plan is to remove pilots altogether, this line of thinking is just going to lead to more incidents. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36725176 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36725176
  - nerdponx 3y ago
    That's not my point. I don't see where the fly by wire system specifically caused the problem in this particular accident. Maybe there was insufficient cockpit indication that the aircraft switched to alternate law? Maybe the pilots were insufficiently trained on the scenario of icing leading to auto pilot disengagement? Maybe the pitot tube design was problematic and led to excessive ice buildup? Maybe the pilot was having a psychological problem, or was too fatigued? Etc
    - 3y ago

andrewstuart2 3y ago

The fact that it was an ipad and not a book probably contributed to the fact that they could identify the gouge marks. If it was a book this might still be more of a mystery. The takeaway in the last paragraph seems to be a good one: > “Hopefully this accident will prompt operators to have a long hard look at all possible loose articles in cockpits and robustly securing valuable tools and sources of situational awareness like EFBs,” he told Vertical by email. My understanding is that iPads are super popular for pilots, especially of non-commercial jets, because at the price point, plus buying a few apps, the experience and utility is pretty unmached. Aviation-grade equipment is super expensive because it goes through many regulatory hurdles which are, unfortunately, written in blood as this one might be. But I would hope to see regulators, if they do something, take a pragmatic and balanced approach given the benefits of accessible electronics.

pc86 3y ago
I think it's unlikely that there be any additional regulations from this, especially in the Part 91 / GA arena (which this flight was not), but I've been surprised before.
dghlsakjg 3y ago
I think some airlines are now requiring iPads for their pilots since it can replace all of the paper manuals and charts that need to be in the cockpit[1]. [1]https://www.engadget.com/2013-06-24-ipad-now-being-used-in-every-american-airlines-cockpit.html https://www.engadget.com/2013-06-24-ipad-now-being-used-in-e...
- kayodelycaon 3y ago
  Minor clarification as I was initially confused: The airline provides the iPads. Pilots aren't allowed to use their personal devices.
xp84 3y ago
It seems like if there's a device important enough to warrant being in the cockpit, it ought to be secured semi-permanently to a purpose-built mount while the aircraft is in motion. > take a pragmatic and balanced approach given the benefits of accessible electronics A very solid ProClipUSA mount for an iPad can be had for under $200, so assuming a 3x multiplier for regulatory certification, I don't think that requirement would make anything less accessible. I hope that devices flopping about the cockpit like this is a practice that will be phased out.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

CodeWriter23 3y ago

I think it would be SOP to have all objects mounted or restrained in a helicopter cockpit.

rolph 3y ago

in an aircraft, its best to minimize the number and type of unsecured items. its all relative, if the vehicle shifts place in the air relative to momentum, loose things get tossed around in the cabin/the cabin gets tossed around against loose items. this was exacerbated by the tight cabinspace, and probably about a half second to get the obstruction out. i used to see a lot of something like, a beverage bottle, or a coffee mug, roll up under the pedals of a vehicle, after falling out of the beverage holder.