Regulators are proposing making a common sense change that would make it easier to investigate aircraft incidents (and in turn make flying safer), but I imagine this won’t be without controversy.
In this post:
Cockpit voice recorder to increase from two to 25 hours
One of the reasons that aviation is so safe is because we learn so much from every incident to prevent something similar from happening in the future. This is largely thanks to flight data recorders (which paint a picture of the aircraft’s performance prior to an incident) and cockpit voice recorders (so that investigators can hear what the communication was like in the cockpit).
One major challenge with cockpit voice recorders is that they only record for two hours. If you have an accident and the plane can’t fly again, then you have the last two hours of communication. Meanwhile if an incident occurs but the plane can still fly, that data will pretty quickly disappear.
Along those lines, the Federal Aviation Administration has this week proposed extending the cockpit voice recorder requirement from two hours to 25 hours. It’s expected that implementing this requirement could take multiple years, given all the parties involved, and potential intervention from Congress.
There have been discussions about a rule change like this for quite some time, and in the past the FAA was generally in favor, but didn’t pursue it, arguing that there were more important priorities.
In recent months we’ve seen several close calls at airlines, including some runway incursions. Unfortunately the cockpit voice recorders aren’t available for any of those recent incidents, given that more than two hours passed before recordings could be retrieved. Regulators say that there have been over a dozen incidents since 2003 where investigators would have benefited from being able to hear recordings, but couldn’t due to the two hour limit.
This will probably get pushback from pilots
To me this seems like a common sense change. If we agree that a cockpit voice recorder contains useful information, then isn’t it more useful to be able to hear what happened for a longer period of time? Many incidents aren’t reported immediately, or happen at the beginning of the flight, so the data never gets recovered.
For example, when an American 777 recently taxied onto an active runway at JFK and caused a near disaster, the conversation in the cockpit couldn’t be recovered, since the aircraft continued its flight. Furthermore, the pilots haven’t exactly been cooperative in complying with what regulators have asked.
While this change seems logical, I imagine that this will get huge pushback from pilot unions. The general argument has been that pilots want more privacy protections regarding the recordings potentially being released to the public.
I imagine beyond that, in situations where pilot error might be to blame for something, many pilots don’t want investigators listening to what they were saying leading up to an incident. While most pilots are professionals and do a great job keeping us safe, transcripts from cockpit voice recorders often have some shocking conversations.
Bottom line
The FAA finally plans to pursue increasing the recording period for the cockpit voice recorder from two hours to 25 hours. This follows a series of scary incidents, where being able to analyze the cockpit voice recorder would have been useful.
While we’ve seen this proposed in the past, the FAA chose not to pursue it up until now. Hopefully the FAA is able to make progress this time, though I imagine it won’t be without some controversy.
What do you make of the recording period for the cockpit voice recorder being extended?
We have reached the point where we are now equipping police officers (and dashboard cameras) so that we can get accurate information about what actually occurs in an incident.
Hopefully this will result in more reasoned behavior from all concerned.
Why is this an issue in the cockpit? Many more lives are at stake.
All information from any aircraft should be live and streamed to a safe location that cannot be accessed by anyone other than authorized personnel.
With live storage there would never be any question of what and where an aircraft experienced a problem or a deviation from destination.
The crew is at work and being paid. It is not a private space. Record everything all the time other than the lav. If you're not doing anything embarrassing or foolish you should have no problem. It is a job not a cocktail party.
A two-hour recording will provide plenty of detail into decision-making prior to an accident. What is now occurring is the desire to pursue liability in non-accident incidents.
In the JFK incident, it is obvious by ground radar data tags and voice communications which crew were at fault. The primary reason aviation is SO safe in the U.S. is the no-fault safety culture. Nobody needs 25 hours of recording for this purpose.
If you want an...
A two-hour recording will provide plenty of detail into decision-making prior to an accident. What is now occurring is the desire to pursue liability in non-accident incidents.
In the JFK incident, it is obvious by ground radar data tags and voice communications which crew were at fault. The primary reason aviation is SO safe in the U.S. is the no-fault safety culture. Nobody needs 25 hours of recording for this purpose.
If you want an example of where a 25-hour recording could provide more public safety...install CVRs in politicians' offices and the office of the President.
The no-fault belief is the real toxic culture. Mass cover up under the excuse of safety.
Politicians are way more advance than the aviation industry.
They've been doing it over 50 years. Ever heard of Watergate?
Shocking? I am not sure if I would describe their conversations or communications as shocking. Let's face it, they may be trained to do this job but they are human too.
Video Recorders in the Cockpit and the cabin. Huge safety improvement.
APA will fight it hard. Again.
But if you are not doing anything wrong, it shouldn't be a problem. Also great way to nail passengers behaving badly.
Yes, make this change.
In a day where 2 simple storage chip binded together with a controller on a pcie rail can store terabytes of data, can't imagine how cockpit voice recorder only works for 2 hours.
Like everything else in the aviation industry.
It's a design from the 60s.
The whole industry in running on obsolete technologies.
You clearly know nothing of the industry. While there are parts that are out of the 60’s, there’s also plenty that’s fairly advanced (no, it’s not cutting edge, but that is a deliberate choice, as the desire is to utilize mature, proven technologies).
Privacy from voice recorders... while on the clock, handling company property worth more than a hundred million USD and in charge or hundreds of lives? It's not like airlines are asking to install a camera in the washroom; this is improving a pre-existing measure.
If pilots really do come out against this, they'll look real bad, especially when they've just negotiated salaries worth north of half a mil.
You just ripped off my comment.
I don't even know who you are.
Completely agree.
You are clearly not a pilot. If you were you’d eat those words. That would do nothing to increase safety. You are proof that the illusion of security does work.
The purpose of the tape recording isn't to improve security, it's to aid in investigating and improving future flight safety, which is basically the entire history of aviation and how flights are so safe today.
There is clearly a gap when it comes to long flights today, this addresses that. Conversely I'd love to know what you're doing on the flight deck that requires so much privacy?
I am not a pilot, but in the...
The purpose of the tape recording isn't to improve security, it's to aid in investigating and improving future flight safety, which is basically the entire history of aviation and how flights are so safe today.
There is clearly a gap when it comes to long flights today, this addresses that. Conversely I'd love to know what you're doing on the flight deck that requires so much privacy?
I am not a pilot, but in the corporate world if I was in my office, being paid by the company, and using company computer, guess how far my "privacy" arguments will get me if they want to look at the contents of my work laptop? And that thing's only worth $2000 tops and 0 lives hang in the balance.
As a pilot I wish our contract was north of half a mil. I don't have any issue with extending the limit to 25 hrs. Think it's not a bad idea especially with long haul operations
I agree. Career pilot, including nearly 15 years at air carriers, I have no issue with 25 hours - EXCEPT it needs to be linked to federal legislation requiring all police body camera footage to be declared public records which is by default accessible to the public (so it isn’t withheld by departments or mysteriously “lost”) and also make it a felony to mute or disable the camera while on duty. The police have the...
I agree. Career pilot, including nearly 15 years at air carriers, I have no issue with 25 hours - EXCEPT it needs to be linked to federal legislation requiring all police body camera footage to be declared public records which is by default accessible to the public (so it isn’t withheld by departments or mysteriously “lost”) and also make it a felony to mute or disable the camera while on duty. The police have the power to destroy people’s lives while facing zero consequences - that needs to end. There is also a legitimate need to enhance data gathering on aviation accidents and incidents. Put appropriate safeguards in place to prevent data from being released inappropriately and take advantage of the technology we have which can enhance safety.
Fair enough, saying all pilots get paid that much is poor choice of words on my part.
I agree with other posters. I'm at a total loss to understand why, in 2023, we don't have constant audio and video recording of all parts of the cockpit and aircraft being stored both locally and remotely and retained indefinitely. Why on Earth should on-the-job life-or-death cockpit activity be entitled to privacy protection? And how can it be that a pilot union or lobby has enough sway to prevent cockpit recording technology from moving past...
I agree with other posters. I'm at a total loss to understand why, in 2023, we don't have constant audio and video recording of all parts of the cockpit and aircraft being stored both locally and remotely and retained indefinitely. Why on Earth should on-the-job life-or-death cockpit activity be entitled to privacy protection? And how can it be that a pilot union or lobby has enough sway to prevent cockpit recording technology from moving past the 1960's? Sure seems like a tiny interest group. This is yet another reason I'm strongly in favor of transitioning completely to computer piloted aircraft, particularly with machine learning systems now capable of logging a bajillion hours of training, working through vastly more simulations than a human could train on in a lifetime, and remembering them all perfectly and recalling them instantly. Maybe keep some inactive human puppet pilots in the cockpit for show to ease the nerves of the Luddites during the transition.
Completely agree with the first half of your paragraph.
30 days is standard (at least in Europe) for security camera footage.
As in, if nobody has asked for it by that time, one can assume it's reasonable to reuse the media.
The problem that's been argued is that the audio has always been started that it isn't releasable to the public but it's there for safety investigation. Yet, in reality, it always gets released to the public. In today's, tweeter, Instagram, you tube, TikTok world people get eviscerated by the public. And then there's the civil lawyers out there to sue you. So while it's always a good idea unfortunately, it doesn't stay that way. Hence...
The problem that's been argued is that the audio has always been started that it isn't releasable to the public but it's there for safety investigation. Yet, in reality, it always gets released to the public. In today's, tweeter, Instagram, you tube, TikTok world people get eviscerated by the public. And then there's the civil lawyers out there to sue you. So while it's always a good idea unfortunately, it doesn't stay that way. Hence the resistance to video. People resist having video cameras out in public for recording to fight crime, and that's not in a work space. Not disagreeing with the idea just trying to state the why resistance to video.
We have all the technologies available over the counter, but a bunch of Regulatorsaurus who are buddies with Unionosaurus aren't extinct yet.
Why 25 hours? It seems something more like 72 hours would be more beneficial. For example, say you have a JFK - HKG flight where an incident occurs near the beginning of the flight. It's in the air for 14 hours, on the ground for 3, and then back in the air for 14 hours on its return before reaching the ground in the U.S. where the FAA can do something actionable.
Believe it or not... the 25 hour rule would do nothing in any of these cases. they say pilot error is like 80% of all crashes.... I say pilot skill is why we have not had a deadly crash in the USA since 2009 (and that was a FLUKE of a bad crew).
Perhaps, but you would still learn from the communication and what went on. If it is skill, then hearing the pilots discussion and decision making/process at that time would be incredibly beneficial for training and other purposes. Likewise, if it was pilot error that caused a near-miss, then the same can be said. This is a no-brainer.
I share your high opinion of pilots' still and professionalism. But I don't think that means we should stop pushing for procedural safety improvements like this. Your argument is a little bit like the old medical joke of a patient who said "Yeah, I took the antibiotics for a while. But I felt so much better that I figured I didn't need them anymore."
And they should review the installation of CCTV in the cockpit (again resisted by unions and pilots).
I've always wondered this - why aren't there cameras on planes? At least in the aisles? They are on every other form of public transportation.
Commercial flights aren’t public transportation
Surely, in 2023, this data should be streamed to the cloud, rather than stored on some sort of orange box that might never be recovered?
NO RIGHT TO PRIVACY WHEN YOU ARE AT THE HELM of machinery that holds hundreds of lives at stake. Any pilot using this privacy argument is f***ing selfish and/or stupid. Almost certainly Republican, too. Yes, I went there. Politics. You know why? Because now stupid OMAAT commenters will reply to this with some stupid nonsense! They take the bait like...
NO RIGHT TO PRIVACY WHEN YOU ARE AT THE HELM of machinery that holds hundreds of lives at stake. Any pilot using this privacy argument is f***ing selfish and/or stupid. Almost certainly Republican, too. Yes, I went there. Politics. You know why? Because now stupid OMAAT commenters will reply to this with some stupid nonsense! They take the bait like Bill Clinton to women who are not named Hillary.
I'm particularly eager to hear from the racist D3kingg
I would feel safer in a plane if I knew the pilot was republican. Democrats have higher rates of mental illnesses and emotional instability. That’s a statistical fact
I’m not saying there aren’t great pilots who are democrats, but on a balance of probabilities…
Would you kindly tel us where you got the "Democrats have higher rates of mental illnesses and emtional instability" information. Surely you wouldn't make a comment like that without the facts to share.... Just a link to the study or facts is fine.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339541044_Mental_illness_and_the_left
Here you go Mark
and trump to any woman named anything.
Definitely pulled out of his or her ass!
Repubs have stigmatized mental illness to the detriment of themselves as well as their own diagnosis and accurate measurement. So even if Dems come out with "higher rates" one needs to ask how was the Republican suffering in silence measured in the study?
Republicans are less likely to have a victim mentality, and are more likely to be stoic. i.e They have better control of their emotions. These are traits that I would prefer in a pilot during an in-flight emergency because they increase the chances of survival…
Do you have a citation for this? There's obviously a subculture of victimhood in some factions of the Democratic Party, but that's over-exploited for cheap political points.
Even if we accept that Repubs are more stoic, I can't accept the inference that it...
Do you have a citation for this? There's obviously a subculture of victimhood in some factions of the Democratic Party, but that's over-exploited for cheap political points.
Even if we accept that Repubs are more stoic, I can't accept the inference that it leads to a higher chance of survival. That sounds like a scientific question (there's literally a field called survival analysis) and I would be very interested in a citation.
You see what I'm all about, citations. Evidence. Reality. Actuality.
The fact that you're gullible enough to believe any of that, should be the first clue that none of it is actually true....