Off duty pilot arrested for attempted sabotage

Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Devil's Advocate said:
It's entirely possible to find a sympathetic way to tell his story, but he picked the wrong time, wrong place, and wrong jurisdiction to act on his impulses. When you try to bring down a commercial airplane you either succeed or you go away for a very long time, probably forever.
Click to expand...
"Ladies and Gentleman of the jury, my client, a poor, hardworking pilot who diligently followed his career, was placed in a corner by a greedy corporation that pushed him incessantly to perform and work, heedless of the stresses this would place on his mental health..."
 
The situation is tragic. By recent accounts, the guy is an ordinary person with a spotless flying record, good dad, etc., who has struggled at times with depression. Psychedelics have become an effective intervention In some cases for mental illnesses that have not responded well to other interventions. He consumed magic mushrooms without supervision, had a bad trip, and nearly killed a lot of people without intending to do so. There's not much fix to this. His life is now a dumpster fire, and a lot more people are now scared of flying.
 
I read another, non-transportation forum, and a retired pilot talked about there being a great stigma about mental health with pilots. As in admitting to it, partially, because any medication taken for it, would show up in drug tests (specifically anti-depressants) and would probably kill their career unless they got a good attorney and medical witnesses to help them fight the suspension. I think there is probably a lot of untreated mental, I think illness might be too strong a word, but distress such as stress etc, in a lot of professions where treatment is stigmatized or unavailable.

On a lighter note, one of my good friends is a retired FA (flight attendant) who jokes about being proud of passing all the drug tests over the years. The comment or joke was the drug tests used weren't very good quality for the cabin crew or else there would have been no crew.

That said, this ended as well as could be expected but I can't help feeling bad for the pilot - he sounded, frankly, helpless and pathetic and could probably have been helped with good care (without knowing more of his situation beyond what I've read).
 
Matthew H Fish said:
"Ladies and Gentleman of the jury, my client, a poor, hardworking pilot who diligently followed his career, was placed in a corner by a greedy corporation that pushed him incessantly to perform and work, heedless of the stresses this would place on his mental health..."
Click to expand...
My sympathy ends at the point where he risked the lives of 80+ innocent people. Pulling on the fire suppression handles because you're stressed or angry at your employer is not a cry for help; it's an attempt at mass homicide. I support addressing pilot stress and helping them work through mental illness but I'm not going to forget what he did simply because his attempt to harm or kill everyone aboard failed.
 
Last edited:
blueman271 said:
I’m not a pilot nor am I trying to minimize the severity of this incident but modern airliners are capable of gliding, they aren’t going to immediately fall out of the sky if they lose thrust from the engines.
Click to expand...
It was close, I think. Had the pilot flying not immediately fought off this guy's attempt, it could have been tragic. I'm a retired airline employee, though not a pilot. But in working on delayed or canceled flights, working with maintenance employees, you get to know some stuff. When a pilot pulls those fire suppression handles, it also causes the engine's fire bottles to go off, which effectively kills the fire. There is a delay before the bottles go, but once they do I am pretty sure you can't restart those engines in flight. As to the what blueman above said, airliners can glide, but it's a dicey proposition. You have to have a nearby airport and you only get one shot at landing, and with no power you probably don't have much in braking or slowing down your approach. I'm only aware of two incidents of this nature that succeeded - Air Transat 236, and the Air Canada ''Gimli glider'' that actually couldn't make an airport, and instead landed at a disused airfield that was hosting car races at the time. Crazy stuff, that somehow all turned out well.
 
alpha3 said:
It was close, I think. Had the pilot flying not immediately fought off this guy's attempt, it could have been tragic. I'm a retired airline employee, though not a pilot. But in working on delayed or canceled flights, working with maintenance employees, you get to know some stuff. When a pilot pulls those fire suppression handles, it also causes the engine's fire bottles to go off, which effectively kills the fire. There is a delay before the bottles go, but once they do I am pretty sure you can't restart those engines in flight. As to the what blueman above said, airliners can glide, but it's a dicey proposition. You have to have a nearby airport and you only get one shot at landing, and with no power you probably don't have much in braking or slowing down your approach. I'm only aware of two incidents of this nature that succeeded - Air Transat 236, and the Air Canada ''Gimli glider'' that actually couldn't make an airport, and instead landed at a disused airfield that was hosting car races at the time. Crazy stuff, that somehow all turned out well.
Click to expand...
Don’t forget the Miracle on the Hudson. While they didn’t glide nearly as long as the Gimli Glider or the Air Transat flight they did successfully glide and ditch in the Hudson.
 
alpha3 said:
It was close, I think. Had the pilot flying not immediately fought off this guy's attempt, it could have been tragic. I'm a retired airline employee, though not a pilot. But in working on delayed or canceled flights, working with maintenance employees, you get to know some stuff. When a pilot pulls those fire suppression handles, it also causes the engine's fire bottles to go off, which effectively kills the fire. There is a delay before the bottles go, but once they do I am pretty sure you can't restart those engines in flight. As to the what blueman above said, airliners can glide, but it's a dicey proposition. You have to have a nearby airport and you only get one shot at landing, and with no power you probably don't have much in braking or slowing down your approach. I'm only aware of two incidents of this nature that succeeded - Air Transat 236, and the Air Canada ''Gimli glider'' that actually couldn't make an airport, and instead landed at a disused airfield that was hosting car races at the time. Crazy stuff, that somehow all turned out well.
Click to expand...
There have been a number other successful glides, but they may not have ended on a runway. Regardless of the outcome for the airplane, if the passengers and crew do well, I would consider that a success.
 
alpha3 said:
It was close, I think. Had the pilot flying not immediately fought off this guy's attempt, it could have been tragic. I'm a retired airline employee, though not a pilot. But in working on delayed or canceled flights, working with maintenance employees, you get to know some stuff. When a pilot pulls those fire suppression handles, it also causes the engine's fire bottles to go off, which effectively kills the fire. There is a delay before the bottles go, but once they do I am pretty sure you can't restart those engines in flight. As to the what blueman above said, airliners can glide, but it's a dicey proposition. You have to have a nearby airport and you only get one shot at landing, and with no power you probably don't have much in braking or slowing down your approach. I'm only aware of two incidents of this nature that succeeded - Air Transat 236, and the Air Canada ''Gimli glider'' that actually couldn't make an airport, and instead landed at a disused airfield that was hosting car races at the time. Crazy stuff, that somehow all turned out well.
Click to expand...
You forgot US Airways Flight 1549 gliding into the Hudson River
 
I suppose one radical solution to this particular event would be not to allow "off duty crew" as passengers in the cockpit?

I guess that would improve passenger safety, but it would affect the airlines profits, so not a realistic solution...

I know that would not stop the actual pilot cracking up, but maybe a step in the right direction?
 
alpha3 said:
It was close, I think. Had the pilot flying not immediately fought off this guy's attempt, it could have been tragic. I'm a retired airline employee, though not a pilot. But in working on delayed or canceled flights, working with maintenance employees, you get to know some stuff. When a pilot pulls those fire suppression handles, it also causes the engine's fire bottles to go off, which effectively kills the fire. There is a delay before the bottles go, but once they do I am pretty sure you can't restart those engines in flight. As to the what blueman above said, airliners can glide, but it's a dicey proposition. You have to have a nearby airport and you only get one shot at landing, and with no power you probably don't have much in braking or slowing down your approach. I'm only aware of two incidents of this nature that succeeded - Air Transat 236, and the Air Canada ''Gimli glider'' that actually couldn't make an airport, and instead landed at a disused airfield that was hosting car races at the time. Crazy stuff, that somehow all turned out well.
Click to expand...

Every type of jet aircraft has its own unique fire suppression system but they all perform pretty much the same function. Pulling a fire handle will do several things simultaneously such as disconnect the affected engine from the major systems it powers, (air, hydraulics, electrics), shut off fuel supply to the engine, and arm the fire switches to allow their activation, which would be an additional action step in the fire fighting sequence.

The fire bottles themselves contain halon and function by eliminating the oxygen in the combustion vicinity. They don't actually discharge into the engine itself, they discharge into the surrounding cowling to extinguish an uncontained fire that is external to the combustion chamber (an operating jet engine is by definition a contained fire). So as long as the fire handles were reset to reopen the fuel supply valves, and there wasn't any actual engine damage to begin with, the actual fire suppressant discharge shouldn't by itself affect the engine's ability to be restarted.
 
Last edited:
caravanman said:
I suppose one radical solution to this particular event would be not to allow "off duty crew" as passengers in the cockpit?

I guess that would improve passenger safety, but it would affect the airlines profits, so not a realistic solution...

I know that would not stop the actual pilot cracking up, but maybe a step in the right direction?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't really be practical to eliminate the jumpseat occupancy. Consider that hundreds of off-duty pilots ride on the jumpseat system wide around the globe on a daily basis with no incidents. Without the ability to commute to and from their home town to the base they're assigned to, the entire system would grind to a halt pretty quickly.

More to the point, if they're rated pilots going to or from a working flight, it would be much easier to bring down a plane seated at the controls than from the relatively awkward position of the jumpseat if that was their intention.
 
I get that these guys need to move around the system, but my point is that the airlines could provide regular passenger cabin seats for them, rather than allowing them cockpit access. That would cost airlines though, by removing some revenue generating seats from the public.
I assume that off duty staff might have a beer or several after work, before entering the cockpit for their "jumpseat" free lift?
pi314 said:
It wouldn't really be practical to eliminate the jumpseat occupancy. Consider that hundreds of off-duty pilots ride on the jumpseat system wide around the globe on a daily basis with no incidents. Without the ability to commute to and from their home town to the base they're assigned to, the entire system would grind to a halt pretty quickly.

More to the point, if they're rated pilots going to or from a working flight, it would be much easier to bring down a plane seated at the controls than from the relatively awkward position of the jumpseat if that was their intention.
Click to expand...
 
blueman271 said:
Don’t forget the Miracle on the Hudson. While they didn’t glide nearly as long as the Gimli Glider or the Air Transat flight they did successfully glide and ditch in the Hudson.
Click to expand...
Yes, both you and AmtrakBlue mentioned this one. I didn't forget, but didn't really seem like a 'glide' in the sense we're speaking of, where the aircraft has many miles to go with engines out. Sully did a terrific job, here, but he wasn't trying to glide as much as he was trying to get to the Hudson. You need some altitude to be able to 'glide', and Sully didn't have it.
PVD said:
There have been a number other successful glides, but they may not have ended on a runway. Regardless of the outcome for the airplane, if the passengers and crew do well, I would consider that a success.
Click to expand...
Yep. Any crash/rough landing you can walk away from is a success.

John Santos said:
There was also the 737(?) that landed on one of the levees in or near New Orleans that lost both engines in a severe hail storm.
Click to expand...
Ah, I did forget this one - TACA 110, that flew into a bad storm cell and flamed out both engines. Like Gimli, this one couldn't make an airfield either, but successfully landed on a levee in Louisiana.
 
alpha3 said:
Yes, both you and AmtrakBlue mentioned this one. I didn't forget, but didn't really seem like a 'glide' in the sense we're speaking of, where the aircraft has many miles to go with engines out. Sully did a terrific job, here, but he wasn't trying to glide as much as he was trying to get to the Hudson. You need some altitude to be able to 'glide', and Sully didn't have it.

Yep. Any crash/rough landing you can walk away from is a success.


Ah, I did forget this one - TACA 110, that flew into a bad storm cell and flamed out both engines. Like Gimli, this one couldn't make an airfield either, but successfully landed on a levee in Louisiana.
Click to expand...
There's a fair number of them similar to that. One into a river in South America after flameout, 2 into fields in Russia? one was birds, not sure of the other, one was dismantled for scrap, the latest, they are going to try and fly out. Can't think of them off the top of my head, but there are more for sure.
 
caravanman said:
I suppose one radical solution to this particular event would be not to allow "off duty crew" as passengers in the cockpit?

I guess that would improve passenger safety, but it would affect the airlines profits, so not a realistic solution...

I know that would not stop the actual pilot cracking up, but maybe a step in the right direction?
Click to expand...
There could be a situation where one of the two pilots flying was having the issue, and having a pilot in the jump seat could help restrain him…🤷‍♂️
 
railiner said:
There could be a situation where one of the two pilots flying was having the issue, and having a pilot in the jump seat could help restrain him…🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
Attempting this from the jump seat was probably a blessing in disguise since it was two against one and they did not need to drag him out of a buckled pilot seat in the middle of departure.
 
As has been noted above, every now and then people do very stupid, very violent things. The system generally works because it so seldom happens.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if the FAA decided that non-essential jump seat riding was a bad idea. There was the incident with a Fedex pilot that tried to take down a DC-10.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Express_Flight_705
"On April 7, 1994, Federal Express Flight 705, a McDonnell Douglas DC-10-30 cargo jet carrying electronics equipment across the United States from Memphis, Tennessee, to San Jose, California, was the subject of a hijack attempt by Auburn R. Calloway, a Federal Express employee facing possible dismissal at a hearing scheduled for the following day for having lied about his flight hours. He boarded the scheduled flight as a deadhead passenger carrying a guitar case concealing several hammers and a speargun."
 
Brian Battuello said:
By the way, in the late 1990's, long before 9/11, I flashed my CFII license at a flight crew in South Africa and scored a jump seat ride on an Airbus. That was a once-in-a-lifetime ride!
Click to expand...
Not the same thing as a cockpit ride, but at one time, if you had even a private pilot license, the FAA would allow you to visit control towers and ATC facilities.😎
Not sure if they still do…
 
caravanman said:
I suppose one radical solution to this particular event would be not to allow "off duty crew" as passengers in the cockpit?

I guess that would improve passenger safety, but it would affect the airlines profits, so not a realistic solution...
Click to expand...

How would that improve passenger safety? There’s no functional difference between the mental health of a fully rated, qualified and employed pilot in the jumpseat and that of the same pilot at the controls of a plane the previous or next day.

This is the exact kind of knee-jerk reaction that makes things worse rather than better.

It wasn’t the fact that he was a jumpseater that was a threat. It was the fact that he (apparently) had some untreated mental illness that led to him taking psychedelic mushrooms before the flight. In the history of commercial flight, there have probably been more instances of a jumpseating pilot helping to prevent a tragedy than instigating one.
 
caravanman said:
I get that these guys need to move around the system, but my point is that the airlines could provide regular passenger cabin seats for them, rather than allowing them cockpit access. That would cost airlines though, by removing some revenue generating seats from the public.
I assume that off duty staff might have a beer or several after work, before entering the cockpit for their "jumpseat" free lift?
Click to expand...

I’m fairly certain that it is against all regulations, airline rules, etc., for a jumpseater to have consumed alcohol before getting on the plane. The same rules that apply for active crew apply to jumpseaters in this regard. It’s really a stretch to try and find some reason why jumpseating is a bad thing.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top