Pogey Bait

I personally think we will see no repercussions on this from any government entity. Had this individual been a “pilot” then we would have a totally different story on our hands.

He sure picked the right equipment for the job.

PurpleToolBox

Illegal for PRIVATE COMPANIES. Our licenses and medicals are issued by federal agencies. Many of them use polygraphs.


While this situation would be an extreme possibility, having to visit a psychologist as part of your medical is not. Although the FAA ruled they will not require pilots to undergo psychological testing or visits to a psychologist, that decision could change should we see more incidents like this -- especially if the person is a pilot or we have another GermanWings incident.



https://www.economist.com/gulliver/2...gists-required




"In January, the FAA began enhancing training for AME’s so they can increase their knowledge on mental health and enhance their ability to identify warning signs." https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=20455

Broncofan

Everyone keeps saying our job isnt hard. Well, as i recall, he wasn't able to land the thing, and i think we can all agree managing descent planning, speed and altitude control on landing is the most challenging part. The part he could not do

prex8390

I don’t don’t think he had any intention of landing.

motorclutch

But....he could do one hell of a barrel roll!

Excargodog

Immediately after the Reagan assassination attempt the head of the American Psychiatric Association, in defense of the would-be assassins psychiatrist, said for the record that psychiatrists were no better at predicting violent or sociopathic behavior than anyone else (calling into question exactly what the h€|| ARE they good for, but that's a different rant) and precisely nothing has changed to alter that view.

As for the Hogan and MMPI, both have been shown to lack predictive value positive and negative, meaning the guy who passes could still be a future axe murderer and the guy who fails might very well have nothing wrong with him.

Which is why the military has no-lone zones around their nukes. Nobody, whatever their rank, experience, or mental health certainty is permitted unobserved access. There is always someone else watching to make sure they haven't suddenly turned into a whacko. But there we are talking nukes, not a Q400.

I know that we are all very aviation oriented or we wouldn't be here, but seriously, somebody could probably hijack a propane or gasoline tanker truck and drive it under the Seattle convention center on I-5 - or in the I-90 tunnels - and do every bit as much damage and kill just as many people as this guy could have with the Q400.

Looking at where cost effective improvements can be made in intercepting aircraft that start engines or start moving without authorization might be worthwhile, although even that is not without hazard.

Going ape$£it crazy with poorly predictive tests probably isn't.

jungle driver

something like this could be used to prevent unauthorized runway access as well as preventing runway incursions. gates only drop when you are cleared to line up and wait, cross or takeoff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wPliTkBR48

Two Kings

Couldn’t someone just take off on a wide taxiway?

JamesNoBrakes

Incredibly expensive solution when you could just lock the controls/door, etc...

Stinger6

Or land on one?
Tango? Tango?

Or Pullman, for that matter...which is a whole 'nother story but a narrow and challenging surface.