NetJets reduces pilot hiring minimums
07-20-2022, 06:33 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2016
Posts: 324
Originally Posted by Tippy
Terrible idea and not necessary. We already have CVRs and FDRs to watch us. We are operating machines not dealing with the criminal public. There's already plenty of tools to keep and eye on us, A body cam would look stupid next to a Jacket and TIe.
Originally Posted by ZebraSpots
Don’t need them.
Dr. Baehr already placed monitoring capsules in us with the prostate exams back in the day. They double serve as a mini taser to get early showtimes moving.
Seriously though… worst idea ever. Body cams. No way.
Dr. Baehr already placed monitoring capsules in us with the prostate exams back in the day. They double serve as a mini taser to get early showtimes moving.
Seriously though… worst idea ever. Body cams. No way.
Last edited by aeroengineer; 07-20-2022 at 06:39 AM. Reason: clarity
07-20-2022, 07:18 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,063
Originally Posted by aeroengineer
Funny. Tracker along with the "fearsome finger of fate" Sure FDRs and CVRs are there but are typically useful after a mishap. Cameras monitor everything nowfrom bank tellers to equipment operators all the time in our world. I'm certainly not advocating for lav cameras. Riddle me this. If you say it's the worst idea ever then sure let's discuss why. We're all about safety whether enhanced medicals or more realistic sims or differing age limits for that matter. For the most part these are only snapshots that may or may not reveal an issue. Those who hold a security clearance are subject to continuous credit monitoring now and not just every 5 or 10 years. Cameras don't discriminate that's for sure. Actually, think of how many jobs at an airport are under video surveillance 24/7. Why should the flight deck be any different?
07-20-2022, 12:31 PM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Position: Just a pilot
Posts: 745
Originally Posted by ZebraSpots
Don’t need them.
Dr. Baehr already placed monitoring capsules in us with the prostate exams back in the day. They double serve as a mini taser to get early showtimes moving.
Seriously though… worst idea ever. Body cams. No way.
Dr. Baehr already placed monitoring capsules in us with the prostate exams back in the day. They double serve as a mini taser to get early showtimes moving.
Seriously though… worst idea ever. Body cams. No way.
07-20-2022, 12:33 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Position: Just a pilot
Posts: 745
Originally Posted by aeroengineer
I mentioned this on another thread related to the 121 world. Serious question. Why not put police style body cameras on the crew? Reviewable by the FAA and management for performance or competency degradation. We have no issues putting them on law enforcement for accountability. Pilots arguably carry as much responsibility as law enforcement with regards to the public. No he said she said sts.
07-20-2022, 01:03 PM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2016
Posts: 324
Originally Posted by Flyfalcons
The planes already tattle via FOQA data.
If any entity ever pushes for cameras, I see it being the insurance companies. If an operator is given enough of a discount on insurance, they might go along.
07-20-2022, 02:04 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2016
Posts: 324
Originally Posted by AirBear
Pilot Unions have made it clear they wont tolerate cameras in the cockpit. I think they've even implied the cameras wouldn't be very reliable as the circuit breakers would keep popping. 
Cameras hard wired to the aircraft would be a mountain of paperwork with FAA taking years to approve for a particular aircraft. That's why I mentioned stand-alone body cameras. My hope is they catch evolving problems BEFORE they became a mishap. All crewmembers whether 35 or 65 get the same scrutiny. I have no doubt Unions would fight it, but they would have to make a case why they won't tolerate it. It would then come down to what the FAA decides to put it in the rule book.On a side note the SCOTUS muddied the waters on the authority of government agencies to make rules outside specific instructions from Congress so there is that.
Last edited by aeroengineer; 07-20-2022 at 02:15 PM. Reason: clarity
07-20-2022, 02:13 PM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,063
Originally Posted by aeroengineer
Certainly glad this is available. I was looking at FAA Advisory Circular 120-82 and if I read it right it specifically requires de-identification of the data, so it doesn't identify a certain flight/crew/time etc.
If any entity ever pushes for cameras, I see it being the insurance companies. If an operator is given enough of a discount on insurance, they might go along.
If any entity ever pushes for cameras, I see it being the insurance companies. If an operator is given enough of a discount on insurance, they might go along.
07-20-2022, 02:59 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2021
Posts: 199
Originally Posted by aeroengineer
Funny. Tracker along with the "fearsome finger of fate" Sure FDRs and CVRs are there but are typically useful after a mishap. Cameras monitor everything nowfrom bank tellers to equipment operators all the time in our world. I'm certainly not advocating for lav cameras. Riddle me this. If you say it's the worst idea ever then sure let's discuss why. We're all about safety whether enhanced medicals or more realistic sims or differing age limits for that matter. For the most part these are only snapshots that may or may not reveal an issue. Those who hold a security clearance are subject to continuous credit monitoring now and not just every 5 or 10 years. Cameras don't discriminate that's for sure. Actually, think of how many jobs at an airport are under video surveillance 24/7. Why should the flight deck be any different?
You can star in your own Truman Show voyeur special.
It’ll be fun.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
