Commercial Pilot License, 20/20 Vision, Physically Fit but Un-Sane ?

The shocking suicidal crash of the Germanwings plane last week just proves that there is a very fine line between safety and security and you may just compromise one in lieu of the other - usually its safety and usually its because of comfort.

We are a 'reactive' society. We react to exceptional incidents, generalizing them and then trying to use them as basis for our acts or decisions (sometimes even laws). Take for example the spurt in sales of Electronic Security Solutions (CCTV, Access Control, Bollards) after an incident.

• If there is a break-in, we immediately say "put more access control"
• Terrorist Attack, Bomb Blast "put more cameras"
• Robbery in the building "must install a Video Door Phone"

I still remember that before 9/11- we never even thought "let's get to the airport early, there could be a long line at security" or "ill just carry the bottles in my hand". The security process (and the surrounding industry) just 'took-off' after the 9/11 attacks - passengers are checked rigorously.

We love the perception of security - we don't care if we are safe but like to believe that gadgets and processes in place will protect us. We do not consider the MOST important factor - the "person"

Statistically - there is a 0.00001% chance your plane will crash. Consider if you are going to be in that range, try calculating the same if the reason for the crash is a suicidal pilot - the person in this case.

Cockpit Doors

Cockpit doors came into limelight after 9/11. Because the terrorists were able to barge in and take over the pilot - we said "wait a minute - we need secure doors". So first there were laws (FAA Release No. APA 01-02)

1. Requires strengthening of cockpit doors. The doors will be designed to resist intrusion by a person who attempts to enter using physical force. This includes the door, its means of attachment to the surrounding structure, and the attachment structure on the bulkhead itself. The FAA rule uses an impact standard that is 50 percent higher than the standard developed by the National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice. In addition to intrusion protection, the FAA is using a standard sufficient to minimize penetration of shrapnel from small arms fire or a fragmentation device. The agency is providing guidance to operators on acceptable materials. All new doors must meet existing FAA safety requirements.
2. Requires cockpit doors to remain locked. The door will be designed to prevent passengers from opening it without the pilot's permission. An internal locking device will be designed so that it can only be unlocked from inside the cockpit.
3. Controls cockpit access privileges. Operators must develop a more stringent approval process and better identification procedures to ensure proper identification of a jump seat rider.
4. Prohibits possession of keys to the cockpit by crewmembers not assigned to the cockpit.

BCAS then followed suit (G.S.R. 34(E))

"Closing of cockpit door : Every aircraft operator shall, -

1. lock cockpit doors of aircraft during, all phases of flight, unless required to be opened for operational reasons;
2. establish and maintain communication system between the flight crew and cabin crew during flight; and
3. assign responsibility of access control of cock-pit to pilot-in-command"

There were patents (US 4042193 A)

A door or hatch operating mechanism is blocked by a bolt when the aircraft moves in that dynamic pressure is sensed by a spring biased displaceable large piston moving a small piston which acts on a hydraulic link acting, in turn, on another spring biased piston which holds the bolt in locking position or releases it).

Since we thought the 'attack' will always be form the passenger side - we put an Air Marshall.

We thought we were safe.......but were we ? What if it could be an inside job. What if the person responsible for flying you from point A to point B is not psychologically fit, suffers from depression, suicidal, and wants go down in history as one of 11 pilots who could have deliberately caused a crash ( https://bit.ly/1BsuYA6 )

Psychiatrist Philip S. Graven suggested the term "un-sane" to describe a condition that is not exactly insane, but not quite sane either.

The questions that came to my mind immediately after the news were-

1. Could this have been avoided ?
2. Are the pilots tested for 'Suicidal Tendencies' ?
3. Door Security - Can we be secure and safe ?

Sadly - the answers I found for 1. and 2. were pretty disappointing. It seems there are psychological evaluations conducted before you are actually given the control of the jet but its not a recurring test (I assume that after this - they will be recurring) (Note: I spoke to a friend who is a pilot for a famous Indian airline and did verify that this is being discussed internally).

Medical Note: For now, there are no brain scans, hormonal screenings or other technologies that can distinguish a suicidal person from anyone else. Instead, within certain populations, self-policing is the primary method for catching mental health issues.

Also did some reading on the cockpit doors - " A locked door is opened by a flight crew inside the cockpit but can also be unlocked by cabin crew entering a keycode from the outside. But on some planes, the crew inside the cockpit can manually override it to keep a door locked. In the case of an electrical supply failure the door is automatically unlocked, but remains closed. It is equipped with a manual escape hatch but that is only accessible from the inside"

My thoughts on securing cockpit doors:

The patent should still hold, doors do need to be secured but there has to additional processes and checks in place.

1. Biometrics: The door lock is overridden with a bio-metric lock. Access should (could) be granted to - the pilot, the co-pilot, the senior-most Air Steward/Stewardess and the Air Marshall (if available). The security policy could be based on a chain-of-trust where if such a situation occurs (Co-Pilot locking Pilot Out and overriding the keypad) the Pilot could open the door from the outside provided there is 2-step authentication (Pilot + Sr. Air Steward/Stewardess OR Pilot + Air Marshall OR Sr. Air Steward/Stewardess + Air Marshall). Where Biometrics is concerned, i would use IRIS Scanners, simply because one could argue that what if a terrorist cut the thumb off ?
2. A CCTV camera (both ways) - for the cockpit to monitor the outside passenger area and one inside (which could only be monitored by the Air Marshall or a Sr. Steward on a hand-held secure monitor (a simple password protected IPad would do)
3. How about a Ground based Centralized In-Flight Command & Control at Air Traffic Control Stations - Imagine if the airlines had in-flight monitoring control room at ATC stations. We are now able to transmit decent quality video using extremely low bandwidth - so why not ? The CCTVs could send video to a ground station either on an event (if the door lock was overridden ? sudden drop in pressure ? loud noise ? etc.) or at random intervals. The Operator on ground can take a decision to unlock the door ? In either case apart from the Black Box, video evidence is possible.
4. Real-Time Physiological Monitoring - Physiology is the branch of biology that deals with the normal functions of living organisms and their parts. There are parameters that can be monitored in real-time and can alert in a case of sudden rise (e.g. - stress levels, sudden rise in heart beat). So if the heart beat of the pilot suddenly rises, an alert could be generated.

Considering that air travel is extremely safe (see Death By: Odds below), some basic process changes can ensure high level of security as well.

Notes:

1. These are my thoughts on what I think could work. The technology is available, whether commercially viable is something I haven't looked into.
2. I personally know of a technology that monitors physiology of a user in real-time - so if you need more information, feel free to PM me.
3. If you do end up making/copying/selling/distributing a product based on any of the ideas above - send me a thank you note.
4. This article does not encourage you to look at your pilot and co-pilot suspiciously.
5. Be safe, be secure and be aware.

Reading Material:

1. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/26/germanwings-crash-safety-of-cockpit-doors-on-all-planes-questioned
2. https://www.planecrashinfo.com/cause.htm
3. https://www.google.co.in/patents/US4042193
4. https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=5470
5. https://www.bcasindia.nic.in/law/acts/Aircraft(Security)%20Rules,%202011.pdf

Statistics: Your odds in death by -

1. Cardiovascular disease: 1 in 2
2. Smoking (by/before age 35): 1 in 600
3. Car trip, coast-to-coast: 1 in 14,000
4. Bicycle accident: 1 in 88,000
5. Tornado: 1 in 450,000
6. Train, coast-to-coast: 1 in 1,000,000
7. Lightning: 1 in 1.9 million
8. Bee sting: 1 in 5.5 million
9. (U.S.) commercial jet airline: 1 in 7 million