When the reinforced door was introduced, the residual risk was an inaccessible cockpit when one crew member left. Putting a cabin crew in there during the absence is a reasonable mitigation that costs little but slightly delayed service. Yes, I am a pilot with 40+ years experience.

GF

The other risk was reduced crew communication, one of the best things from a CRM point of view in an emergency now is to open that cockpit door and leave it open to allow information to move more easily between the cabin and cockpit

Every time there is an accident/incident in aviation, regulatory authorities tries to find solutions in order to mitigate these events from happening again. That's all good.That being said, the problem in my opinion with the two-person cockpit rule is that there is not enough knowledge about mental health issues and how to solve them, especially in the aviation community. It's not something you can train in a simulator or in a CRM course. (The CRM course might help, but probably not sufficiently).

I have personally had cabin crews in the cockpit showing tendencies of depression, recently divorced pilots not feeling well, possible intoxicated crews, we have read about fights among the flight deck crew etc. These events are usually hard to recognize in advance and very hard to solve, even with the right knowledge. You can not rule out bad apples in transportation or any kind of employment for the matter.

Who's to solve a situation where two pilots fights in the cockpit? Who to trust? If you suspect your colleague has mental/suicidal issues on a long-haul flight, will you consider leaving him with a purser/cabin crew while going to the loo? Will you try to remove him from his position? We just don't have the psychiatric knowledge how to assess such a situation and even if we do, these are some extremely tough calls.

The two-person cockpit rule would assume that the person entering the cockpit "replacing" the pilot can handle a potential suicidal pilot. It also assumes that the entering person doesn't have suicidal plans of its own. There's been a recent thread on a.net about an Emirates pilot losing it as a dead-head crew with, what it seems, no viable reason. Imagine him as a company trained pilot entering the flight deck instead of a purser/cabin crew.

Any person in the cockpit will always be a potential threat, regardless of any ruling. The amount of people entering the flight deck might actually increase the amount of incidents and accidents. You may call me naive, but I still want to trust in the people I'm working with. Trust that they can handle a situation arising in the flight deck. Trust that they can put their personal life aside while working. Trust they are not intoxicated. Trust that they have the right training, procedures and CRM skills. Trust in knowing their physical and mental limitations.

When you deal in complex situations with people (mental issues, unruliness, intoxication, deportation, hijacking etc.), you will most probably follow some certain guidelines and previous experiences, but at the end of the day, what you mostly need is common sense. That will never be covered in any regulation, but it's actually the main factor in solving problems with humans. The two-cockpit rule will never be able to cover all the different situations and I have serious doubts about it's mitigating effect. Time will tell....

It's not about 'handling' a suicidal pilot though. It's about one person not being able to completely lock themselves in and take a plane down. If there's nobody else with them then there is nothing you can do. The door cannot be breached. Emergency codes don't work if the suicidal one has locked the keypad out.

sevenair wrote:

It's not about 'handling' a suicidal pilot though. It's about one person not being able to completely lock themselves in and take a plane down. If there's nobody else with them then there is nothing you can do. The door cannot be breached. Emergency codes don't work if the suicidal one has locked the keypad out.

Look at things as a more coherent system, door lock is not the only part of airplane and its operations.
The existing system is that pilots are (somewhat) trusted to operate the airplane. They do have access to all controls (naturally), there is a set of relaxed security rules for the crew, pilots can do some things with aircraft systems - e.g. move control surfaces during walkarounds.

Now you're saying that pilot cannot be trusted with as much as staying alone for 10 minutes. That instantly means background check, professional training etc. are not a proof against bad intentions. So we need to screen pilots like everyone else. Actually stricter than regular pax (maybe mandatory cavity check) - because they already have access to sensitive areas and what if they bring something like a shocker to disable avionics? You need supervise walkarounds (what if they plans something into pitot tubes, for example, or jam control surface?) etc etc.. And basically any accident with "pilot mistake" as a cause must be considered as a possible suicide path as well and similary proofed against. TSA supervisor in a jumpseat - because government employees are not prone to mistakes, maybe? Can we trust pilots to navigate around a thunderstorm? What if captain says go straight and FO says go around that cloud - should a purser be called as a third vote?
Things quickly spin out of control once you declare pilot to be a weak link...

I actually understand @zeke argument about workload and concentration, for example. But that is on a different page.

Pilots have background checks. They have medicals. They have peers who can report them if they have suspicions. That didn't stop LAM, Germanwings, possibly MH370.

We are talking about a pilot putting a plane into a descent from which the other crews cannot recover as they're locked out of the cockpit. Pilots make mistakes. I make several every day. That's why there's two of us. Everyone makes mistakes. Deliberately locking a crew member out and crashing the plane is not making a mistake. It's a calculated act of mass murder.

Pilots and cabin crew are trained professionals able to work in a very demanding role. However all of the training in the world doesn't help when someone goes rogue on you and there's no way to stop them.

A FO flying through a CB can be stopped with a simple 'I have control' and 'HDG' read from the FMA. A FO flying through the CB will be a debrief point on the captain's return although it's unlikely anyone would choose to go toilet just as we approach some cells. A FO putting the door to LOCK, and crashing the plane is not the same. It's not stoppable. There's literally nothing you can do about it.

Pilots are trusted with people's lives. It's difficult for lost of us to comprehend, but throughout history there are several examples of the people trained to and tasked with keeping everyone safe becominf the very people who kill everyone deliberately.

zeke wrote:

The other risk was reduced crew communication, one of the best things from a CRM point of view in an emergency now is to open that cockpit door and leave it open to allow information to move more easily between the cabin and cockpit

That wouldn't work with smoke/fumes. At my outfit we keep it closed to minimum any cross contamination between cabin and flight deck. I've been there myself and despite a bomb proof door and masks on we still managed. The door makes it more difficult but that's when training and attitude come in to it.

sevenair wrote:

It's not about 'handling' a suicidal pilot though. It's about one person not being able to completely lock themselves in and take a plane down. If there's nobody else with them then there is nothing you can do. The door cannot be breached. Emergency codes don't work if the suicidal one has locked the keypad out.

I'm not sure I understand your point? Locking yourself in and taking a plane down is quite suicidal to me.
Do you believe a cabin crew inside the flight deck would prevent a possible serial killer from crashing a plane (because that's basically what a suicidal pilot would be)?
Do you think not being alone would prevent the pilot from committing suicide? I'm not claiming it's not possible, but is there any research which supports your claim?
A below average airline pilot could make a plane irreversibly unflyable in less than ten seconds.
Do you believe that an unqualified person in the flight deck would even realize what's going on, let alone having time to notify/open the door to the other pilot?

I have dealt with intoxicated passengers, unruly passengers, violent deportees and a passenger with health issues trying to strangle the cabin chief with the interphone. Believe me, there is nothing logic in their behaviors and nothing that prevents them from their acts when it has reached a certain level.
Unfortunately, I don't believe a suicidal pilot will be discouraged from crashing an airplane regardless of who, or who isn't in the flight deck. It's just a question of how far his mental issues has gone.

sevenair wrote:

Pilots have background checks. They have medicals. They have peers who can report them if they have suspicions. That didn't stop LAM, Germanwings, possibly MH370.
However all of the training in the world doesn't help when someone goes rogue on you and there's no way to stop them.

I 100% agree with you on these extracts from your post. So I still struggle to understand why that second person in the flight deck would have any effect on the outcome of a pilot with suicidal intentions.

For me, the two-person cockpit rule is/was something to comfort the general public and the passengers on-board a flight. But the outcome will always remain in the hands (or the brain) of the rogue pilot.

cuban8 wrote:

sevenair wrote:

Pilots have background checks. They have medicals. They have peers who can report them if they have suspicions. That didn't stop LAM, Germanwings, possibly MH370.
However all of the training in the world doesn't help when someone goes rogue on you and there's no way to stop them.

I 100% agree with you on these extracts from your post. So I still struggle to understand why that second person in the flight deck would have any effect on the outcome of a pilot with suicidal intentions.

For me, the two-person cockpit rule is/was something to comfort the general public and the passengers on-board a flight. But the outcome will always remain in the hands (or the brain) of the rogue pilot.

Because a crew member simply needs to open the door using the handle. They're not there to overpower the pilot. They're not there to fly it to safety or put it out of a dive, they're there to let the other person in.

It concerns me enough to want to avoid flying with airlines there don't have the rule so if anyone's aware of airlines that don't have it then I'd like to know.

sevenair wrote:

cuban8 wrote:

sevenair wrote:

Pilots have background checks. They have medicals. They have peers who can report them if they have suspicions. That didn't stop LAM, Germanwings, possibly MH370.
However all of the training in the world doesn't help when someone goes rogue on you and there's no way to stop them.

I 100% agree with you on these extracts from your post. So I still struggle to understand why that second person in the flight deck would have any effect on the outcome of a pilot with suicidal intentions.

For me, the two-person cockpit rule is/was something to comfort the general public and the passengers on-board a flight. But the outcome will always remain in the hands (or the brain) of the rogue pilot.

Because a crew member simply needs to open the door using the handle. They're not there to overpower the pilot. They're not there to fly it to safety or put it out of a dive, they're there to let the other person in.

It concerns me enough to want to avoid flying with airlines there don't have the rule so if anyone's aware of airlines that don't have it then I'd like to know.

and simple question: would a second person be able to reach controls and recover the situation? Think SU 593, complicated by the correcting pilot not even being seated at controls when the plane goes nuts.

sevenair wrote:

Because a crew member simply needs to open the door using the handle. They're not there to overpower the pilot. They're not there to fly it to safety or put it out of a dive, they're there to let the other person in.

Remember though, more pilot suicides have been "successful" with more than one pilot in the cockpit than when a pilot was alone.

And do you really thing someone can "pull it out of a dive" and overpower another pilot at the controls?? Look at Egyptair 990. (Two pilots in the cockpit) Even though the Eqyptians deny it was suicide, the Flight Data Recorder clearly showed one elevator up and one elevator down indicating that one pilot was pulling the control column while the other was pushing it. (This will happen on a Boeing aircraft after the elevator jam clutch is "broken")

Therefore, do you really think that avoiding an airline due to operational rules will result in a statistically safer flight? We are talking 7 occurrences in over 60 years. If it really does concern you, then maybe you should poll airlines to see the real root of the cause and see the way they deal with mental illness. Fly the airlines that acknowledge and help all spectrums of mental illness ... those that allow paid leave and actively help pilots in stress.

Take it even further. Think about Germanwings. The cause of that accident was that German law (at the time) would not allow that man's physician to warn authorities about a known mental illness. The change of that law (in Germany) has done more to enhance safety than any on-board procedure. Contact Civil Aviation Authories and ask their policy, and if you really think it would be safer, avoid the countries that do not allow a free movement of information between Physicians and aviation governing bodies.

Max Q wrote:

All these complications can be avoided by a simple design change


Mandate that all aircraft have an enclosed toilet INSIDE the cockpit exclusively for pilot use


No more waiting for a flight attendant to come to the cockpit and no more security/ incapacitation concerns, best of all pilots ‘go’ when they want to

Actually there are airliners that have the lav inside the cockpit. Our 767's at FX are like that and I believe UPS 767's are like that as well...The only pax airliner I have seen with the lav in the cockpit was when I worked for NW we had to work the KLM MD-11's I remember seeing a lav in the cockpit on theirs. But not a lot of pilots like the lav in the cockpit for obvious reasons. I have seen the crews refuse to take the aircraft in some hot weather stations due to the smell.