Co-pilot's illness forces Air Canada jet to land

[groundeffect]

Have you eaten a crew meal lately...

[Guest rattler]

Regarding Daggers familiarity with Airlines, he tends to come across as an expert with insider knowledge, so I don't think he needs to be cut any slack in this regard.

[Innuendo]

Hey Dagger, given that the Captain was handling the flight and the F/O was incapacitated, what other crew would the ACPA release be referring to? The release is probably by design a bit terse, but I think their actions were acknowledged OK.

[Guest rattler]

A while back I was thinking of joining team Red too but I started getting that sick feeling again and couldn't do it. I too would have gone crazy!

Dumb, Dumb, Dumb

[dagger]

Just my opinion...I think some of you are little overly sensitive about Dagger's post. He is not associated with the airline industry in the same manner we all are and I can see where he may feel the "cabin-crew" were ignored in the ACPA release.

I don't think he should be chastised to the point of name calling because he is not aware of the concept of "crew". On the other hand I still feel that the statement by ACPA was to alay the fears of passengers that may think they are going into a death spiral should one pilot fall ill.

I don't think ACPA made any overt effort to praise the cabin crew and I don't think it was an intentional omission but had they more time time to fashion the Press release they might have said "Our pilots and cabin crew are trained ..yad-yada-yada..

Lord knows Dagger certainly doesn't need me to defend his post but in my opinion there is a bit of over reaction by some and I just wanted my 2 cents out there.

It's no big deal what ACPA said or didn't say. I was only thinking that we've had three incidents in recent weeks - Flight 190, this incident and the South Asian passenger who went bananas on another YYZ-LHR flight, and in each case, the cabin staff performed heroically - I'd say almost flawlessly, and brought a lot of credit to the Air Canada name. The senior purser who calmed that poor passenger without losing his temper at the man's insults or abusing him, the cabin staff who helped calm the first officer, and then the FA's who were jolted severely on Flight 190 but looked after passengers before tending to their own bruises/injuries. Maybe CUPE should have put out a release patting their members on the back, but difficult, completely unforeseen events like these require team work from the front end and back end crews, and I believe that in all three incidents the crew performance was EXCEPTIONAL, VIRTUALLY TEXT BOOK and these joint effort should be lauded by somebody other than the company PR people.

It's been a trying month, but from a staff performance standpoint, it's been "the best of times".

[moeman]

From our January newsletter by Lesley Swann, our Component President:

Thursday, 24 January 2008 

Flight AC190

A very special acknowledgement goes out to the heroic flight attendants of Flight 190 on January 9, 2008.  Toronto based crew members (names deleted by myself), as well as off-duty flight attendant (Also deleted), went above and beyond their call of duty in spite of suffering injuries themselves.  On behalf of all Air Canada flight attendants, I commend you for your exemplary actions and acts of bravery under extreme circumstances.  Congratulations, we are so proud of you! 

These types of incidents emphasize that the primary purpose of our profession is safety.

[handyman]

Lord knows Dagger certainly doesn't need me to defend his post but in my opinion there is a bit of over reaction by some and I just wanted my 2 cents out there.

Hey Kip,

Lord knows you of all people are aware of more than a "bit of over reaction" by some on this site! Some...no many...have a hair trigger and looking for an excuse to flinch!

It's what makes many Canadians...Canadian. Feeling the need to be a "CC" and just really being a whiner!

[Vsplat]

handyman, with respect, there is a difference between thin skin and commenting on an inappropriate post.

We know the press has lurked here in the past. Consider the affected pilot, their family and what we actually know about the situation at present. Your post as referenced by others is damaging in so many ways. Please do the honourable thing and pull it.

Vs

[Kip Powick]

In the public domain..Toronto Star article.

The co-pilot's eyes were closed and his hands and feet were bound as he was escorted off Air Canada Flight 848 at Shannon International Airport by two Irish police officers.

"It's okay. You can text me. You can email me," the disoriented man mumbled to no one in particular as he was taken off the plane, passenger Chris Robson recalled in an interview with the Star last night.

The co-pilot's head was tilted toward the ceiling and his shirttail hung out from under a khaki sweater.

Air Canada confirmed the co-pilot of a flight from Pearson airport to London was admitted to an Irish hospital after becoming ill in the cockpit on Monday.

"The co-pilot fell ill during the flight and the captain elected to divert to Shannon," Air Canada spokesperson Peter Fitzpatrick said yesterday. "The aircraft landed without incident. At no time were the safety of the passengers or crew in question."

But Fitzpatrick would not confirm a report by the Irish Independent newspaper that the co-pilot suffered a nervous breakdown and is undergoing psychiatric care after being forcibly removed from the flight.

It all happened quickly.

About five and half hours into the flight, Robson awoke to the sound of many footsteps hurrying to the front of the plane. It was about 2 a.m. Monday, Toronto time.

"Look, we've got a really serious medical emergency on board," a concerned flight attendant told him as he walked to the front of the plane and was told to use the facilities at the back of the plane.

There was a call for a medical person from among the passengers. "We have a medical emergency, the flight services director called out on the plane," recalled Robson, a global training adviser for Imperial, who was in sitting in the centre row of business class about 4 metres from the co-pilot as he was restrained by the crew on the floor outside the galley.

"He was clearly someone not in control of his senses," said Robson.

The captain came on and said the flight was being diverted to Shannon Airport.

"I saw the crew all around a man on the floor outside the galley (just behind the cockpit). It appeared they were restraining him," said Robson. "He was looking around. He was swearing and yelling."

Others on board said they heard the co-pilot say "he wanted to talk to God ... that the plane was low on fuel," recalled Robson.

Shortly after the plane landed, Robson recalled, "The aisles were full of officials."

At one point, three members of the Shannon Airport police, five members of the Irish Garda and two paramedics had come on board to investigate the disturbance before the co-pilot was escorted off the plane.

Passengers disembarked and waited about seven hours before another flight crew arrived from Heathrow to fly them to London on the same plane, said Robson.

During that time, business class patrons were given 20 euros for food and economy class members were given 15 euros, he said.

Robson, who is constantly taking international business flights, said the incident would not deter him from flying Air Canada again. "Absolutely. They were gracious and sensitive. At no point were we scared," he said.

However, Robson did think it curious there was no mention of compensation for the inconvenience and delay passengers suffered.

Other passengers on the flight say they were stunned when they found out the "disruptive" man on board was actually the co-pilot of the plane.

"I heard him swearing and yelling," said Jessica Schneider, who was travelling with her 9-month-old daughter. "I thought it was a passenger, I had no idea that it was a co-pilot.

"We didn't know what was going on, " she said, adding she only found out the man had been the co-pilot after talking to family members in Toronto.

Schneider was one of 136 passengers on Air Canada Flight 848 that was forced to make an emergency landing in Shannon after the co-pilot became ill on board.

Passengers were first alerted to the emergency when an announcement was made asking for help from a doctor or nurse halfway through the seven-hour flight.

Less than an hour from landing, the man was moved into a seat in the first row of the economy class section, said Schneider, who was sitting a number of rows behind the man. "I could definitely hear him, and he was yelling at people trying to help him as well."

"Our member was taken to hospital, where he is being treated," said Capt. Andy Wilson, president of the Air Canada Pilots Association, in a news release.

A report by the Irish Independent newspaper said the co-pilot needed psychiatric care.

When paramedics came to take him off the plane, Schneider said the man appeared to be resistant and was swearing. "He wasn't co-operating with them, he didn't want to go with them."

He was eventually taken off the plane on a stretcher, she said.

A source at Mid West Region Hospital, in the town of Ennis just north of Shannon, confirmed last night that the co-pilot had been admitted and was in the acute unit at the hospital.

Other than the inconvenience of having to stop over at a small airport for seven hours, Schneider said none of the passengers appeared to be too worried by the outburst or the incident.

"They never told us the nature of the problem," she said. "Which is probably a good thing, since people don't really like to hear that their pilot has gone crazy.

"I am just glad that it ended well. ... It's scary to think what could have happened."

Chagnon Denis, a spokesperson with the International Civil Aviation Organization, said that even though the incident took place outside Canadian airspace, an investigation would take place by the airline and Canadian authorities. Transport Canada spokesperson Lucie Vignola said the agency will be interviewing the flight crew and the airline, but said it appeared that proper procedures were followed.

Fitzpatrick said Air Canada would do an internal evaluation to "see what could be learned from the incident."

>Advertisement<

[dagger]

Chagnon Denis, a spokesperson with the International Civil Aviation Organization, said that even though the incident took place outside Canadian airspace, an investigation would take place by the airline and Canadian authorities. Transport Canada spokesperson Lucie Vignola said the agency will be interviewing the flight crew and the airline, but said it appeared that proper procedures were followed.

Denis Chagnon actually, used to work at AC.

[Specs]

I'm surprised nobody has commented on Duty times or mandating relief pilots be used on extended remote area flights. If you include the Egyptair accident which I seem to recall was found to be pilot induced, the AC incident, which under different circumstances could have been much more serious, would mark the second time in recent memory where pilot incapacitation was a present and serious safety concern.

On a more positive note -

What a great stroke of luck this time around there's no you tube video. Personally I found the last one (AC passenger) unseemly and offensive.

[Thebean]

From our January newsletter by Lesley Swann, our Component President:

As alluded to earlier, I know people who were on 190, (one of which was hospitalized after being tossed around), and they say the head flight attendant, (I think), was truly amazing.

The f/a suffered a significant laceration to the facial area, yet continued to perform all duties.

This person even apologized to the injured person for not having been able to do more when they disembarked.

[skyline]

I hope this person returns to good health soon and certainly feel for the family and friends. A friend of mine had a very similar incident and was due to a chemical imbalance. After medical treatment is doing very well today. However, will never be given his medical certificate back. What is also very disturbing is this could happen to anyone of us. Nature is not always kind. As for “handy man”, I hope you are more sensitive to your family and friends. More so, I hope you are a little more professional at work, if you do in fact are part of the flight crew.

[Guest rattler]

I'm surprised nobody has commented on Duty times or mandating relief pilots be used on extended remote area flights. If you include the Egyptair accident which I seem to recall was found to be pilot induced, the AC incident, which under different circumstances could have been much more serious, would mark the second time in recent memory where pilot incapacitation was a present and serious safety concern.

On a more positive note -

What a great stroke of luck this time around there's no you tube video. Personally I found the last one (AC passenger) unseemly and offensive.

Sked time for the flight is 7.5hours. Hardly a long duty day..... (even including the pre and post flight crew time)

[Kip Powick]

Hey Handy'

C'mon..bite the bullet...you made a flipant remark, probably meaning to impart humour but it has not been taken that way and can certainly be construed as hurtful to his friends and family.

Your definitions are meaningless other than No. 1 and No. 1 is definitely what you inferred within your posted text.

Do the right thing, DELETE and we may even let you stay here

regards,

Kip

[handyman]

Hey Handy'

C'mon..bite the bullet...you made a flipant remark, probably meaning to impart humour but it has not been taken that way and can certainly be construed as hurtful to his friends and family.

Your definitions are meaningless other than No. 1 and No. 1 is definitely what you inferred within your posted text.

Do the right thing, DELETE and we may even let you stay here

regards,

Kip

You're a reasonable man Kip! Unlike the 1 star Francis and the rattling "CC" I really don't know what all the commotion is about using that word!

Regardless...it's deleted!

[AIP]

Sked time for the flight is 7.5hours.  Hardly a long duty day..... (even including the pre and post flight crew time)

You are assuming that this was the one and only leg for the crew in the duty period you describe.

That is a big assumption.

Canada has some of the most lax (read worst) rules in the world when it comes to augmentation.

[ccairspace]

Regardless...it's deleted!

I think that sometimes in our haste to be first with a witty retort we forget that compassionate understatement is the more appropriate response.

Perhaps those that pasted the quote could amend their posts.

ccairspace

[Kip Powick]

Regardless...it's deleted! 

Bravo Zulu (Navy jargon for "Well Done") -- you are now back on "the" Christmas card list !!

[E-HANDLE]

You are assuming that this was the one and only leg for the crew in the duty period you describe.

That is a big assumption.

Canada has some of the most lax (read worst) rules in the world when it comes to augmentation.

Although it is a rare event for me to agree with any thing AIP says, on this point, he is spot on.

[skyline]

I always respect a person who does the right thing. Thanks "Handy Man". I only wish I could undo some things I've done in the past.

[Don Hudson]

Canada has some of the most lax (read worst) rules in the world when it comes to augmentation.

In Canada, a crew of two pilots, plus one augment pilot in an aircraft with an SAE-standard bunk, (defined in the CARS) can legally be on duty for 20 hours non-stop and in "unforseeen circumstances" (the definition of which is unclear), can extend that period for another 3 hours to 23 hours on duty. Maximum duty time "in the seat" for any one crew member is 14 hours.

Only a three-pilot crew is prescribed in the CARS. There is no mention, requirement for or provision for a fourth pilot on long haul flights. The FAA Regulations do however, address the need for the fourth pilot.

The laws governing transport and long-haul bus drivers are far more strict and are firmly enforced with stiff penalties for going over the duty day. I know this because I watched the driver of our transportation to a week-long jazz music festival where 80 kids were competing, log his duty day times, (Surrey to Moscow, Idaho - about 10hrs). After dinner, he refused to take the entourage across the street to the University for that evening's jazz concert. He said he'd love to but if he was ever caught it was his licence. We walked.

The reason why this industry is nowhere near that standard is the ATAC (Air Transport Association of Canada, affiliated with IATA) lobbied on behalf of the airlines for the present flight time and duty day regulations and nothing has changed since. Despite challenges by airline managements in the US*, the FARS are more conservative than Canada's.

If anyone wonders if airline pilots actually fly those ridiculous (and I would use the term, "unsafe" here), limits, as much as the airlines would love flight crews to do so negotiated contracts are far more restrictive. The increase in flight safety is the net result of pilot associations spending negotiating dollars on what the Regulator should be doing. Augmentation has been singularly difficult to come to terms with, labeled in a book by an airline CEO as "union featherbedding".

Where a fourth pilot is provided for long haul routes over 15hrs duty time, (YVR - SYD; YVR - HGK), that is the result of contract negotiations, not the CARS.

Compared alongside the ULH (Ultra Long Haul) regulations in Singapore which were introduced to provide for one of the longest routes in the world, SIN - LAX, the Canadian Regulations are an embarrassment and a contentious anachronism for professionals but likely the envy of many of the world's airline managements.

The link to the appropriate section of the CARS is:

CARS 720.15 - STANDARDS: Flight Time and Duty Day Limits

The Transport Canada site provides links to other work on this issue from a Fatigue Management Conference in Seattle, 2005 but so far, no change in regulations has occurred. The site is worth visiting as it provides a presentation on Singapore's ULH operation.. Curt Graeber, Human Factors Specialist with Boeing, comments in this paper.

* ALPA Intervention in ATA petition and the outcome:

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has rejected an airline industry lawsuit challenging the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) interpretation of crew rest regulations.

The court's May 31 decision virtually sweeps aside industry objections to the FAA's stated intention to enforce the regulation requiring that pilots must receive eight hours of actual rest in every 24-hour period. Carriers found in violation of crew-rest rules face fines in the range of hundreds of thousands of dollars, depending upon the number of instances where pilots are on duty more than 16 hours a day. - Court Upholds Regulation on Crew Rest

[CD]

Also: Development and implementation of fatigue risk management systems for aviation maintenance and aircraft operators

[Don Hudson]

Drew Dawson is superb in this work. ACPA had him at their first Annual Flight Safety Symposium and I've spent time discussing FDA and fatigue issues with him at the FSF Conference in Paris, November 2006. ACPA just completed it's fourth Safety Symposium and continues to press technical and safety issues.

From the TC site:

Progress to date

Various components of the FRMS toolbox have been developed, including training and assessment materials for employees. A pilot test with a Canadian airline is set to begin in spring 2007, which will help develop best practices guidelines for implementing the FRMS as well as determine whether changes to the toolbox are required.

To my knowledge "that Canadian airline" has done nothing towards this project and has instead "set aside" FRMS "because the 'long haul' airplanes" have left the fleet and "there is no longer a reason to pursue FRMS".

Perhaps someone else can offer more information?

[Wolfhunter]

Unfortunately, my medical expertise is limited to standard first aid but this sounds like a physiological event of some type to me. In general, and not to use this incident in particular, I’m curious if any members can provide some insight (or a link) to specific ailments (physical vice mental) that might account for this type of incident? Copy the insulin shock… thanks.

As to the “harrowing experience” thing, any passenger subjected to witnessing one of their (yes their) pilots being physically restrained meets my personal threshold of harrowing. Looking across at an empty seat during decent, approach and landing is by no means a “simple diversion”… unless you lead a much more exciting life than I do.