After publishing my story this morning on the American Airlines pilots who have refused to allow the NTSB investigatory team to record their interview, I received a text message from 121pilot, a commercial airline pilot for a major U.S. carrier and our resident captain on Live and Let’s Fly. As I greatly respect him and his opinions as a professional pilot, I wanted to publish his counterpoint and then open this issue to discussion. He reasons that in our “gotcha” culture in which leaks can be counted on, the AA pilots reasonably objected to having their testimony recorded.
-Matthew
No, AA Pilots Should Not Agree To Let NTSB Record Their Testimony.
Ok I’m very understanding of the AA pilots’ desire not to participate in a recorded interview. The problem with electronic recordings is the high probability of it leaking. The NTSB can interview the pilots and take notes, etc. as they have always done and get to the heart of the safety issues involved. Safety does NOT require an electronic recording of every utterance. Part of the problem with an electronic recording is that when it inevitably leaks, there is then a high probability for selective editing. This results in the pilots being made to look far worse than they should.
The crew (who I agree as you know screwed up badly) is willing to be interviewed. Making an electronic recording might be an added convenience for the investigators but frankly, the negatives outweigh the probable gains. If it was me in the hot seat I’d be fighting it as well. It’s one thing to sit down and have a fully candid conversation about what went wrong. It’s quite another to do so when it’s being recorded and there is a near certainty of that recording being leaked and selectively edited to make someone look as stupid as possible. Because that is gotcha journalism these days.
What are your thoughts on this issue? Even if 121pilot makes a reasonable point, does the risk of leaking the audio outweigh the benefits of ensuring that investigators cannot twist the words of pilots, which only a recording can 100% ensure?
image: vintage AA travel poster
Why do you think that there’s any higher probability of the notes of an interview leaking than the audio? And aren’t written notes just as susceptible to being selectively edited before being leaked as an audio recording?
The public has a short attention span and a selectively edited recording by CNN would have them branded as the worst pilots ever without a trial. Every AA passenger for the next 10 years will have a picture and name of the not convinced on their cell phone and compare to the crew they see up front.
I’m not defending the crew, but they deserve their fair hearing.
This is all Bravo Sierra in my mind and purely an attempt by the union to cyaThis parallels the often used verbiage …the pilot works for a major US airline. Why not spell it out,so hush hush like they work for the CIA. The whole culture reeks of cya.
Notes can also be leaked. Not to mention things taken out of context, misinterpreted, or misconstrued. A least with an audio recording, it’s all “on the record.”
A selective recording carries more weight than someone’s notes. Surprisingly, anyone would think leaked memos would have the same weight as a recording of the pilot’s voices intentionally edited to make them look bad.
That was fast.
Thank you for sharing your response so quickly. I still have to lean towards the pilots allowing the NTSB to require what they want in this case. The Biden Administration would ever leak anything, right? Plus there would have been an audio recording of the cockpit if they hadn’t continued to London. I am only a civilian so obviously not an expert here but I am curious as reporting said that after Tenerife there were massive upgrades to runway safety and protocols…except for letting a plane continue on after a very close call incursion? That doesn’t really add up to me. But I guess it’s a moot point now, considering the subpoenas, or are they planning to defy those too?
An interesting take. If the court of public opinion would be determining the final outcome I would agree. As it is it looks like legal tricks to avoid responsibility, abetted by the union.
Exactly this.
You look worse fighting the request, and those mediating the decision will hear either way.
I don’t understand the desire to treat these pilots with kid gloves. Their actions quite nearly led to the loss of hundreds of lives. Concerns over leaked recordings, damaged reputations, etc. seem laughable in comparison.
(Part) 121 pilot is dead wrong. First, there were recordings of the pilots on the CVR. When this incident happened and the AA B777 taxied back to the gate, the CVR should have been pulled and the flight crew relieved of duty pending at least an internal investigation by AA. This severe screwup could have resulted in another Tenerife disaster in the making. The recorded testimony by the pilots needs to be perfectly recorded so it is wholly and accurately transcribed into the NTSB report. Leaking of testimony is of little importance as to the greater picture of ensuring that this lack of situational awareness and cockpit resource management. We need to understand the causal factors of this incident in order to institute corrective action to reduce the chance of this happening again. If the pilots have nothing to hide, there is nothing for them to worry about. I can imagine that mandatory pulling of the CVR will be a rule in runway incursions.
Leaky notes, leaky recording, very little difference. AA’s reputation is on the line here, by refusing the recorded interview it sure looks like an admission of guilt. Reminds me of a No Contest plea.
If anything, the recorded interview would reveal so much about the pilots’ confidence in their decisions, investigators would hear exactly how unconfident and nervous they were. Probably exactly why they’re refusing. Not that it matters much with a court subpoena looming to get it.
So sad to hear that 121 pilot is equally hesitant for the full story to come out, else why agree with this poor decision by these pilots? They surely knew something was going on at the airport in the 30 min they waited after the event to leave for London, they would have known exactly what they’d said in the cockpit that would’ve been on the recorder. They were trying to limit damage by leaving. I wonder if all the of them were in agreement or if things got heated during the flight. It’s like they drove away from the scene of an accident, but a good thing to do. Now they continue to run away from it. And if AA cleared their schedule to make them available then they’re also not doing what their employer wants them to do.
This is all sorts of bad. Not too mention if AA cleared their schedule why were they still flying during the investigation? My trust in AA, its pilots, and the pilot union is severely damaged at this point
Would comprise of recording the interview for only the stenographer. Requiring the stenographer to destroy the recording after all parties and the stenographer have checked the accuracy of the transcription. Afterward, requiring them to sign an affidavit to the destruction of the recording be a “fair” comprise?
This is what I was thinking. That way the video/audio recording has a very limited number of people who could leak it in all practicality, and they’d be strongly disincentivized from doing so because it could be easily tracked and they could lose their jobs and future employability. It’s still not as ideal as being able to hear their tone of voice, but a complete transcript of the exact words that were said is at least a decent compromise. I don’t think just the investigators taking notes is a good idea, having seen the difference between investigators notes and actual interview footage in criminal investigations.
There is some explaining to be done. Worrying about “sounding” stupid is unproductive at this point. Giving a truthful rational account of the event is what is needed. Anyone can make a mistake. People understand that and we all move on.
And the “got you media” excuse sounds paranoid.
The AA pilots can always plead the 5th amendment for any answers that might incriminate them regardless of any subpoena. If forced to a recorded interview I would expect them to do this.
Great, so now we have a situation that could have been very bad and we can’t/won’t get answers? So much for safety being paramount in aviation.
It’s not a criminal investigation. They cannot plead the 5th.
If they refuse to answer, the FAA pulls their pilot certificates and they become immediately unemployed and unemployable.
Then a judge will instruct them to answer.
Thanks for the info.
Yeah I don’t think you’re going to find a lot of sympathy for highly compensated pilots. They take on the responsibility, they’re compensated for it, so they must take on the consequences as well. Put on the big boy panties and be responsible. Damn the public opinion, I never thought you cared anyway?
I suppose I don’t really care whether the interviews are taped or whether notes are taken. What is important is that the pilots get interviewed, so the NTSB can understand what happened in the cockpit that day. The method of the interview is less important than finding out what went wrong.
We’re all just inching closer and closer to the complete surveillance state— where we will attempt to eliminate crime, accidents, and other misfortune by watching and recording every move you make. I say good for the pilots. You can conduct a compete and thorough investigation without recording every second of it.
Normally I would agree and I do think about Minority Report and your other points, which are valid. That being said, it seems a little opportunistic to play the surveillance card now when we have had the surveillance state/Patriot Act since October, 26 2001. To American and the pilots favor, many weren’t alive when Tenerife happened or know little about it. Should they be more be informed, then I think public outcry would be well served to demand a recording/transcript. I was rewatching Sully today about the Miracle on the Hudson–recordings were used by the NTSB, perhaps just for dramatic effect. But in that case, CVR was available. At the end of the day, it’s well within the publics right to demand transparency here, seeing government continues to use tax dollars and other funding and programs to support US carriers. The government works for us, and now the airlines do–by taxpayer funded association.
Far more concerning to me is AA’s response that they did “clear their schedule for interviews.” How and why are these pilots even at the controls right now and flying?
Perhaps they were at LAX driving the bus and tug?
I wrote in Matthew’s original column. I agree with 121pilot’s conclusion but not his reasoning.
Just like a video deposition is different from an oral deposition that is transcribed by a court reporter, so is this FAA request for a video questioning rather than an oral questioning that is transcribed. A video deposition tries to “gotcha!” It requires the pilot being questioned to also be good in acting. Pauses are bad. Smooth talking is good. It’s too quick to think and answer questions thoughtfully.
When opposing counsel has money and wants to fry you, they get video depositions.
To my knowledge they are requesting an audio recording, which I think is fair. Video would be a bit much.
“NTSB has determined that this investigation requires that the flight crew interviews be audio recorded and transcribed by a court reporter to ensure the highest degree of accuracy, completeness, and efficiency.”
Would this be the first time the NTSB audio recorded a crew? No..so not sure what the big deal is.
Worry about selective editing but the whole interview is recorded. Which means any selective editing can be easily refuted. Meanwhile notes take by the NTSB can be leaked just like a recording but how do you rebuttal leaked selective notes?
Those clowns almost murdered hundreds of people through incompetence, stupidity or laziness. They then sabotaged the investigation by flying on to London, thus erasing the video recordings. They should humbly submit to anything NTSB asks of them – the entitled pricks.
Why are they even free after refusing to cooperate with the investigation? Need another two days to coordinate how it’s someone else’s fault?
Indeed, it’s that overrecording of tbe CVR which sticks in my craw. As professionals they would have been well aware of its limited capacity. If they were not so aware, that would be stand-alone evidence of unprofessionalism. At the very least – professionalism assumed – by erasing the CVR they are guilty of compromising a quasi-judicial process. They’re sure-as not doing themsdlves or the wider public any favours. It may even be interpreted as seff-incriminatory.
I find it very interesting that this incident took place not long after a change to cockpit duty delegations at AA. I just recently read that AA put more duties onto FO’s that were normally completed by the Captains. Their union was not in agreement with this change and my question is, did this and does this now create a “Head down” situation with the FO? Which would definitely change the dynamic of a safer cockpit, especially when taxiing. I always remember that one saying “ accidents don’t usually occur with only one error, it’s usually multiple errors”.
I was a police officer for many years. And all thought I’m proud of what I did I will tell you that union can be brutal. Fire department union is even worse. Pilots union? Guess what guys you’re way up there too. Outrageous. There’s simply no reason not to record the interview. Every internal affairs investigation is recorded in any major department. End of story.
The pilots made an egregious error. They should be terminated,
If it was an honest accident the pilots will normally be retrained and returned to service. However if attempting to fly under the influence of drugs or alcohol, that’s a different story, hence why a transparent investigation is needed.
This is not about the pilots interview constraints. It’s about aviation safety! The pilots are being juvenile as whether is transcription or recording their statement is on record. So if they had any interest in helping the aviation community to understand what went wrong that allowed this to happen they should agree to a recording. It is the best way to ensure an accurate record.
Consider how many CVR’s from aircraft accidents have passed through the NTSB over the last several decades. Consider the sensational and global headline-grabbing nature of those audio files.
Now consider: The only audio “leaks” from those (1000+) CVRs has been from…..litigating attorneys.
The NTSB is arguably the most secure repository for digital audio on the planet.
I find it hilarious that attorneys are worried about the NTSB leaking audio.
There are cabin voice recordings. Is this pilot also suggesting those be discontinued?
Why not agree that both parties (pilots & NTSB) be given copies of the interview tapes? Then the pilots’ union can selectively leak whatever it thinks makes the pilots look less negligent.
I think giving pilots a copy of the tape is a good compromise.
My apologies for delayed responses I’m on vacation at the moment.
First keep in mind that as far as we know the crew is completely willing to participate openly and transparently in an investigation. There is no desire to hide anything that I see.
The normal NTSB investigative process has been very successful over the years and it’s never included an audio recording of the interview. Why the sudden change? What’s the value add from a safety perspective here? I’ve yet to see a solid argument advanced for how an audio recording of the proceedings will actually lead to a better and more compete analysis of what happened.
If the NTSB’s first and foremost interest was safety then their desire should be to sit down with the crew in an environment that creates maximum transparency. This isn’t it.
And if you think the NTSB is above deciding that evidence been dammed they want a pilots head on a platter you only have to look at TWA 841.
To repeat no one has objected to a full and compete interview of the crew with their cooperation. The objection is to the fairly unprecedented desire to have an audio recording of the proceedings.
Thank you for engaging on this issue despite the dissent. For me, if there was CVR available, then fine, who needs the audio recording as we have the CVR. You’d have to explain further on TWA 841 or provide a story/stories for us to read. As it stands after a quick Google search, I feel even less safe flying now after reading about TWA 841 as I didn’t know pilots could erase CVR from the cockpit, at least previously in this case:
The aircraft was equipped with a Fairchild Industries Model A-100 cockpit voice recorder (CVR). However, 21 minutes of the 30-minute tape were blank. Tests of the CVR in the aircraft revealed no discrepancies in the CVR’s electrical and recording systems. The CVR tape can be erased by means of the bulk-erase feature on the CVR control panel located in the cockpit. This feature can be activated only after the aircraft is on the ground with its parking brake engaged. In a deposition taken by the Safety Board, the captain stated that he usually activates the bulk-erase feature on the CVR at the conclusion of each flight to preclude inappropriate use of recorded conversations. However, in this instance, he could not recall having done so. The NTSB made the following statement in the accident report:
We believe the captain’s erasure of the CVR is a factor we cannot ignore and cannot sanction. Although we recognize that habits can cause actions not desired or intended by the actor, we have difficulty accepting the fact that the captain’s putative habit of routinely erasing the CVR after each flight was not restrainable after a flight in which disaster was only narrowly averted. Our skepticism persists even though the CVR would not have contained any contemporaneous information about the events that immediately preceded the loss of control because we believe it probable that the 25 minutes or more of recording which preceded the landing at Detroit could have provided clues about causal factors and might have served to refresh the flight crew’s memories about the whole matter.
–do we not have a similar situation here with heading on to London? Like others, the CVR is where I get stuck on this, so I say fine, let the NTSB audio record. Anything else looks like evasion at this point.
So the short story of TWA 841 is that Boeing and the NTSB advanced a theory that the crew had pulled a circuit breaker so that they could extend the flaps without the slats to improve high altitude performance. Supposedly this was done when the FE was out of the cockpit and when he returned he without saying anything saw the breaker out and reset it. The slats then come out leading to an upset. That the CVR gets erased results in the investigation going sideways as the NTSB basically refuses to consider anything other than the Captain having done this on purpose.
But their are numerous problems with this theory as documented by Emilio Corsetti in his book Scapegoat and others.
1. The NTSB ran flight tests with a slat extension and it did not produce an upset.
2. The damage to the aircraft rendered the ability to erase the CVR inoperative.
3. It turned out in the end that a lower rudder hardover caused by the yaw damper actually caused the upset.
4. Despite all the evidence that has been gathered the NTSB remains resolute in their refusal to consider that they may have gotten this one wrong and unfairly tarnished a crews reputation.
This is a very short summary of just a few of the points and there is a lot more. But when you look at all the evidence it’s clear the NTSB really screwed this one up.
Thank you for the reply and information–I will look into it more. I certainly don’t think the NTSB is without fault–American 587 and 9/11 are a glaring examples of that.
Agree regarding voice data and telemetry. For all of the advances in tech, the fact that the CVR is physical and two hours long is ridiculous.
And apologies, I see now that the CVR can only be disabled on the ground. Was working too fast and not reading my own post.
Subpoenas don’t happen for actively willing participants
This, of course, is horse scat. The reason that Malaysian Airlines has not been found is partially related to this in that in that case, no voice data was able to be analyzed as is the case with this. The voice data and the telemetry should all be encrypted and uploaded. Then the courts can be used to get an encryption key release if there is a real reason to go over the voice data. Otherwise it is just the stereotypical ostrich sticking it’s head in the sand.
replied to you a few comments above, sorry
I meant to say I think the CVR should be both physical and digital