Stringent tests a must for flight crew

WITH the recent death of 150 people on Germanwings flight 4U 9525, apparently because of co-pilot Andreas Lubitz, air travellers might be starting to lose faith in the airline industry’s abilities to police aircraft and crew airworthiness.

In the aftermath of recent air tragedies, there has never been a more compelling time to screen flight crew as there is now.

According to statistics, aircraft assisted suicide has happened six times in the last 33 years, accounting for 571 deaths, and will continue to happen unless appropriate risk-management strategies are taken.

Aviation history has underlined the mental health of air crew as one of the probable causes of air disasters. The mental health assessment of a flight crew must therefore extend beyond the psychological tests performed by psychologists (this is the current practice of Malaysia’s Department Civil Aviation), who base their assessment on their general impression of a person’s emotional stability and mental health. A flight crew’s psychiatric assessment should be thoroughly evaluated by a psychiatrist licensed by the government - a medical doctor who specialises in mental health and can prescribe medication and therapy.

All the pilots who were suspected of being suicidal, including Germanwings’ Lubitz, passed their mental health screening because these tests rely heavily on pilots volunteering information. Knowing that his flying privileges and livelihood depend on the assessment outcome, a pilot may withhold certain information.

It is also high time the DCA take other red flags more seriously. Pilots with domestic abuse charges (this may suggest a violent disposition), marital problems, criminal charges or ongoing criminal court cases, questionable moral character, drug abuse, financial troubles and a gambling or alcohol addiction should be considered a flight risk and be placed under scrutiny.

When a pilot is facing multiple psychological stressors in his life, it is disputable whether he has the calmness of mind to navigate an aircraft under normal flight circumstances, let alone the mental clarity to deal with possible aircraft emergencies and life threatening situations. For the safe carriage of commercial airline passengers, the pilot should be assigned to groundwork duties and only allowed to return to the flight deck once whatever factors that may negatively impair his performance are completely resolved.

Air crew should also be obligated to disclose any information that could interfere with their judgment and emotional stability (including their financial status) or risk being fined if found to be falsifying information. While this may seem like a violation of privacy, in the case of flight crews who are responsible for thousands of lives on the aircraft, it is necessary.

The DCA and commercial airlines should ponder whether the policy of having two persons in the cockpit at all times is enough, given that, firstly, there are crash axes in the cockpit that could be used as a weapon by a flight crew against the other and, secondly, there is an Engine Fire Extinguisher System that will permanently shut down the jet engine mid-air at the touch of a button (Airbus) or by pulling the lever (Boeing).

YASMIN KARIM

Petaling Jaya, Selangor