Passenger Defiance of FAA Rules Boon to Accident Investigators

On July 22, as Southwest Flight 345 descended through 400 feet on approach to New York's LaGuardia Airport with an 11 knot tailwind, the captain took the controls from first officer. They were flying onto a runway with headwind of 11 knots, the crew reported.  Then, for some reason, the captain put the plane down, nose gear first, sending the gear strut upward into the electronics and equipment bay of the Boeing 737-700 and making a very dramatic screeching skid down Runway 4.

These details are among those released by the National Transportation Safety Board today, as the investigation into the cause of the accident continues. If you've noted that more than two weeks has passed since the accident and these details are just coming out, credit that to some extent to the fuss kicked up by the Air Line Pilots Association which as been "engaged in discussions with the NTSB leadership and senior staff" according to a letter sent by Lee Moak, the union boss to members over the weekend.

ALPA boss Lee Moak photo from ALPA

ALPA was none too happy that information about the pilots in command of Asiana Flight 214 was released by NTSB Chairman Deborah Hersman within days of the crash landing in San Francisco and the union's lobbying at L'Enfant Plaza does seem to have had some tranquilizing effect on the safety board's press operation, though spokeswoman Kelly Nantel chalks that up to the fact that the Southwest crash did not have a board member on scene. 

Meantime, NTSB investigator in charge Dennis Jones is getting a big assist in the Southwest 345 probe from videos of the accident, at least two of which were made from inside the airplane.

 

A total of five videos - some from the passenger cabin and some from outside the plane - are valuable Nantel told me this afternoon. "It allows us to look from a variety of different angles." Digital evidence was "critical to determining what happened" in the crash of Jimmy Leeward's P-51 at the Reno Air Race in 2011, she said.

As I wrote for The New York Times  these days investigators of all sorts from safety agencies to law enforcement are deluged by digital evidence provided by citizen videographers and their ubiquitous smart phones, iPods, handy cams and tablets. At the same time it can be an overwhelming task for investigators to screen this stuff and evaluate its usefulness. 

It that is not enough of a dilemma, don't forget that recording inside an airplane below 10,000 feet is in defiance of safety rules. Investigators have so far found no evidence that electro-magnetic interference from those digital devices affected the flight systems, instruments or controls on the Southwest 737 but the fact that could have should give one pause. And with that possibility in mind, its worth considering the implications when airline passengers feel it's okay to decide which rules they'll heed and which they'll ignore. 

"The regulations are in place for a reason and we support them because they afford a level of safety," Nantel said. "Its always a concern when passengers feel they don't have to comply." 

Nevertheless, in the case of Southwest 345 investigators find themselves in a dilemma, delighted and yet uncomfortable by the source of what could be illuminating evidence.  Asked what the safety board's next step might be to prod someone to sort out the air safety community's use-but-don't-tell relationship with digital devices, Nantel said, "There is no next step, it's up to the FAA to determine if there is some gross non compliance." 

There already is gross non compliance that is easy part. The "what's next?" question will be a lot tougher to answer.