Originally Posted by Excargodog

I think the diagnosis of “depression” is currently as misused as the diagnosis of attention deficit disorder, which as currently affects nearly 50% of male middle schoolers in many districts. The incidence has risen markedly over time:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9616454/

Since generally speaking population norms describe 95% as within normal limits and 5% as outside of normal limits, this is a statistically highly improbable finding. Being in the rowdier 50% of seventh grade males doesn't’ make you abnormal, just not terribly well behaved.

Similarly, we have over many decades redefined “depression”
Originally there were two types of ‘depression’ described, exogenous and endogenous. Exogenous meant you had a cause. Your dog died or your kid died or your spouse died or you were going through a divorce. You were going through a $hitty period in your life and you were reacting to it just like anyone else would. That was then considered something called an acute situational reaction or if delayed, an adjustment disorder, not depression. Unlike endogenous depression, which was a symptomatic depression despite the absence of identifiable causes, those didn’t get treated with antidepressants and generally resolved without drugs.

But along came Prozac and other money makers for the pharmaceutical industry and in a turnabout no less self serving and egregious than pushing OxyContin and ADHD meds, the pharmaceutical industry has pushed for all types of depression to be treated with drugs. And like the poor kids that were put on ADHD meds for basically being boys in middle school, the FAA aeromedical dudes and dudettes now have to cope with a lot of people with a disqualifying defect that may or may not have ever been warranted.

Originally Posted by ugleeual

true… that’s a whole other risk all together... to mitigate this risk you’d have to do some in-depth background investigations for hiring and periodically (five years like military ?) and mental health screening as part of the medical every year.

Only way to stop a JS’r from doing this would be to ban JS in its entirety.

Originally Posted by jrydel

The fire handles on the E170 have to be pulled pretty hard to snap into the position that cuts off the fuel (along with hydraulics and bleed air I think). I wonder if he just didn’t pull hard enough

Originally Posted by Cyio

So it turns out you are correct and I am glad to hear it, I just wish the FAA would be more transparent, perhaps having AME's bring up the fact that they are working hard to improve this.

When I read this:
"A 2022 study published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine found that 56.1 percent of pilots reported a history of health care avoidant behavior related to fear of losing their aeromedical certificate, and nearly 27 percent indicated misrepresenting or withholding information on their aeromedical screening for the same reason."

I dont get a warm and fuzzy that the FAA is doing enough to educate pilots. I am happy to hear there is at least someone trying to make changes.

Originally Posted by PipeMan

IMHO, cockpit JS should only be allowed for traveling to/from an assignment, and only on the pilot’s own metal. No cockpit JS for leisure travel, only cabin.

On other airlines, leisure or to work but cabin only.

This event was bound to happen, not a matter of it, but when.

Originally Posted by BlueScholar

The military background checks don't do much considering Chelsea Manning, Ed Snowden and every other leaker, spy and mole you've ever heard of had TS-SCI clearances. There is no perfect system, and restricting jump seaters who already have cockpit access isn't going to do anything to prevent incidents when that pilot is in the cockpit for every single trip on their schedule.

Originally Posted by Noisecanceller

I don’t care what anyone advertises. Every six months it’s an exercise to earn back the right to earn our living.

Originally Posted by Turbosina

I would assume (this isn't a topic that was really covered during any training I've ever been through) that if you blow a bottle into each engine, the odds of a restart are much lower.

Originally Posted by PlaneS

The PSA BAe also wasn’t a jumpseater - it was a passenger armed with a magnum.

Originally Posted by RTROAjax

*FFDO application numbers skyrocket*

Originally Posted by ReadOnly7

If they are anything like the E-145, you also have to twist them. Plus….there is fuel in the line beyond the fuel SOV. If the pilots reset the handle and there was no twisting….there was probably no more than a momentary dip in n2.