It may depend on the test.
It depends on where you draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable medical and mental health conditions, and how they are diagnosed and reported. What's best for public safety would disqualify so many pilots that it would create chaos in the industry, which to some extent it already has.
I also can’t imagine there wouldn’t be legal issues with giving someone hallucigenic mushrooms and sending him out the door while under the influence of them.
If he started something like “guys I’m not feeling so good” before he stood up for the handles, they may have looked over their shoulders and saw him reaching.
The information from Alaska is that he pulled both handles. The crew reset them quickly enough that neither engine flamed out.
the other problem with the FAA approach to drugs is that they might be used to mask an underlying problem that is disqualifying.
I'd like to better understand this position. If this airman, who seems to have been suffering from clinical depression, hadn't feared the FAA taking his medical away, would he have been more likely to have sought treatment and likely a diagnosis? Would the FAA then ignore that diagnosis and allow a clinically depressed airline pilot to continue flying? What if the treatment included psychoactive medication, as it often does, would the FAA need to ignore that as well?
I think there are a lot of misconceptions about the FAA's stance on mental health. To be fair, I think the FAA's stance is not quite as scary as a lot of people think.
Seriously?
As stated, there are two stages. Pulling the handle down cuts off the fuel, hydraulics, and bleed air (and the crossbleed) to the engine. Then turning it left or right causes the extinguisher on the left or right side to discharge to that engine (you get two extinguisher shots total but they can be used on either engine). While the extinguisher discharge is obviously irreversible, I'm not sure you can't reset the handle. The things that the handle uses for shutoff are just valves that are selectable elsewhere.
At least in my limited experience, the valves that close when the shutoff is activated are spring loaded and can only be manually reset. But I'm sure that is aircraft specific and can't speak to the ERJ.
As far as I can remember, the fire handles were fully resetable on all of the airplane's that I've flown. The only thing I remember that wasn't resetable was the generator (CSD) disconnect function.
Could be. But life is more complicated than people being mean and their statement seems to be bending over backward to acknowledge that, arguably at the expense of clarity.
No, they’re bending over backwards to say that society is mean for stereotypical reasons…and it’s all about blaming others.
This is interesting. Do valves and stuff have to be manually reset on the ground?
In all of the airliners that I have flown, you can reset the handle and restart the engine.
How long would that take? One engine, what if both went. How would that affect the restart with both having been shut down?
So if he shut them down. What’s the time grime to restart. How much altitude they losing while restart? If the firebottles deployed no restart possibility correct?
According to a E175 Pilot I heard discussing this on the "Taking Off" YouTube, they have to be reset on the ground. I have no personal knowledge how they work. The YouTube link I posted in #52 has disappeared so maybe the Pilot was confused about the operation and didn't want to get "retrained".
Blowing the fire bottles has no effect on restart capability.
I mean, sort of?
Yes. Could you explain?
Not very long. The engines are still turning so you just need to reintroduce the fuel and turn on the igniters. There is a loss of all engines checklist that covers it.
Why would that have any effect? The fire agent isn't sprayed into the core of the engine, it is sprayed inside the nacelle, around the engine. Fire inside the engine is good. It is the fire outside of the engine that we want to put out.
The airplane has a RAT.
