I note a report that one of the investigators says he believes the pilots' story that they were simply preoccupied and not asleep. He said that otherwise, they would have come up with a "better lie".Alex Reid

FAA made an announcement October 27, 2009 Contact: Laura Brown ([email protected]) Phone: (202) 267-3883 or (202) 359-3680 FAA Revokes Pilot Licenses The Federal Aviation Administration has revoked the licenses of two Northwest Airlines pilots who overflew their destination airport on October 21, 2009 while operating Flight 188 from San Diego to Minneapolis.The pilots were out of contact with air traffic controllers for an extended period of time and told federal investigators that they were distracted by a conversation. Air traffic controllers and airline officials repeatedly tried to reach them through radio and data contact, without success.The emergency revocations cite violations of a number of Federal Aviation Regulations. Those include failing to comply with air traffic control instructions and clearances and operating carelessly and recklessly.The revocations are effective immediately. The pilots have 10 days to appeal the emergency revocations to the National Transportation Safety Board.

NW has made a statement , that in effect .. they're fired

I think the government made a decision to them..Maybe for now they are out of there service.RegardsMcLeonard_____dossier surendettement

Hello,This is the official letter received by the captain (PDF)http://redirectingat.com/?id=42X487496&amp..._nDaycUiacyKUUrRegards.Gus.

Even more scary to consider. These pilots were out of communication for at least 91 minutes, not the earlier reported 75 minutes! I wonder what fuel reserves they had left and what Delta's policy is concerning the amount of fuel reserves they can carry? I know that the airline companies are trying to save money by putting the bare minimum possible onboard to safely meet the demand for the alternate. How much fuel did these guys have left when they landed in Minneapolis and did that have any bearing on the FAA's decision to revoke their licenses?

Here is a line from Delta's statementI am still somewhat torn. Big part of me says fire them and yank their certs cause what they did is inexcusable. However another part understands they have families and if no other blemishes exist they should be dropped to non-flying for a while then put back on the line. But this might set a bad precedence that you can screw up royally and all will be forgiven.

The passengers they endangered also have families...

Even more scary to consider. These pilots were out of communication for at least 91 minutes, not the earlier reported 75 minutes! I wonder what fuel reserves they had left and what Delta's policy is concerning the amount of fuel reserves they can carry? I know that the airline companies are trying to save money by putting the bare minimum possible onboard to safely meet the demand for the alternate. How much fuel did these guys have left when they landed in Minneapolis and did that have any bearing on the FAA's decision to revoke their licenses?

They went 150 miles past their destination. That is about .3 hours worth of flying time at cruising speed. Double that and add a little for the turnaround and landing, and they would have probably used an extra .8 hours worth of flying all told. They didn't fly an extra 91 minutes. Despite what you think or may have heard about the airlines, the dispatcthers do still give some contingency and extra fuel above and beyond the legal reserves for comfort. My guess is they probably would have touched down with about a half an hours worth of gas left, if they didn't have any alternates declared.

Even more scary to consider. These pilots were out of communication for at least 91 minutes, not the earlier reported 75 minutes! I wonder what fuel reserves they had left and what Delta's policy is concerning the amount of fuel reserves they can carry? I know that the airline companies are trying to save money by putting the bare minimum possible onboard to safely meet the demand for the alternate. How much fuel did these guys have left when they landed in Minneapolis and did that have any bearing on the FAA's decision to revoke their licenses?

I'm not sure how they tell time, but what's written in the Official letter posted above by the FAA, states, the first time they didn't respond to ATC was 7:24PM CDT, and contact was re-established at 8:14PM CDT. In my book that's 50 minutes, not 75 or 91 minutes. Still too long!

The passengers they endangered also have families...

And that is why I have said a big part feels both should be terminated and numerous times in the past said they should lose their tickets and jobs.

There's an interesting choice of words:"...while you were on a frolic of your own."That's a rather peculiar phrasing for an official letter from an FAA staff attorney.

does it mean hanky panky (and then leave the CVR overwrite) :(

They went 150 miles past their destination. That is about .3 hours worth of flying time at cruising speed. Double that and add a little for the turnaround and landing, and they would have probably used an extra .8 hours worth of flying all told. They didn't fly an extra 91 minutes. Despite what you think or may have heard about the airlines, the dispatcthers do still give some contingency and extra fuel above and beyond the legal reserves for comfort. My guess is they probably would have touched down with about a half an hours worth of gas left, if they didn't have any alternates declared.

The 91 minutes I heard was on the news. Can't believe everything you hear on the mainstream news I guess. Maybe it included some time period that ATC couldn't contact them well before they passed over MPLS. It was also stated here:http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/28/us/28plane.htmlRichard Cole, the co-pilot who lives in Salem just north of me, gave the Portland, OR KATU ABC affiliate a short statement on TV the other day when he returned home:http://www.katu.com/news/local/66575547.htmlMy point is if these pilots hadn't been 'rousted' out of their distraction by a flight attendant, they could have used up their contingency fuel reserves and not known that there was a problem until a low fuel pressure warning or some other alarm went off. A little late then to easily correct their 'frolic' mistake. Wouldn't you love to hear what was on the CVR? Maybe "Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, snork" or "blasted that sucker!". Too bad it was only a last 30 minutes record time model.

There's an interesting choice of words:"...while you were on a frolic of your own."That's a rather peculiar phrasing for an official letter from an FAA staff attorney.

Hmm, combine that with the time discrepancy written in the same letter, and this letter may not be as official as it looks!

Wouldn't you love to hear what was on the CVR? Maybe "Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, snork" or "blasted that sucker!".

Some other hypotheses:1) "Have you ever seen boobs like these?"2) "Re-raise to $500!"3) "On this online store Cialis is so cheap..." :( Marco