Germanwings A320 crashed in France :(
Discussion
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: I guess we can go round and round in circles but I can't think of any solution that wouldn't be exploitable or have a "what if" scenario.
I can't either because I'm not an aircraft designer. But if a team can build an aircraft that flies itself then they should be able to make a door lock that does what we want it to do. 
A few years ago we would have been saying "can't think of a way to make a plane land itself". Well now we can...
Oh my god. Looks like Bild have the transcript of the CVR with timings. It seems the passengers were screaming for between 5 and 8 minutes before the impact. Horrific.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3016466/Op...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3016466/Op...
M4cruiser said:
I can't either because I'm not an aircraft designer. But if a team can build an aircraft that flies itself then they should be able to make a door lock that does what we want it to do.
But the question is, who is 'we'?If the pilot wants to land safely at the destination and the guy banging on the door wants to hijack the aircraft 'we' want the guy kept out.
If the pilot wants to fly into an alp and the guy banging on the door wants to land safely 'we' want the guy let in.
How is the door supposed to know which is which?
kapiteinlangzaam said:
You are either a very distasteful troll, or you actually believe the drivel you are spouting and therefore almost certainly suffer from some description of mental illness.
You do realise you'd be amongst the first to be incarcerated if your plans were put in to action....!
Are you serious? What a hysterical response.You do realise you'd be amongst the first to be incarcerated if your plans were put in to action....!
Calm down and make your argument rationally by rebutting the points put forward.
kapiteinlangzaam said:
cardigankid said:
Not quite.
Anyone mentally unstable at any time should be excluded from responsible jobs.
Those known to be a threat to others safety, having expressed a desire to commit some diabolical act, as this pathetic inadequate little prat did, should be locked up.
It's not actually terribly difficult. There were people who knew that inconsequential punk planned something like this yet they did nothing. They are not terribly hard to identify. I've met them. I was at primary school with a murderer. He was just a sad retarded individual who did not have the equipment to deal with life. He ended up in jail, where he should have been from the off. We all knew he was subnormal. All it takes is the quality of decision to deal with them. These incidents happen because the inadequate are tolerated today to an unprecedented degree.
Mental illness is not the same as physical illness. It is weakness and instability.
You are either a very distasteful troll, or you actually believe the drivel you are spouting and therefore almost certainly suffer from some description of mental illness.Anyone mentally unstable at any time should be excluded from responsible jobs.
Those known to be a threat to others safety, having expressed a desire to commit some diabolical act, as this pathetic inadequate little prat did, should be locked up.
It's not actually terribly difficult. There were people who knew that inconsequential punk planned something like this yet they did nothing. They are not terribly hard to identify. I've met them. I was at primary school with a murderer. He was just a sad retarded individual who did not have the equipment to deal with life. He ended up in jail, where he should have been from the off. We all knew he was subnormal. All it takes is the quality of decision to deal with them. These incidents happen because the inadequate are tolerated today to an unprecedented degree.
Mental illness is not the same as physical illness. It is weakness and instability.
Edited by cardigankid on Saturday 28th March 22:50
You do realise you'd be amongst the first to be incarcerated if your plans were put in to action....!
No good debating with a idiot about mental illness.
He is a distastefull troll.
kapiteinlangzaam said:
They've been rebutted over and over already by various posters whom actually have a functioning brain in their head, and by myself a few pages back.
In any case, do I really need to rebut the idea that the solution is to send mentally ill people to Africa to fight Ebola?
The only thing that stigmatising (even more so than now), or forbidding, or attaching life-changing consequences to a diagnosis of mental illness is that they will simply no declare it. Rather than your pilot dealing with a small mental issue (could be depression due to bereavement for example) he will be forced to hide it, for fear of his career being ended.
Is this a situation you genuinely consider to be a good idea?
The thrust is to detect where people in positions of responsibility could do harm to others and prevent this.
And the pilot did hide his condition, so no ifs there.
The doctors who examined him should have had a hotline to immediately report their conclusion.
cardigankid said:
Anyone mentally unstable at any time should be excluded from responsible jobs.
Those known to be a threat to others safety, having expressed a desire to commit some diabolical act, as this pathetic inadequate little prat did, should be locked up.
Do you think this will encourage people to come forward and ask their employers for help, or to simply keep quiet and pretend everything is OK?Those known to be a threat to others safety, having expressed a desire to commit some diabolical act, as this pathetic inadequate little prat did, should be locked up.
Most often when something bad happens two things happen, people say "We'd never have expected it from him/her" or someone comes out like the ex-girlfriend with some kind of dark story where you think "And did you think to tell anyone?".
You also have to consider what is a "responsible job" - thinking simply about the airline industry I can think of a few job roles where you could cause some serious damage if you were so inclined without going anywhere near an airplane (ATC leaps to mind as an example).
I'm trying to work out if you harbour some seriously extreme views about people with mental illness or if you're simply doing a bad job of suggesting that there is a point where you can offer support to an individual but have to take practical, physical steps to prevent them from being able to do harm?
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Do you think this will encourage people to come forward and ask their employers for help, or to simply keep quiet and pretend everything is OK?
Most often when something bad happens two things happen, people say "We'd never have expected it from him/her" or someone comes out like the ex-girlfriend with some kind of dark story where you think "And did you think to tell anyone?".
You also have to consider what is a "responsible job" - thinking simply about the airline industry I can think of a few job roles where you could cause some serious damage if you were so inclined without going anywhere near an airplane (ATC leaps to mind as an example).
I'm trying to work out if you harbour some seriously extreme views about people with mental illness or if you're simply doing a bad job of suggesting that there is a point where you can offer support to an individual but have to take practical, physical steps to prevent them from being able to do harm?
Offering support is a 'nice to have', to stop them hurting others is the key.Most often when something bad happens two things happen, people say "We'd never have expected it from him/her" or someone comes out like the ex-girlfriend with some kind of dark story where you think "And did you think to tell anyone?".
You also have to consider what is a "responsible job" - thinking simply about the airline industry I can think of a few job roles where you could cause some serious damage if you were so inclined without going anywhere near an airplane (ATC leaps to mind as an example).
I'm trying to work out if you harbour some seriously extreme views about people with mental illness or if you're simply doing a bad job of suggesting that there is a point where you can offer support to an individual but have to take practical, physical steps to prevent them from being able to do harm?
kapiteinlangzaam said:
CardiganKid would like all sufferers of mental illness to be shipped off to Africa to fight Ebola, or to be immediately incarcerated, or to have their careers removed from them should they have shown any sort of psychological episode at any moment of their life.
Whilst the incarceration argument isnt worth arguing against (trying to reason with idiots simply reduces you to their level, at which point through experience the idiot beats you)... the wider notion of serious career ending and life changing consequences for people diagnosed with mental illness is quite terrifying.
I work in a job that would be considered as one of the professions where you would be 'removed'. I have seen colleagues over the years have burnouts, mental breakdowns or suffer with other mental illness due to outside factors. Due to the open and supportive policy of our employer there was no stigmatisation attached to this - they were able to openly and at an early stage declare that something was wrong, and through the correct intervention and full support from our employer, everything was solved.
If they were forced to hide the symptoms through fear, I can tell you know the results would not have been pretty and on a bad day might have made the international news as well.
Let me be clear, through personal experience and from working in a pressured and safety paramount environment:
Attaching dire consequences to a diagnosis of mental illness will not stop people being afflicted with mental illness. Itll simply stop them from seeking help, or force them 'underground' to self medicate etc. This will almost certainly produce 'events' that make international headlines on a much more regular basis.
Maybe you are a pilot, maybe not, doesn't really matter.Whilst the incarceration argument isnt worth arguing against (trying to reason with idiots simply reduces you to their level, at which point through experience the idiot beats you)... the wider notion of serious career ending and life changing consequences for people diagnosed with mental illness is quite terrifying.
I work in a job that would be considered as one of the professions where you would be 'removed'. I have seen colleagues over the years have burnouts, mental breakdowns or suffer with other mental illness due to outside factors. Due to the open and supportive policy of our employer there was no stigmatisation attached to this - they were able to openly and at an early stage declare that something was wrong, and through the correct intervention and full support from our employer, everything was solved.
If they were forced to hide the symptoms through fear, I can tell you know the results would not have been pretty and on a bad day might have made the international news as well.
Let me be clear, through personal experience and from working in a pressured and safety paramount environment:
Attaching dire consequences to a diagnosis of mental illness will not stop people being afflicted with mental illness. Itll simply stop them from seeking help, or force them 'underground' to self medicate etc. This will almost certainly produce 'events' that make international headlines on a much more regular basis.
I imagine, and would hope there are ALREADY what you call dire consequences for mental illness. Pilots would be taken off the roster immediately.
That is what should have happened here.
NicD said:
I imagine, and would hope there are ALREADY what you call dire consequences for mental illness. Pilots would be taken off the roster immediately.
Bearing in mind how many people in the population in general suffer mental illness, and that the incidence is probably higher in pilots, there'd be quite a shortage of pilots if that got implemented.kapiteinlangzaam said:
I'm not a pilot, however I might tell them to turn left/right etc 
Ill let you in on a bit of a secret.
My daughter was still-born in 2013. I'm sure you can imagine the effects, actually I hope you cant because that means you have been exposed to similar and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.
I come to work and sit in front of a screen with 20-30 aircraft at any one time under my control. Now, where do you think my head should be? On the screen, or floating off in a cloud thinking about my daughter that I never got to know?
Through my employer i've seen a councillor and since been referred to a psychologist to work through the situation. This helps enormously and means when I come to work, im ready to work - this is surely what you want to happen, non, that the professionals to whom you trust your life and your families life etc are in a good place mentally and ready to give their undivided attention to your safety?
Now, I don't consider myself depressed or mentally ill. I just got dealt a stty hand of cards with my wife and now we have to deal with it. Do you think that if for a moment, even for a split second that if I thought there was even the slightest chance of me declaring to a doctor or to my employer that I was having a tough time dealing with bereavement that I would have sought help for my situation? I can tell you now that the answer is a resounding NO!
Maybe this would have no consequences, maybe this would cause something horrific, I don't know.
Perhaps I would walk in to the doctors office with the idea that I just needed to talk things through, and walk out with a diagnosis of depression which under your plans would = loss of job & career, loss of house, on the dole etc. Nobody is going to take that risk.
Because of the open and non-punitive policy of my employer in regards to such matters ive received the help I need, have been able to deal with it, and when I come to work I am focussed on nothing save doing a good job and your safety.
You can feel free to disagree with this, but unless your view point is coming from a position of experience or direct knowledge, then i'm sorry but it doesn't count for st. You are another Daily Mail headline maker with no understanding of the situation. Sometimes you have to accept that you don't know what you are talking about and acknowledge that others around you DO know what they are talking about.
I feel for you, but this is not a good justification for the status quo.Ill let you in on a bit of a secret.
My daughter was still-born in 2013. I'm sure you can imagine the effects, actually I hope you cant because that means you have been exposed to similar and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.
I come to work and sit in front of a screen with 20-30 aircraft at any one time under my control. Now, where do you think my head should be? On the screen, or floating off in a cloud thinking about my daughter that I never got to know?
Through my employer i've seen a councillor and since been referred to a psychologist to work through the situation. This helps enormously and means when I come to work, im ready to work - this is surely what you want to happen, non, that the professionals to whom you trust your life and your families life etc are in a good place mentally and ready to give their undivided attention to your safety?
Now, I don't consider myself depressed or mentally ill. I just got dealt a s
tty hand of cards with my wife and now we have to deal with it. Do you think that if for a moment, even for a split second that if I thought there was even the slightest chance of me declaring to a doctor or to my employer that I was having a tough time dealing with bereavement that I would have sought help for my situation? I can tell you now that the answer is a resounding NO! Maybe this would have no consequences, maybe this would cause something horrific, I don't know.
Perhaps I would walk in to the doctors office with the idea that I just needed to talk things through, and walk out with a diagnosis of depression which under your plans would = loss of job & career, loss of house, on the dole etc. Nobody is going to take that risk.
Because of the open and non-punitive policy of my employer in regards to such matters ive received the help I need, have been able to deal with it, and when I come to work I am focussed on nothing save doing a good job and your safety.
You can feel free to disagree with this, but unless your view point is coming from a position of experience or direct knowledge, then i'm sorry but it doesn't count for s
t. You are another Daily Mail headline maker with no understanding of the situation. Sometimes you have to accept that you don't know what you are talking about and acknowledge that others around you DO know what they are talking about. The same hand wringing each time some disturbed person stabs a random passer by.
kapiteinlangzaam said:
I'm not a pilot, however I might tell them to turn left/right etc
Ill let you in on a bit of a secret.
My daughter was still-born in 2013. I'm sure you can imagine the effects, actually I hope you cant because that means you have been exposed to similar and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.
I come to work and sit in front of a screen with 20-30 aircraft at any one time under my control. Now, where do you think my head should be? On the screen, or floating off in a cloud thinking about my daughter that I never got to know?
Through my employer i've seen a councillor and since been referred to a psychologist to work through the situation. This helps enormously and means when I come to work, im ready to work - this is surely what you want to happen, non, that the professionals to whom you trust your life and your families life etc are in a good place mentally and ready to give their undivided attention to your safety?
Now, I don't consider myself depressed or mentally ill. I just got dealt a stty hand of cards with my wife and now we have to deal with it. Do you think that if for a moment, even for a split second that if I thought there was even the slightest chance of me declaring to a doctor or to my employer that I was having a tough time dealing with bereavement that I would have sought help for my situation? I can tell you now that the answer is a resounding NO!
Maybe this would have no consequences, maybe this would cause something horrific, I don't know.
Perhaps I would walk in to the doctors office with the idea that I just needed to talk things through, and walk out with a diagnosis of depression which under your plans would = loss of job & career, loss of house, on the dole etc. Nobody is going to take that risk.
Because of the open and non-punitive policy of my employer in regards to such matters ive received the help I need, have been able to deal with it, and when I come to work I am focussed on nothing save doing a good job and your safety.
You can feel free to disagree with this, but unless your view point is coming from a position of experience or direct knowledge, then i'm sorry but it doesn't count for st. You are another Daily Mail headline maker with no understanding of the situation. Sometimes you have to accept that you don't know what you are talking about and acknowledge that others around you DO know what they are talking about.
You make a very good point.Ill let you in on a bit of a secret.
My daughter was still-born in 2013. I'm sure you can imagine the effects, actually I hope you cant because that means you have been exposed to similar and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.
I come to work and sit in front of a screen with 20-30 aircraft at any one time under my control. Now, where do you think my head should be? On the screen, or floating off in a cloud thinking about my daughter that I never got to know?
Through my employer i've seen a councillor and since been referred to a psychologist to work through the situation. This helps enormously and means when I come to work, im ready to work - this is surely what you want to happen, non, that the professionals to whom you trust your life and your families life etc are in a good place mentally and ready to give their undivided attention to your safety?
Now, I don't consider myself depressed or mentally ill. I just got dealt a s
tty hand of cards with my wife and now we have to deal with it. Do you think that if for a moment, even for a split second that if I thought there was even the slightest chance of me declaring to a doctor or to my employer that I was having a tough time dealing with bereavement that I would have sought help for my situation? I can tell you now that the answer is a resounding NO! Maybe this would have no consequences, maybe this would cause something horrific, I don't know.
Perhaps I would walk in to the doctors office with the idea that I just needed to talk things through, and walk out with a diagnosis of depression which under your plans would = loss of job & career, loss of house, on the dole etc. Nobody is going to take that risk.
Because of the open and non-punitive policy of my employer in regards to such matters ive received the help I need, have been able to deal with it, and when I come to work I am focussed on nothing save doing a good job and your safety.
You can feel free to disagree with this, but unless your view point is coming from a position of experience or direct knowledge, then i'm sorry but it doesn't count for s
t. You are another Daily Mail headline maker with no understanding of the situation. Sometimes you have to accept that you don't know what you are talking about and acknowledge that others around you DO know what they are talking about. Perhaps we already have the sweet spot between patient confidentiality and regulation of health at work.
The draconian 'lock up all those with mental issues', is clearly not the answer, and raises its own questions about those who think it is.
kapiteinlangzaam said:
Theres no hand-wringing here.
Im trying to show you through a direct and personal experience that for 99.999999999999999999% of people, the current system works, in fact it works tremendously well and further more - the solutions that you propose might (might!) do something to catch the 0.00000000000000000001% of utter mentalists, but at the grave expense of everyone else.
Where do you want to draw the line?
Im suggesting the line is placed in a very good spot right now.
What experience do you have (apart from reading DM headlines) that means you can construct a reasoned and sound case for moving the line to a more extreme position? Again, dont just quote the current GermanWings situation, tell us something from your own experience on the subject - otherwise im afraid ill have to strike your viewpoint down to being ill-informed and shaped by the current media situation and therefore not worth discussing.
Please disclose the source for your 'statistics'.Im trying to show you through a direct and personal experience that for 99.999999999999999999% of people, the current system works, in fact it works tremendously well and further more - the solutions that you propose might (might!) do something to catch the 0.00000000000000000001% of utter mentalists, but at the grave expense of everyone else.
Where do you want to draw the line?
Im suggesting the line is placed in a very good spot right now.
What experience do you have (apart from reading DM headlines) that means you can construct a reasoned and sound case for moving the line to a more extreme position? Again, dont just quote the current GermanWings situation, tell us something from your own experience on the subject - otherwise im afraid ill have to strike your viewpoint down to being ill-informed and shaped by the current media situation and therefore not worth discussing.
You demean newspapers then present some made up and extreme numbers.
How are we in a 'sweet spot'? For gods sake, this disturbed man just killed 150 souls. We don't have the facts for the Malaysian Airlines loss, but a similar theory has been put forward.
You are personally involved from a vivid experience so not a reliable advocate. A lack of personal experience far from disqualifying me, actually disqualifies you.
You are putting the interests of the disturbed way ahead of those likely to be injured by them.
http://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/help-information/me...
From the above web site:
Mixed anxiety & depression is the most common mental disorder in Britain, with almost 9% of people meeting criteria for diagnosis. (The Office for National Statistics Psychiatric Morbidity report, 2001)
Between 8-12% of the population experience depression in any year. (The Office for National Statistics Psychiatric Morbidity report, 2001)
If we follow,some of the advice on here we'd be saying about 2.5 million people in the UK should be sacked or worse.. That's useful
People suffering from depression need to feel they can come forward and receive help
From the above web site:
Mixed anxiety & depression is the most common mental disorder in Britain, with almost 9% of people meeting criteria for diagnosis. (The Office for National Statistics Psychiatric Morbidity report, 2001)
Between 8-12% of the population experience depression in any year. (The Office for National Statistics Psychiatric Morbidity report, 2001)
If we follow,some of the advice on here we'd be saying about 2.5 million people in the UK should be sacked or worse.. That's useful
People suffering from depression need to feel they can come forward and receive help
NicD said:
Please disclose the source for your 'statistics'.
You demean newspapers then present some made up and extreme numbers.
How are we in a 'sweet spot'? For gods sake, this disturbed man just killed 150 souls. We don't have the facts for the Malaysian Airlines loss, but a similar theory has been put forward.
You are personally involved from a vivid experience so not a reliable advocate. A lack of personal experience far from disqualifying me, actually disqualifies you.
You are putting the interests of the disturbed way ahead of those likely to be injured by them.
I'm surprised that you can read his very relevant story and then immediately dismiss it.You demean newspapers then present some made up and extreme numbers.
How are we in a 'sweet spot'? For gods sake, this disturbed man just killed 150 souls. We don't have the facts for the Malaysian Airlines loss, but a similar theory has been put forward.
You are personally involved from a vivid experience so not a reliable advocate. A lack of personal experience far from disqualifying me, actually disqualifies you.
You are putting the interests of the disturbed way ahead of those likely to be injured by them.
What do you suggest as the alternative? You have to try and keep dangerous individuals from a position of responsibility, but you also have to embrace those who will otherwise hide those same attributes, so what is your answer? And why do you think it's perfect, or at least less likely to result in casualties?
R666 said:
http://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/help-information/me...
From the above web site:
Mixed anxiety & depression is the most common mental disorder in Britain, with almost 9% of people meeting criteria for diagnosis. (The Office for National Statistics Psychiatric Morbidity report, 2001)
Between 8-12% of the population experience depression in any year. (The Office for National Statistics Psychiatric Morbidity report, 2001)
If we follow,some of the advice on here we'd be saying about 2.5 million people in the UK should be sacked or worse.. That's useful
People suffering from depression need to feel they can come forward and receive help
Have we that many pilots?From the above web site:
Mixed anxiety & depression is the most common mental disorder in Britain, with almost 9% of people meeting criteria for diagnosis. (The Office for National Statistics Psychiatric Morbidity report, 2001)
Between 8-12% of the population experience depression in any year. (The Office for National Statistics Psychiatric Morbidity report, 2001)
If we follow,some of the advice on here we'd be saying about 2.5 million people in the UK should be sacked or worse.. That's useful
People suffering from depression need to feel they can come forward and receive help
get a grip.
The latest:
'“There is clear evidence of a serious psychosomatic illness,” the investigator added. “He [Lubitz] was suffering from a severe subjective stress syndrome and was heavily depressed.”'
Why on earth did the psychiatrists not report him?
NicD said:
Please disclose the source for your 'statistics'.
You demean newspapers then present some made up and extreme numbers.
How are we in a 'sweet spot'? For gods sake, this disturbed man just killed 150 souls. We don't have the facts for the Malaysian Airlines loss, but a similar theory has been put forward.
You are personally involved from a vivid experience so not a reliable advocate. A lack of personal experience far from disqualifying me, actually disqualifies you.
You are putting the interests of the disturbed way ahead of those likely to be injured by them.
There's no more risk today or tomorrow of this happening again than there was the morning of the accident - you can pretty much count on one hand (maybe two) the known cases of pilot suicide.You demean newspapers then present some made up and extreme numbers.
How are we in a 'sweet spot'? For gods sake, this disturbed man just killed 150 souls. We don't have the facts for the Malaysian Airlines loss, but a similar theory has been put forward.
You are personally involved from a vivid experience so not a reliable advocate. A lack of personal experience far from disqualifying me, actually disqualifies you.
You are putting the interests of the disturbed way ahead of those likely to be injured by them.
Dunblane happened and the answer was ban hand guns, guy with mental issues has an episode and now the answer is apparently, ban mental illness.
Of course there is a point at which there is no alternative but to remove people from a situation, but you don't encourage people to seek treatment by demonising them and making clear that if they do, their working career is essentially over if they fall into any of the employment categories that you deem a risk.
Think it through, what if the guy down your local water works has a psychotic episode and puts something nasty in the water supply?
What if the guy driving the 40 ton artic has a breakdown and thinks "Oh f
k it" as he goes past the school bus, or the school bus driver as he arrives at the school?It simply isn't workable and is an emotive response to a very unlikely situation.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff