Germanwings A320 crashed in France :(
Discussion
XB70 said:
Finlandia said:
Agree on that. Plus he was bullied, as he experienced it, by the other pilots, so why not teach them a lesson as well.
Except he didn't teach them a lesson. 
-Pete- said:
NicD said:
-Pete- said:
I think it's extremely naive to think you can regulate against such a rare occurrence. And if I had to trust someone with my life, I'd rather have Kapiteinlangzaam than NicD...
It is rare (8 since 1976 - http://www.vox.com/2015/3/26/8294971/pilot-suicide...But horrific when it occurs on a passenger jet.
Sorry for being naive that I think rather simple procedural changes could reduce the risk, I am sure you know better, and thanks for your nice little comparison.
Next time, why don't you give some reasoning instead of flip insults.
Simple question: Do you want people who are stressed, or doubt their competency, to go to their doctor? Or not?
They answer, is NO, and why don't you read my posts a bit more carefully.
NicD said:
-Pete- said:
NicD said:
-Pete- said:
I think it's extremely naive to think you can regulate against such a rare occurrence. And if I had to trust someone with my life, I'd rather have Kapiteinlangzaam than NicD...
It is rare (8 since 1976 - http://www.vox.com/2015/3/26/8294971/pilot-suicide...But horrific when it occurs on a passenger jet.
Sorry for being naive that I think rather simple procedural changes could reduce the risk, I am sure you know better, and thanks for your nice little comparison.
Next time, why don't you give some reasoning instead of flip insults.
Simple question: Do you want people who are stressed, or doubt their competency, to go to their doctor? Or not?
They answer, is NO, and why don't you read my posts a bit more carefully.
So to be clear, you *don't* want people who are stressed, or doubt their competency, to go to their doctor?
eharding said:
NicD said:
-Pete- said:
NicD said:
-Pete- said:
I think it's extremely naive to think you can regulate against such a rare occurrence. And if I had to trust someone with my life, I'd rather have Kapiteinlangzaam than NicD...
It is rare (8 since 1976 - http://www.vox.com/2015/3/26/8294971/pilot-suicide...But horrific when it occurs on a passenger jet.
Sorry for being naive that I think rather simple procedural changes could reduce the risk, I am sure you know better, and thanks for your nice little comparison.
Next time, why don't you give some reasoning instead of flip insults.
Simple question: Do you want people who are stressed, or doubt their competency, to go to their doctor? Or not?
They answer, is NO, and why don't you read my posts a bit more carefully.
So to be clear, you *don't* want people who are stressed, or doubt their competency, to go to their doctor?
I answered 'am i missing the point?'
My posts have all been about this GW pilot WHO WAS UNDER TREATMENT yet the doctors did not, or could not divulge this to the competent authority and so avert this tragedy.
I doubt this state of affairs will be allowed to continue.
The poster had tried to come back with some straw man argument of his own which I ignored.
NicD said:
eharding said:
NicD said:
-Pete- said:
NicD said:
-Pete- said:
I think it's extremely naive to think you can regulate against such a rare occurrence. And if I had to trust someone with my life, I'd rather have Kapiteinlangzaam than NicD...
It is rare (8 since 1976 - http://www.vox.com/2015/3/26/8294971/pilot-suicide...But horrific when it occurs on a passenger jet.
Sorry for being naive that I think rather simple procedural changes could reduce the risk, I am sure you know better, and thanks for your nice little comparison.
Next time, why don't you give some reasoning instead of flip insults.
Simple question: Do you want people who are stressed, or doubt their competency, to go to their doctor? Or not?
They answer, is NO, and why don't you read my posts a bit more carefully.
So to be clear, you *don't* want people who are stressed, or doubt their competency, to go to their doctor?
I answered 'am i missing the point?'
My posts have all been about this GW pilot WHO WAS UNDER TREATMENT yet the doctors did not, or could not divulge this to the competent authority and so avert this tragedy.
I doubt this state of affairs will be allowed to continue.
The poster had tried to come back with some straw man argument of his own which I ignored.
My fault of course, I should have known better than to even pay attention to your increasingly incoherent gibberish postings.
XB70 said:
Except he didn't teach them a lesson.
He took out his frustrations/woes/call them what you will on a trapped and captive group of completely innocent and helpless victims who had no previous interaction with him and contributed the sum total of zero to the state he found himself in.
What bothers me more than anything is that it does appear to be calculated and premeditated:
- his comments about "we'll see" and "maybe".
- the continuing insistence that the Captain leave the flight deck to take a toilet break.
- the continued ignoring of what could only have been increasingly desperate pleas from the passengers.
I was thinking this last night. All the captain, crew and the passengers knew was that the door was locked and that the co pilot may of passed out. You'd think if he was sticking a finger up at all and sundrie that we would have said something.He took out his frustrations/woes/call them what you will on a trapped and captive group of completely innocent and helpless victims who had no previous interaction with him and contributed the sum total of zero to the state he found himself in.
What bothers me more than anything is that it does appear to be calculated and premeditated:
- his comments about "we'll see" and "maybe".
- the continuing insistence that the Captain leave the flight deck to take a toilet break.
- the continued ignoring of what could only have been increasingly desperate pleas from the passengers.
Digga said:
Getting the right receptacle is key; girth, overall capacity and the ease of re-sealing are all critical factors.
And don't mix it up with your drink, unless you're name's Bear.
Freezer bags.And don't mix it up with your drink, unless you're name's Bear.
The big ones, obviously!
And don't wait until you're bursting, otherwise the massive piss balloon between your legs becomes a big liability
eharding said:
Eh? You didn't pose a rhetorical "Am I missing the point" question. You said "I am so sick of people who think they know best saying 'I am missing the point.'", and then went on to provide an answer - "NO" - which might reasonably be taken to be a response to the question asked of you in the quote above.
My fault of course, I should have known better than to even pay attention to your increasingly incoherent gibberish postings.
You are probably used to being correct (in your own mind perhaps) but please point to anything incoherent I have posted?My fault of course, I should have known better than to even pay attention to your increasingly incoherent gibberish postings.
croyde said:
I was thinking this last night. All the captain, crew and the passengers knew was that the door was locked and that the co pilot may of passed out. You'd think if he was sticking a finger up at all and sundrie that we would have said something.
Or possibly even worse than that, keep them guessing. What people want and need most of all in tragedies like these, is some sort of closure in the form of an explanation as to why, but without any explanation we are left wondering how and why, without ever really coming to peace with the thought.
NicD said:
You are probably used to being correct (in your own mind perhaps) but please point to anything incoherent I have posted?
TBF I have no idea what you're banging on about either.What's the actual point you're trying to make with regards to the thread.
This squabbling is pointless.
el stovey said:
TBF I have no idea what you're banging on about either.
What's the actual point you're trying to make with regards to the thread.
This squabbling is pointless.
In a nutshell, medical professionals treating persons with conditions that give them the potential to harm themselves or others should be obliged to report this to a central authority. This requires proportionality (and the central reporting system), of course. What's the actual point you're trying to make with regards to the thread.
This squabbling is pointless.
NicD said:
In a nutshell, medical professionals treating persons with conditions that give them the potential to harm themselves or others should be obliged to report this to a central authority. This requires proportionality (and the central reporting system), of course.
I don't think you'd have too many people disagree with that.I do go back to my previous point though about where you go once you've dealt with pilots or how you deal with it simply in terms of cost and logistics - I'm not suggesting you don't try because it's too hard, but there are a great many professions where someone having an episode could do a lot of harm.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said:NicD said:
In a nutshell, medical professionals treating persons with conditions that give them the potential to harm themselves or others should be obliged to report this to a central authority. This requires proportionality (and the central reporting system), of course.
I don't think you'd have too many people disagree with that.I do go back to my previous point though about where you go once you've dealt with pilots or how you deal with it simply in terms of cost and logistics - I'm not suggesting you don't try because it's too hard, but there are a great many professions where someone having an episode could do a lot of harm.
NicD said:
In a nutshell, medical professionals treating persons with conditions that give them the potential to harm themselves or others should be obliged to report this to a central authority. This requires proportionality (and the central reporting system), of course.
That sounds a bit vague, which conditions do you mean? If someone knows they will end up in this central reporting system, won't they just not seek treatment and make the whole problem worse? If you're looking at catching pilots with issues like our friend intent on murder suicide, would it not be better to include some kind of mental MOT as part of their annual medical. If they come off flying and then return due to successful treatment of mental illness you could always give them more regular medicals. As happens now with certain conditions.
el stovey said:
That sounds a bit vague, which conditions do you mean? If someone knows they will end up in this central reporting system, won't they just not seek treatment and make the whole problem worse?
If you're looking at catching pilots with issues like our friend intent on murder suicide, would it not be better to include some kind of mental MOT as part of their annual medical. If they come off flying and then return due to successful treatment of mental illness you could always give them more regular medicals. As happens now with certain conditions.
I was addressing only a small part of the spectrum, the part that seems easiest to fix. I was hoping that the people paid to look after such things would have joined it all up. Seems to needs catastrophes to focus the mind.If you're looking at catching pilots with issues like our friend intent on murder suicide, would it not be better to include some kind of mental MOT as part of their annual medical. If they come off flying and then return due to successful treatment of mental illness you could always give them more regular medicals. As happens now with certain conditions.
Dan_1981 said:
But imagine something does go horribly wrong on one of his flights?
It may very well be nothing to do with his condition, but you can probably guarantee that it would come to light..... you want him to end up as the scapegoat because he isn't being totally honest about his health?
This is still a valid point, and I suspect we shall never know ..... but suppose the aircraft electronics went wrong, it locked the door, cut power to many electronic circuits, started to descend, and the poor chap is alone in the cockpit frantically trying to sort it out, and can't open the door, or doesn't have time to do so ......... and ends up getting blamed for the crash.It may very well be nothing to do with his condition, but you can probably guarantee that it would come to light..... you want him to end up as the scapegoat because he isn't being totally honest about his health?
It's not hugely different to AF447, except for that there were 3 in the cockpit and we established the mistake one of them made.
M4cruiser said:
This is still a valid point, and I suspect we shall never know ..... but suppose the aircraft electronics went wrong, it locked the door, cut power to many electronic circuits, started to descend, and the poor chap is alone in the cockpit frantically trying to sort it out, and can't open the door, or doesn't have time to do so ......... and ends up getting blamed for the crash.
It's not hugely different to AF447, except for that there were 3 in the cockpit and we established the mistake one of them made.
Transponder was still broadcasting, and on the non-emergency frequency. ACARS was still working. He never said a word after the door was shut. Breathing didn't alter. The speed brakes were deployed (which can't be done without electrical power). the descent was under full control and remained on the correct heading. It's not hugely different to AF447, except for that there were 3 in the cockpit and we established the mistake one of them made.
the way the flight systems are designed makes it impossible for everything to go wrong at the same time, apart from the electrical systems we knew were still working. Added to that, the rudder and elevator trim on that A320 (it has been changed in newer ones AIUI) was still mechanical, so even in the event of a total (and I mean total) systems failure he would have still had the control authority to yaw the plane away from the mountains towards level ground or even one of the airports that was in range.
M4cruiser said:
This is still a valid point, and I suspect we shall never know ..... but suppose the aircraft electronics went wrong, it locked the door, cut power to many electronic circuits, started to descend, and the poor chap is alone in the cockpit frantically trying to sort it out, and can't open the door, or doesn't have time to do so ......... and ends up getting blamed for the crash.
It's not hugely different to AF447, except for that there were 3 in the cockpit and we established the mistake one of them made.
Door locks have mechanical override (flight deck side) and door has an escape panel.It's not hugely different to AF447, except for that there were 3 in the cockpit and we established the mistake one of them made.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff