Germanwings A320 crashed in France :(

[anonymous-user]

Hainey said:

el stovey said:

Hainey said:

Back to the 'hostie in the flight deck would prevent it point.' Well, say your in clag. No vis. Or it's night and hardly any visual clues. Would they notice if you bugged for a gradual descent? No, and they wouldn't worry if they did. It's a level change, yeah? Buy the time they did, too late..

JuniorD was pointing out to you that a hostile might break the suicidal behaviour simply by her presence. His example is that the bloke waited until the captain had left. As he pointed out, perhaps having another person there (who can't do anything) might modify the behaviour of someone.

Perhaps, but you and I know we'll never know that answer so it's subjective at best. I have known people with mental illness and the unpredictability of it when left untreated is horrifying to see. You use the word 'might' in your post, and I actually agree with your point, the one I'm making is nothing is foolproof and clever people find a way. I think this guy may have been one of those who would.

He had an easy route to his goal so he took it. Maybe he would have managed to complete a more difficult option as well

I'm pointing out that JuniorD was saying a hostile might moderate someones behaviour as you were saying she wouldn't be any use as the F/O could descend gradually. You were disputing a point he didn't actually make.

[Hainey]

el stovey said:

Hainey said:

el stovey said:

Hainey said:

Back to the 'hostie in the flight deck would prevent it point.' Well, say your in clag. No vis. Or it's night and hardly any visual clues. Would they notice if you bugged for a gradual descent? No, and they wouldn't worry if they did. It's a level change, yeah? Buy the time they did, too late..

JuniorD was pointing out to you that a hostile might break the suicidal behaviour simply by her presence. His example is that the bloke waited until the captain had left. As he pointed out, perhaps having another person there (who can't do anything) might modify the behaviour of someone.

Perhaps, but you and I know we'll never know that answer so it's subjective at best. I have known people with mental illness and the unpredictability of it when left untreated is horrifying to see. You use the word 'might' in your post, and I actually agree with your point, the one I'm making is nothing is foolproof and clever people find a way. I think this guy may have been one of those who would.

He had an easy route to his goal so he took it. Maybe he would have managed to complete a more difficult option as well

I'm pointing out that JuniorD was saying a hostile might moderate someones behaviour as you were saying she wouldn't be any use as the F/O could descend gradually. You were disputing a point he didn't actually make.

Then I apologise unreservedly if I answered a point unnecessarily.

[Richie200]

Most airlines already have a policy in place to cover the '2 in Flt deck at all times'. The airline I currently work for ensure a CC member is in the flight deck before the pilot is allowed to go to the toilet. I'm guessing this is the same for most airlines.

[anonymous-user]

JuniorD said:

But, if he required to be alone before he could do it, then breaking that chain with someone up there would have interrupted the plan.

I remember reading about a supermarket that had experienced lots of theft, they decided to put life-sized cardboard cutouts of policemen on the end of each aisle and it was enough to make shoplifters think twice and moderate their behaviour.

I think this is the kind of phenomenon where the presence ( or even the perceived presence) of someone else might reduce the chance of people doing this. As pointed out by others, the suicidal pilot often waits until the other pilot leaves, even suicidal people want the path of least resistance. That's not because they can't physically do it when the other pilot is in there, they opt to do it when they are alone.

Most suicides appear to involve someone being alone and topping themselves, perhaps the presence of another is enough to sometimes break the cycle. Perhaps people are simply much less likely to kill themselves when someone else is there watching.

For that possible reason and the reasons of passenger comfort, I think it's worth having a 2 crew in the flight deck policy but it doesn't physically make it less likely someone can crash the aircraft.

Edited by el stovey on Thursday 2nd April 13:40

[Maxf]

el stovey said:

For that possible reason and the reasons of passenger comfort, I think it's worth having a 2 crew in the flight deck policy but it doesn't physically make it less likely someone can crash the aircraft.

I agree. The presence of another party on the flight deck may help to prevent the mind of a suicidal pilot being in 'that place'. If a simple, effectively free, change in operating policies (calling a flight attendant when a pilot needs a break) can give a few % reduction in the liklihood of this hapening again, then I applaud it.

[bitchstewie]

The thing is I think it happens so infrequently that statistically you could probably stick a small cat in the jumpseat for company and come out "proving" it made a difference.

Don't get me wrong it seems sensible by any measure, but I don't think it's something you could ever demonstrate to work other than some kind of Daily Mail "Retired aircraft pilot confessions" headline.

Incidentally what about light aircraft? Fly one of those into a town centre and it will be a bad day - not trying to be a smartarse just keep coming back to the fact that there is no failsafe way here it's all just stuff that may help but won't always.

[Dan_1981]

2nd recorder has been found. (BBC)

[KTF]

Dan_1981 said:

2nd recorder has been found. (BBC)

Now it will get interesting.

[anonymous-user]

bhstewie said:

The thing is I think it happens so infrequently that statistically you could probably stick a small cat in the jumpseat for company and come out "proving" it made a difference.

I think it would make a difference. Like having a hostile there, just being watched, might be enough to moderate your behaviour.

[TheJimi]

Really good article here by Alistair Campbell - http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/6961386

Read it on the train home last night and was practically thumping the table in agreement.

Edited by TheJimi on Thursday 2nd April 15:56

[KTF]

TheJimi said:

Really good article here by Alistair Campbell - http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/6961386

I would really love it if the FDR revealed something totally unexpected and it wasnt the First Officer after all.

Not that the Mail et al would change their tune nor issue an apology mind.

Edited by KTF on Thursday 2nd April 15:56

[anonymous-user]

I was surprised how soon the French released the statement about the F/O. Since it was based on the assumption that he directed the descent and the door was deadlocked. They said they could hear him breathing which seems odd over the air conditioning in the flightdeck.

I think that there is now enough information to suggest they were right though.

[KTF]

el stovey said:

I think that there is now enough information to suggest they were right though.

Yes, sadly I think it may well have been a deliberate act.

Do you know if the FDR would record attempts to enter the PIN on the cockpit door, door access switch set to locked, etc?

[Cobalt Blue]

[quote]I think that there is now enough information to suggest they were right though.
[/quote]

Spiegel are now quoting the German Prosecutor (and not just the tabloid Bild) as saying that Lubitz searched the web for suicide methods and cockpit door locking in the days before the crash.

But why would he need to look up cockpit door locking? Surely, that would have formed part of his training?

[Thankyou4calling]

With any business there has to be a degree of trust whether that be a doctor, Pilot, builder or checkout cashier.

The incident is so rare that you can't legislate for it having happened or that it won't happen again.

if somebody wants to, they will i think.

If there was a rule that two must be in the cockpit then lubitz would have contrived something or knocked the other guy out to allow his act to ensue.

By changing rules you will only make the evil person think of a way round them i feel.

[JuniorD]

el stovey said:

I was surprised how soon the French released the statement about the F/O. Since it was based on the assumption that he directed the descent and the door was deadlocked. They said they could hear him breathing which seems odd over the air conditioning in the flightdeck.

I think that there is now enough information to suggest they were right though.

Did I read somewhere that they heard him breathing through the oxygen mask which he put on?

What surprises me is the drip feed of leaked info. Unless of course this is leaked with approval.

[Starfighter]

el stovey said:

I'm pointing out that JuniorD was saying a hostile might moderate someones behaviour as you were saying she wouldn't be any use as the F/O could descend gradually. You were disputing a point he didn't actually make.

Help him relax, perhaps...?

[Oakey]

Cobalt Blue said:

Spiegel are now quoting the German Prosecutor (and not just the tabloid Bild) as saying that Lubitz searched the web for suicide methods and cockpit door locking in the days before the crash.

But why would he need to look up cockpit door locking? Surely, that would have formed part of his training?

It's possible he wanted to be completely sure the door couldn't be opened? He may understand how it works but that doesn't necessarily mean he knows every technical detail?

[croyde]

I'm no expert but someone trying to kill themselves probably wouldn't want to have to disable/kill, as has been suggested a few times, someone else in order to do what they are going to do.

[dudleybloke]

Fit the pilots seats with commodes.