If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Germanwings A320 on BCN-DUS flight crash near Nice, France
The old relativity argument. We shouldn't concern ourselves because there are statistically worse things to worry about. Well, let's just pretend this is an avaition safety discussion forum and focus on it anyway.
The age of the argument has no effect on the math. The problem of drunk and drowsy driving is many times worse than that of murder-suicide pilots. (Note the little dot)
Aaannnddd- I didn't say don't discuss it- instead I was offering a counter point to the implication that we had an major problem requiring huge overhauls.
Is that not discussion?
Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
(...)I can't imagine, being an airline pilot, if a doctor told me I was mentally unfit to fly, hiding the fact and climbing into a cockpit. Nor can I imagine not seeking help if I began experiencing anxiety, mental confusion or suicidal thoughts. I think the responsibility of conveying hundreds of lives would be etched into my psyche and the moral dilemma would overwhelm my own sense of career-preservation. It would be like showing up drunk and hoping nobody notices. Knowing on that instinctive level how much danger that poses to so many lives, I would have to take myself out of the game. (...)
You are talking about yourself here, but I can imagine that not everybody would share this kind of commitment (sad - and dangerous - as that may be). The fact that somebody who WAS unfit to fly actually DID hide that fact and DID climb into a cockpit seems to prove that.
The old relativity argument. We shouldn't concern ourselves because there are statistically worse things to worry about.
Well, yes and one I care about passionately.
An aeroplane is a doing a fundamentally dangerous activity. Shuttling a couple of hundred people in a thin tube at 500 mph in a lethal environment with no support if the engines should fail.
And people did die, a horrendous number if you scale up to modern aviation levels. We would have unacceptable levels if we hadn't cracked most of the technical reasons planes crash and have trained pilots within an inch of their lives to cope with the beyond technology issues.
The methodology we did that by forensic analysis of each major incident resulting in refining the technology, imposing and enforcing new procedures has largely worked.
The problem we know have here is essentially a non-aviation issue. Its about a suicider going about his business. It just happened to be in a plane rather than packing a submachine gun on a college campus. Yes we can do more to screen pilots as we have to screen passenger's luggage for bombs. Its something to be investigated forensically by properly qualified and experienced psychologists. Or even here.
My problem is the that every media outlet goes ape on this incident. People, many who appear to have their own personality issues, become instant experts on the subject. Yet they ignore, or the story displaces, much greater threats to their lives
If we applied even a fraction of the research and legislation in aviation to preventing car crashes, or 'accidental' shootings then we would be all be safer with or without Herr Lubitz.
And even people here should have an interest. We may fly but we probably spend even more time on the road and some of us fly to the US!
Aaannnddd- I didn't say don't discuss it- instead I was offering a counter point to the implication that we had an major problem requiring huge overhauls.
Is that not discussion?
We have a significant problem here requiring overhauls.
An aeroplane is a doing a fundamentally dangerous activity. Shuttling a couple of hundred people in a thin tube at 500 mph in a lethal environment with no support if the engines should fail.
And people did die, a horrendous number if you scale up to modern aviation levels. We would have unacceptable levels if we hadn't cracked most of the technical reasons planes crash and have trained pilots within an inch of their lives to cope with the beyond technology issues.
The methodology we did that by forensic analysis of each major incident resulting in refining the technology, imposing and enforcing new procedures has largely worked.
The problem we know have here is essentially a non-aviation issue. Its about a suicider going about his business. It just happened to be in a plane rather than packing a submachine gun on a college campus. Yes we can do more to screen pilots as we have to screen passenger's luggage for bombs. Its something to be investigated forensically by properly qualified and experienced psychologists. Or even here.
My problem is the that every media outlet goes ape on this incident. People, many who appear to have their own personality issues, become instant experts on the subject. Yet they ignore, or the story displaces, much greater threats to their lives
If we applied even a fraction of the research and legislation in aviation to preventing car crashes, or 'accidental' shootings then we would be all be safer with or without Herr Lubitz.
And even people here should have an interest. We may fly but we probably spend even more time on the road and some of us fly to the US!
"The problem we know have here is essentially a non-aviation issue" - WRONG !!!
Human factors DO INFLUENCE AVIATION A LOT !!!
From pilot´s misjudgment to pilot´s errors caused by diseases.
Aviation history is full of examples that human factors were the primary cause of accidents. That´s why we have a medical discipline called AEROSPACE MEDICINE that together with engineering were able to solve main problems that could lead to aviation accidents. That´s why people learn from accidents and current planes have, for instance, computers to compensate (or not allow) pilot´s errors when aviating. That´s why pilot´s screening/training/ licensing/renewing licenses processes involve, beyond technical aspects, some level of medical check. That´s why the aviation industry has today the best safety records.
If roads are less safe than skies, let us do something to improve roads´ safety records, fact that cannot influence the search for better skies safety records.
If the facts are correct, Flight 9525 shows exactly how human factors (from pilot´s screening/training/ licensing/renewing licenses processes) can cause an accident BY ITSELF, without any weather or technical problem additionally involved!!!
Although this tragedy was probably caused exclusively by a medical condition, everyone involved in civil aviation, from operators, FC members, Ground Crew members, manufacturers, etc, should be discussing if improvements are possible to avoid another similar situation (as the industry always does).
Again, at least 7 cases of suicidal pilot causing an accident with fatalities in the last 30 years (excluding MH 370 because we don´t have the exact cause). Average of 1 case each 4 years.
If this fact does not raise a warning flag from safety standards in civil aviation, let´s put it under the rug, continue our lives and be extremely surprised when the next accident caused by a suicidal person happens.
Human factors DO INFLUENCE AVIATION A LOT !!!
From pilot´s misjudgment to pilot´s errors caused by diseases.
Of course I'm with you on your first point.
However this pilot did not make an error. If he had they all might have been alive now.
The fault happened on the ground. After that it was just an accident waiting to happen. A FA in the captain's seat may have prevented it happening on that flight. but would it have stopped a suicidal person committing suicide in another place of his choosing with unknown consequences?
Which is saying we should only care about this case because it was in a plane and let it be swept under the rug if it had killed people somewhere else?
Our approach to crash avoidance is decidedly asymmetric. I don't want to divert energy away from air crash investigations. Quite the contrary. But if we think that serious enough then we should be ramping up on crashes and near crashes that are easier to diagnose, and if we are up for it, easier and cheaper to prevent. We could start by treating automobile safety a bit like aircraft safety.
And don't ignore people with depressive or rage issues (and their lifetime management) who are not on a plane. That can be too late. They may be killing more people.
Of course I'm with you on your first point.
However this pilot did not make an error. If he had they all might have been alive now.
The fault happened on the ground. After that it was just an accident waiting to happen. A FA in the captain's seat may have prevented it happening on that flight. but would it have stopped a suicidal person committing suicide in another place of his choosing with unknown consequences?
Which is saying we should only care about this case because it was in a plane and let it be swept under the rug if it had killed people somewhere else?
Our approach to crash avoidance is decidedly asymmetric. I don't want to divert energy away from air crash investigations. Quite the contrary. But if we think that serious enough then we should be ramping up on crashes and near crashes that are easier to diagnose, and if we are up for it, easier and cheaper to prevent. We could start by treating automobile safety a bit like aircraft safety.
And don't ignore people with depressive or rage issues (and their lifetime management) who are not on a plane. That can be too late. They may be killing more people.
Well, if you consider Flight 9525 a non-aviation isolated issue because the fault happened on the ground, I respect your opinion.
What can I say?
I agree with you. We have different approaches
If this is true then Paris Match magazine needs to be forced to reveal its source because someone seems to have stolen property from the crash site. Let's hope it's bollocks.
But if it IS true then I am sickened at the low levels some people will stoop to to make a buck.
Noise can be heard coming from a seat: the captain removes his seatbelt. The door is opened. The captain says to Lubitz: “You are in control now.”
Lubitz answers with a seemingly light tone of voice: “I hope so.”
Email sent by Germanwings co-pilot in 2009 revealed as Lufthansa confirms insurers have set aside $300m to cover costs
“In the interests of a fast and thorough investigation, Lufthansa has after further internal investigation, handed over additional documents to the Düsseldorf state prosecutor, particularly training documents and medical documents,” a statement said.
“These include the co-pilot’s email correspondence with the flying school. In these, he had informed the school in 2009 of a ‘past serious depressive episode’, in the context of a resumption of his training, including medical documents.”
Tragic.
AirDisaster.com Forum Member 2004-2008
Originally posted by orangehuggy
the most dangerous part of a flight is not the take off or landing anymore, its when a flight crew member goes to the toilet
there are several short video clips showing up in last hour on youtube against "germanwings" purporting to show last seconds. I'm very skeptical. altitude seems high, if I look at the horizon on the turbine I cannot tell if the phone spins or the AC spins....very skeptical here this video is legit.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Comment