Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Germanwings A320 on BCN-DUS flight crash near Nice, France

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Evan View Post
    Nonsense. AFAIK no actual full or partial CVR transcript has been leaked. Announcements based on what the CVR contains have been released to the public to avoid ill-informed speculation. You avoid ill-informed speculation by informing people. Waiting for a full investigation before releasing that information would result in widespread ill-informed speculation. And the public has a right to know what threats exist as soon as they can be reasonably determined. The IFALPA statement smacks of control and concealment typical of a walled-off organization that abhors transparency.
    Do you really believe that ? It's the prosecution authority's job to silence ill-informed speculation about - what actually? Is it the ministry of justice's job to stop scarebus speculations in internet forums? That would shed a very bad light on division of powers in France. BEA's independence has been questioned before, but this story is - more than unprofessional I dare say.

    The investigation authority themselves have not even given a single comment! The FDR has not even been recovered. Along comes this prosecutor and says "voluntary action looks like the most probable cause", and voilá - we have a witch-hunt on the co-pilot. He's dead anyway and cannot respond.

    How do I compare this to the silence of the dutch prosecutors with respect to MH17? There's a hell of a lot of ill-informed or even malicious speculation in that case, I'm sure you are well aware. Does that mean the dutch prosecution authority have absolutely no clue from the recorders? Or are they just slightly more professional and hold back until they have at least learned all the facts?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by mfeldt View Post
      Do you really believe that ? It's the prosecution authority's job to silence ill-informed speculation about - what actually? Is it the ministry of justice's job to stop scarebus speculations in internet forums?
      It is the investigation's moral responsibility to use good judgment and release known information when ill-informed speculation could be very damaging, in this case to both Airbus and certain cultural and ethnic minorities living in France and Germany. That is where the witch-hunts get started.

      You obviously don't completely understand the technical aspects involved in their findings based on the CVR, but they have every reason to be confident about their current assessment of rogue pilot intervention. Nobody in the prosecution or investigation has claimed that it is a certainty, but it is a near-certainty, as is the assessment that the A320 did not suffer a technical failure.

      The IFALPA is speaking from an anachronistic and bureaucratic point-of-view. In the past, before technical data on aviation was easily available and before aviation fora provided an alternate source of public information, people outside of the industry really had little understanding of these events. Today, however, many non-professionals have a very deep understanding and can extrapolate from the evidence certain fairly self-evident conclusions well before the investigation has published its report. The IFALPA needs to accept that the world we live in today will not wait in ignorance for a three-month investigation to run its course when immediate evidence can provide obvious findings. The benefit, in this case, is that it provided the public pressure needed to immediately change certain operator policies regarding the 2-person cockpit rule.

      How do I compare this to the silence of the dutch prosecutors with respect to MH17? There's a hell of a lot of ill-informed or even malicious speculation in that case, I'm sure you are well aware. Does that mean the dutch prosecution authority have absolutely no clue from the recorders? Or are they just slightly more professional and hold back until they have at least learned all the facts?
      MH-17 was taken down by a SAM. We all know that. Nobody needs to hear the CVR and, out of respect, nobody outside of the investigation ever should. You are confusing ill-informed speculation with hair-brained conspiracy theory. You will always have the latter, but the mainstream press will tend to be smart enough to ignore it.

      Comment


      • The next obvious question is: was the F/O on any medications? There is a lot of evidence to support a correlation between SSRI's and suicidal impulses. The mind is not the dependable Rock of Gibralter we like to think it is, especially when phamaceuticals are involved. Personality changes can be profound and yet very hard to detect...

        Comment


        • Bild reporting a history of depression and other psychiatric trouble.

          The pilot who appears to have deliberately crashed a plane carrying 149 others into the French Alps received psychiatric treatment for a "serious depressive episode" six years ago, German tabloid Bild reported on Friday. Prosecutors in France, after listening to the cockpit voice recorders, offered no motive for why Andreas Lubitz, 27, would take the controls of the Airbus A320, lock the captain out of the cockpit and deliberately set it veering down from cruising altitude at 3,000 feet per minute. Citing internal documents and Lufthansa sources, Bild said Lubitz spent a total of one and a half years in psychiatric treatment and that the relevant documents would be passed to French investigators once they had been examined by German authorities. Lufthansa Chief Executive Carsten Spohr told a news conference on Thursday that Lubitz had taken a break during his training six years ago, but did not explain why and said he had passed all tests to be fit to fly.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Evan View Post
            It is the investigation's moral responsibility to use good judgment and release known information when ill-informed speculation could be very damaging, in this case to both Airbus and certain cultural and ethnic minorities living in France and Germany. That is where the witch-hunts get started.

            You obviously don't completely understand the technical aspects involved in their findings based on the CVR, but they have every reason to be confident about their current assessment of rogue pilot intervention. Nobody in the prosecution or investigation has claimed that it is a certainty, but it is a near-certainty, as is the assessment that the A320 did not suffer a technical failure.
            Sorry, I cannot agree here. I don't see how it could have been damaging to wait with any public statement until the picture is more complete. Obviously, the investigation body has chosen to wait, the prosecutor has not.

            The IFALPA is speaking from an anachronistic and bureaucratic point-of-view. In the past, before technical data on aviation was easily available and before aviation fora provided an alternate source of public information, people outside of the industry really had little understanding of these events. Today, however, many non-professionals have a very deep understanding and can extrapolate from the evidence certain fairly self-evident conclusions well before the investigation has published its report. The IFALPA needs to accept that the world we live in today will not wait in ignorance for a three-month investigation to run its course when immediate evidence can provide obvious findings.
            Sorry - again: Even in cases of blatantly obvious murders, prosecution does usually not throw the name of the prime suspect into public for having their families and relatives torn to pieces by mass media. IF that is really necessary, it should be very well founded and all doubts excluded. If you believe this is the case - fine. I don't - not from what I heard from Brice.



            The benefit, in this case, is that it provided the public pressure needed to immediately change certain operator policies regarding the 2-person cockpit rule.
            It seems to be a matter of debate whether that is really beneficial. From a run of potential jihadists on cabin crew jobs (hoping to be assigned to the cockpit one day...) to fist fights with suicidal pilots on the flight deck side-effects may occur (as always).

            MH-17 was taken down by a SAM. We all know that. Nobody needs to hear the CVR and, out of respect, nobody outside of the investigation ever should. You are confusing ill-informed speculation with hair-brained conspiracy theory. You will always have the latter, but the mainstream press will tend to be smart enough to ignore it.
            There's a a not so small part of the world that will not agree. Their top military held a press conference presenting ridiculous claims. Their propaganda is convincing a lot of people - you mentioned PEGIDA: We have those idiots not just claiming to defend European-Christian traditions, they also carry signs "Putin, help us"!

            Why should all this not be encountered with a few well-known facts, if they exist? You think it's less important than protecting the EADS shareholder value? Or even more important than not having flight staff alone in the cockpit? Maybe it's not necessary to hear the CVR, but there must be a first hit recorded of whatever hit that aircraft. Possibly it has been localized - why not make these information public?

            And for the witch-hunt: Unavoidably the first speculations are now around of Lubitz having converted to Islam. So much for the protection of cultural minorities.

            Conspiracy theories will always exist, you can never avoid these. But you can actually promote them by presenting quick conclusions based on evidence that does not comprehensibly support them! Just saying ,,Don't worry, we know more than what we say and we're certain we're right" is clearly not enough in the modern world.

            Comment


            • Alps crash co-pilot Andreas Lubitz hid the details of an existing illness from his employers, German prosecutors say.
              They said they found torn-up sick notes in his homes, including one covering the day of the crash.
              In their report, Duesseldorf prosecutors did not say what illness Mr Lubitz had.
              But German media have said aviation authority documents suggested he suffered depression and required ongoing assessment.
              Prosecutors said there was no evidence of a political or religious motive to his actions, and no suicide note was found.
              ...
              In their statement, prosecutors said they seized medical documents from the Mr Lubitz's two residences which indicated "an existing illness and appropriate medical treatment".
              But "the fact that, among the documents found, there were sick notes - torn-up, current and for the day of the crash - leads to the provisional assessment that the deceased was hiding his illness from his employer", the report states.
              Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32087203

              Very sad, but sounds like it was some sort of unplanned episode, and that he'd presumably stopped taking medicine, or his illness had worsened to the point where his treatment was not taking effect.

              Comment


              • How is it possible that the captain did not noticed that something was going wrong ?
                Why according to media, he made the arrival briefing so early, like if he as the desire to finish this flight service as soon as possible.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Rapha477 View Post
                  How is it possible that the captain did not noticed that something was going wrong ?
                  Why should he have? A long line of people did not notice over many years. Some of these had the job and expertise to try and spot any psychological problem. The guy was obviously very good at covering up any issue of this sort. He had a very strong incentive since his career and dreams depended on it.

                  Hindsight is no help beforehand.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by mfeldt View Post
                    Sorry, I cannot agree here. I don't see how it could have been damaging to wait with any public statement until the picture is more complete.
                    mfeldt, the picture is more complete than you realize. Not only does the CVR record the voices of the pilots, it also records the 'voices' of the cockpit. The aircraft also speaks a language. If a decompression had occurred, the aircraft would have 'spoken up' on the CVR (as it did in Helios 522). Therefore, decompression can be ruled out. If the autopilot had disconnected (as it would have if the sidestick had been moved accidentally by an incapacitated pilot) the aircraft would have 'spoken up'. It didn't, therefore the descent was done on autopilot and the F/O would have had to initate that on the FCU. Also the transponder indicated that an altitude command of 100' was received by the FMGS. That confirms consciousness and intent (though not necessarily clear-headed intent). The CPT could have unlocked the door unless it had been overridden by the F/O (consciousness, intent) unless the CPT did not have the code or the door malfunctioned, however in those scenarios the F/O could clearly hear the CPT's request to unlock the door. He did nothing and did not respond. Same goes for ATC. The aircraft also speaks though ACARS data showing the aircraft's AIDS system reports and ECAM messages. The plane has spoken. The picture is largely there. Not 100% of course, but probably 99%.

                    All evidence indicates that the aircraft was placed intentionally into an open descent by the F/O.

                    In light of that evidence, the prosecution changed it's focus from involuntary manslaughter to voluntary manslaughter. They provided the public with the reasons why this was done. Not the actual evidence but a summarization of what that evidence revealed and the crime it strongly suggested. The BEA has not refuted any of that summarization.

                    The investigation will now try to determine if these findings are incorrect or misinterpreted, as it should, but in the immediate aftermath we must take actions based on the very high probability that they are correct.

                    Sorry - again: Even in cases of blatantly obvious murders, prosecution does usually not throw the name of the prime suspect into public for having their families and relatives torn to pieces by mass media. IF that is really necessary, it should be very well founded and all doubts excluded. If you believe this is the case - fine. I don't - not from what I heard from Brice.
                    In the case of blatantly obvious murders, an arrest is made and the name of the accused is made public shortly thereafter. But I'm curious to know what you believe, how it stacks up against my list of known FACTS posted earlier and who is Brice??

                    There's a a not so small part of the world that will not agree. Their top military held a press conference presenting ridiculous claims. Their propaganda is convincing a lot of people - you mentioned PEGIDA: We have those idiots not just claiming to defend European-Christian traditions, they also carry signs "Putin, help us"!
                    You lost me. If you are referring to Russians, they are under a shroud of disinformation. We know what hit MH-17. We've all seen the evidence. We don't need the CVR or the FDR to respond to it.

                    Conspiracy theories will always exist, you can never avoid these. But you can actually promote them by presenting quick conclusions based on evidence that does not comprehensibly support them!
                    As I've said, conspiracy theories are the domain of nutjobs and rarely influence the media. I'm speaking about mainstream media speculation that can cause damage to innocent lives, such as airline employees, Airbus employees and people of certain cultures and ethnicities. Releasing factual information is the best way to avoid such speculation. We know the pilot wasn't Turkish or Arabic (sorry PEGIDA) and we know the aircraft isn't harboring some dangerous hidden threat that could erode public confidence, ground entire fleets and result in lost jobs. Capiche?

                    Comment


                    • Der Spiegel, reporting from a Talkshow in german TV yesterday (sorry, in German and (slightly improved) google-translated only):


                      Markus Wahl von der Pilotenvereinigung Cockpit war es, der gleich Frau Illners Eingangsstatement mit der Gegenfrage konterte, ob denn das Bild, das jetzt vom Hergang der Katastrophe gezeichnet werde, überhaupt schon komplett sei. Man solle doch bitte erst einmal die weiteren Untersuchungen abwarten. Es gebe auch ganz andere Erklärungsmöglichkeiten.
                      Deutlicher wurde Ex-Minister Ramsauer. Es sei doch gar nicht gesagt, dass die Darstellung des französischen Staatsanwalts vom erweiterten Suizid des Co-Piloten tatsächlich zutreffe. Wenn ein Staatsanwalt etwas behaupte, müsse das schließlich keineswegs stimmen. Oft genug fielen die Urteile später anders aus. Und ausgesprochen kritisch und mit unverhohlener Skepsis äußerte sich Fachjournalist Spaeth.
                      Will Frankreich Airbus schützen?
                      Es sei doch sehr verwunderlich, dass der Staatsanwalt so rasch zu derart weitreichenden Schlussfolgerungen gelangt sei - und das allein anhand einer ersten Auswertung der Stimmenaufzeichnung. Klarheit über das, was sich während des Todesflugs abgespielt habe, könne schlichtweg noch gar nicht vorhanden sein. Andernfalls, so Spaeth leicht sarkastisch, bräuchte man nach der viel wichtigeren Datenbox ja gar nicht mehr zu suchen.


                      Im Übrigen habe es in der Vergangenheit einige Beispiele gegeben, wie französische Behörden sich sehr bemüht hätten, Schaden vom Ruf des Airbus fernzuhalten. Damit wolle er aber nun nicht unterstellen, dass entsprechende Beweggründe auch diesmal bei der Präsentation der Selbstmordtheorie im Spiel seien.
                      It was MarkusWahl of the pilots' union Cockpit who encounterd Mrs. Illner's opening statement by asking whether the image now drawnof the course of the disaster, was at all already complete. You should not hesitate to wait and see further investigations. There could also be quite different explanations.

                      Mor explicit became ex-Minister Ramsauer. It is still not told that the representation of the French prosecutor from the extended suicide of the co-pilot is actually incorrect. Something does not become true just because a prosecutor tells it. Often enough, the verdicts were later different. And very critically and with undisguised skepticism expressed journalist Spaeth.

                      France wants to protect Airbus?

                      It is nevertheless very surprising that the prosecutor had so quickly come to such far-reaching conclusions - and solely on the basis of a preliminary evaluation of the vote recording. Clarity about what had happened during the death flight, simply could not yet be available. Otherwise, added Spaeth slightly sarcastic, you would not need to even look for the much more important data box.

                      In addition, there have been in the past few examples of how French authorities have gone to great lengths to keep damage from the reputation of the Airbus. Of course, he didn't want to propose that such motivations are once again underlying the presentation of the suicide theory in the game now.

                      Comment


                      • I am not a lawyer but reading Annex 13 form ICAO Investigation guidelines:

                        5.4.1- Recommendation: Any judicial or administrative proceedings to apportion blame or liability should be separate from any investigation and conducted under the provision of this Annex.

                        It seems to be the case here – BEA is in charge of “ICAO-recommended” technical investigation, responsible for the clarifying the events that caused the accident/incident and recommending future actions to improve safety and the French Justice is in charge of clarifying eventual criminal responsibility. According to today´s news, German Justice is also investigating the case: http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ry?id=29946898
                        We may dispute how independent Agencies are or if in such early stages of the technical investigation it is appropriate to start a criminal investigation in parallel but it seems to be clear that from the guidelines, there is nothing wrong here.

                        Non disclosure of records
                        5.12
                        The State conducting the investigation of an accident or incident shall not make the following records available for purposes other than accident or incident investigation, unless the appropriate authority for the administration of justice in that State determines that their disclosure outweighs the adverse domestic and international impact such action may have on that or any future investigations:
                        a) all statements taken from persons by the investigation authorities in the course of their investigation;
                        b) all communications between persons having been involved in the operation of the aircraft;
                        c) medical or private information regarding persons involved in the accident or incident;
                        d) cockpit voice recordings and transcripts from such recordings; and
                        e) opinions expressed in the analysis of information, including flight recorder information.

                        Again, we may dispute if this disclosure is premature but it is in accordance to Annex 13

                        Comment


                        • France wants to protect Airbus?
                          Which... simply ignores the known facts... und es ist Der Speigel... wait, where is that thing... ah yes...

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                            mfeldt, the picture is more complete than you realize. Not only does the CVR record the voices of the pilots, it also records the 'voices' of the cockpit. The aircraft also speaks a language. If a decompression had occured, the aircraft would have 'spoken up' on the CVR (as it did in Helios 522). Therefore, decompression can be ruled out. If the autopilot had disconnected (as it would have if the sidestick had been moved accidentally by an incapacitated pilot) the aircraft eould have 'spoken up'. It didn't, therefore the descent was done on autopilot and the F/O would have had to initate that on the FCU. Also the transponder indicated that an altitude command of 100' was received by the FMGS. That confirms consciousness and intent (though not necessarily clear-headed intent). The CPT could have unlocked the door unless it had been overridden by the F/O (consciousness, intent) unless the CPT did not have the code or the door malfunctioned, however in those scenarios the F/O could clearly hear the CPT's request to unlock the door. He did nothing and did not respond. Same goes for ATC. The aircraft also speaks though ACARS data showing the aircraft's AIDS system reports and ECAM messages. The plane has spoken. The picture is largely there. Not 100% of course, but probably 99%.
                            I do not doubt that, I also do not doubt that alternative explanations are more unlikely - but they do exist, and they should be ruled out bfore such a fundamental accusation is made public.

                            The aircraft was placed intentionally into an open descent by the F/O.
                            Taht, at least seems to be certain. But one could guess about the motivation.

                            In the case of blatantly obvious murders, an arrest is made and the name of the accused is made public shortly thereafter. But I'm curious to know what you believe, how it stacks up against my list of known FACTS posted earlier and who is Brice??
                            Brice is the first name of that prosecutor. Arrests are made only, if you can catch the person.

                            As to the facts - we'll I've outlined a scenario similar to the "de-icing spray accident" in 2010 (see link somewhere above), or the one summarized by Peter a few posts back. I don't think it contradicts any of the known facts. but if you want, we can go step by step...

                            You lost me. If you are referring to Russians, they are under a shroud of disinformation. We know what hit MH-17. We've all seen the evidence. We don't need the CVR or the FDR to respond to it.
                            It's not just the Russians. I cannot fully judge the situation in Britain, but here we have a lot of trouble with people actually attacking the mainstream media, accusing them of lies and even warmongering against the Russians. PEGIDA guys are not the only ones shouting "Lügenpresse". And it's no longer small minority. As said above - conspiracy theorists are about to become main stream themselves again. And the silence of the Dutch regarding MH17 is actually seen as evidence that it was all a Ukranian trap and cover-up.


                            we know the aircraft isn't harboring some dangerous hidden threat that could erode public confidence, ground entire fleets and result in lost jobs. Capiche?
                            Actually not. We will know this, once the FDR confirmed it. For now we can only assume it.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                              Which... simply ignores the known facts... und es ist Der Speigel... wait, where is that thing... ah yes...

                              Wait, it's not the newspaper that is inventing the citations. Those were made on TV.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Evan (paraphrased)
                                We need better pilot screening.
                                Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
                                why don't we start by having you open your wallet?
                                Indeed...

                                Evan is right, we do need a magical mind-reading machine, that operates real-time in the cockpit, because you never know when someone is going to lose it...this is two known crashes of this sort and with MH also being a prime suspect.

                                It's not enough to screen folks- you do indeed have to continuously screen them. And then the screening is a horrendous gray area- folks can learn what the right answers are, folks who do not pose a threat get excluded (and then I think we have a new area for you and your lawyer friends to file suit).

                                I'd very much like the airlines to run pilots through a nut-job filter...but 1) I don't really think there is one and 2) I think you are right that we can sure as hell throw money at the problem.

                                The only "solution" that I am seeing is possibly a third crew-member (and thinking back to the 1980's when the flight engineer was being phased out). Of course, there's a 50% increase in the chance that someone's going to go nuts and do something bad.
                                Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X