Originally Posted by
superflanker
My god, and all of this mess in order to save the money of paying a FO? Couldn't they just focus on saving money with other methods (or perhaps 1 or 2 less cabin crew instead of jeopardizing flight safety)?
There in lies the rub. It is easier to chase constant cost cutting than to draw a line where we treat people with respect and instead try to sell the airline or service on its merits.
On a separate note to address the article, the Germanwings incident is not a good reason to maintain two crew. That wasn't sufficient to overcome the threat. It also is not beneficial to look at a person model of fallibility, rather to consider the system model. The copilot was recruited with a known history of psychotic depressive episodes and prevented from taking medication to retain his medical certificate. Recruitment and continued oversight failed - a failure of the system. The system relies on self reporting, in this case by an individual who had impaired judgement and everything to lose - a failure of the system. Finally the medical practitioner consulted by the copilot prior to the accident had significant guidance on how they would breach a patients confidentiality rights, but very little guidance as to when it would be permissible to do so in the interest of public safety - again, a system failing.
System designers are human and will make errors and systems inherently contain error traps and latent errors. Human fallibility can cause errors also, but human variability can prevent incidents. I believe a combination of systems supporting humans, and humans backing up systems still presents the best layers of defence against threats.