View Single Post
Old 25th Mar 2015, 22:34
  #790 (permalink)  
DCP123
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: California
Posts: 11
Ruling out explosive decompression

The first place I saw any claim that the BEA had ruled out explosive decompression was in the Guardian. Germanwings crash investigators review cockpit recordings found on black box | World news | The Guardian

They reported that M. Jouty had "said the information investigators had put together suggested the plane had not exploded and did not suffer a “classic decompression situation”.” This is so different from all other accounts of M. Jouty's press conference that I initially thought they were reporting on a later press conference after someone listened to the relevant parts of the CVR. But this is a report of the same press conference in which nobody else reported any such statements.

Since then a couple of other sources have parroted the language of the Guardian's report. I do not speak French and have not watched any video of the press conference. But what I think has happened here is that a reporter for the Guardian has overestimated his or her ability to understand French and misquoted the head of the BEA.

As reported elsewhere, he said that the plane flew to the crash site intact and did not explode in midair. He
said they had no information about a blown windscreen (as described in some rumors), and that the BEA had just gotten a usable audiofile a few minutes before his conference. He said nothing about its content other than that voices and sounds could be heard on it. He also said nothing about anything that would give the BEA a basis to rule out explosive decompression.

So, I think explosive decompression (plus an inability of the pilots to obtain supplemental oxygen needed to retain consciousness) is still the best fit for a plane flying in a controlled descent with nobody in the cockpit responding to ATC or attempting to avoid terrain.
DCP123 is offline