Originally Posted by
A320ECAM
I'm sorry but what are AVHerald trying to insinuate with their latest article? It looks like a load of hogwash and I don't have the patience to try and read it..
Alright, so here is one father who says that he does not
refuse to believe that his son did this, but that he would like to be offered more convincing evidence. And then he goes on to present the building blocks for a story (he doesn't really spell it out like that) that the co-pilot just liked to play with the altitude selector whenever the captain was away, just so he could watch the associated marker move on the ND, but on the accident flight he was unfortunately knocked unconscious by turbulence during one of these exercises. And the captain was not prevented to return to the flight deck by someone flipping the door control switch to LOCK, but because one digit on the
keypad didn't work.
Btw., the reasoning offered for that specific last item is the one thing that makes the AVHerald article worth reading, more precisely the section titled "Keypad, normal and emergency entry".
But make no mistake, I have little doubt whether or not Lubitz did all this intentionally. From the BFU statement in the final report, appendix 3 (emphasis is mine):
This assessment of the capability to act combined with the factual information, that the co-pilot [...] has made enquiries concerning the function of the door system and suicides, according to documents available to BFU, resulted in the above-mentioned conclusion.