Airbus A320 crashed in Southern France

[DozyWannabe]

I stand by my observation that his failure to listen to the cockpit recording is very striking.

The BEA is an organisation of many people, including specialists in flight recorder data recovery and interpretation - there's no need for the head of the organisation to personally involve themselves in that kind of work.

[MrSnuggles]

ECAM_ACTIONS

Thankyou for providing the parts about pressurisation. I didn't really catch that. I did hear him talk about the flight path though, and due to helpful people here on Pprune understood that he wouldn't comment on the question on what was heard on the CVR during the descent period before the crash.

[bsieker]

The FR24 flight path then suggests the aircraft levelled off c 3000 feet above the local terrain and then a minute later .... when the 350 knot aircraft intersected the rapidly rising terrain.

No, that additional minute is almost certainly an extrapolation artifact to hide temporary loss of realtime data and provide smooth animation of the little airplanes symbols on the FR24 website. If you download the raw data, it ends in a descent and there is no levelling off.

[fizz57]

And if my understanding is correct and they listened to the recording under the best conditions available, why was the boss not interested in listening in to such a crucial piece of evidence at the earliest possible opportunity? As has already been described, there is a lot of work to be done between "listening" to a recording and issuing an annotated transcript. At the very least, timelines have to be established, unclear and noisy words deciphered, and decisions taken on what to omit out of respect for the dead and their relatives.

Knowing that he was going to face the press, I personally am certain that "the boss" did not listen to the recording, and deliberately so. I am equally personally certain that he has a pretty good idea of the contents, and that these will be released when the job is complete.

[2Planks]

And is the language in cockpit one that the BEA head would understand? In an emergency situation would you revert to your language of birth, aviation English or a mixture. Surely as a professional investigator he would wait for a native speaker to interpret the language used and its idiosyncrasies.
IIRC with the Spanair Madrid accident - it took quite a while to come up with an accurate translation - despite much rubbish being talked on here when an audio file was released.

[NigelOnDraft]

If you are right about the need to listen elsewhere in optimum conditions, why did these operatives handle such a delicate and central component of the investigation in less than optimum conditions?

And if my understanding is correct and they listened to the recording under the best conditions available, why was the boss not interested in listening in to such a crucial piece of evidence at the earliest possible opportunity? Because it is a serial process:
Receive and document the CVR condition
Determine how to dismantle the CVR given it's condition
Technically treat the CVR innards with the highest level of care, and with minimum risk, attempt to extract data
In the event you get data, preserve and document that data (backups, file characteristics)
Using a copy of the data, check it is readable / valid data i.e. not blank or corrupt
Preliminary assessment of the data - timings, matching to other data, clear / easy to interpret output
Process of establishing formal transcript
The above is a guess, but I got the impression we are somewhere about 3 from the bottom. When we get second from bottom, there will be political and commercial implications of releasing the info.

Much as we on pPrune might like some "hot info", we have no right to it, and the BEA will not be concerned about our wishes. Their priority is not to establish what happened (that comes later), but if there are immediate safety implications for other aircraft?

[MrSnuggles]

I understand all precautions and different interpretations that you must go through to decipher a CVR.

What I do not understand is why the question if anything was heard from the CVR during the descent was dodged. The answer to that would be at least some sort of clue. Was there voices - yes? - no?

[Denti]

And is the language in cockpit one that the BEA head would understand? In an emergency situation would you revert to your language of birth, aviation English or a mixture. Surely as a professional investigator he would wait for a native speaker to interpret the language used and its idiosyncrasies.

The german BFU has three investigators in france to take part in the investigation. I guess one pretty big part will be the voice recordings. I guess the official flightdeck languages at lufthansa are german and english, with all the checklist and procedures in english, the more relaxed personal talk in german. At least that is how the german competitor handles it. ATC of course is always in english.

[SoaringXc]

I have experience in pressurizing and depressurizing transport aircraft on the ground (done for the purpose of locating structural defects). We would pressurize to about 20% over normal in-flight differential pressure using two large road works compressors.

For safety we devised several means of depressurizing rapidly. Our main method used a purpose built valve installed into a modified over-wing exit door, while our backup was through the toilet cleaning valves. Typical times for reducing from maximum in-flight differential pressure to sea level were on the order of 30 seconds for a 707 size aircraft.

During the development process the owner once had several technicians inside the aircraft. They reported that the depressurization process was a “wild ride”, in which they could not see or hear anything. It was so disorienting that they were unable to concentrate on their duties. And this was done at about 20C, not at -40C.

If D-AIPX experienced such a rapid depressurization at FL380, I can easily understand why the pilots might not have been able to put on their O2 masks before they lost consciousness!

[Rananim]

Folks, as former check airman on the 747-400, as SOP I would command a "simulated" RD in cruise to the crew who I was giving an IOE or check ride to.

Results would blow your mind ---- most "effed up" big time. So, I would leave the cockpit, tell them to bone up on procedures, and I'll be baaaack and run the exercise again.

Some didn't even know how to do a rapid RD properly, some couldn't even get the mask out of holder, some hadn't ever experience this exercise before, some did not know how to preflight the system, some didn't know where the sanitary wipes were, some didn't know how to re-install the mask after use.

It's your life and your pax lives ---- get smart and make the time to do it right.
John Galt

This was posted yesterday and subsequently ridiculed by at least one.Yet they are very wise words and may well be pertinent.It is difficult to get right and the simulator can not reproduce the physiological effects of a decompression.No civilian pilot has seen the inside of a decompression chamber.Many pilots may only know the sequence of the drill and not fully understand what it entails in real life(explosive=ear/lung/cavity trauma).
The subtle failure to pressurize has been discounted due ECAM warnings and I am sure that well-trained Lufthansa pilots can cope with rapid depressurization(valve/pack failure) but what about explosive?Not so easy.

The drill should be memorized and repeatedly performed so it can be done with a blindfold.Self protection should be achieved within 5 seconds(glasses/headsets can be obstacles).Establishing comms(vital because its a coordinated drill)can be tricky and the traps explained and trained until right(SPKR vol,is there a boom/mask switchover).Familiarity with the mask and its operation is so important;the pre-flight test and what to watch for,the NORM/100 and when to use each,how to select/de-select EMRG with mask on(must be practiced repeatedly),how to ensure the door is closed after drill to enable normal comms etc.Many operators are woefully deficient in their focus on such a vital drill and instead choose to focus on SOPs which have never saved anyones life.Airmanship first.Always.

[costalpilot]

i expected on every check ride I took in 30 years, after I got off the fire breathing Martin 404, that an emergency descent would be given.

The first thing I did at the beginning of my flow on a line trip was to check the emergency oxygen system by putting the mask on and taking a big gulp.

I was not alone. This was standard at the three airlines I flew for.

[Pace]

There maybe clues in the fact that the rapid descent started not long after reaching the TOC at FL380.

Most crew won't leave their positions until the aircraft is established in the cruise being occupied in the procedures and monitoring during the climb.

I know in the small corporate jet I fly one of us doesn't leave our seats to go back and attend the PAX requirements until we have levelled.

Had one pilot gone back to the toilets the other pilot should have donned an oxygen mask so with no audible voice interaction between the crew might indicate that there was one pilot up front during the depressurisation.

I do not buy the suicide theory on the basis that had the aircraft not been depressurised then the other crew member would have gained access back into the cockpit.

So reaching cruise level could indicate more than the most likely point for a depressurisation. One pilot would also explain the lack of any call to ATC as one pilot would have their hands full! ATC being the last thing on the list

[GlobalNav]

Hypoxia for pilots and for passengers.

Time of useful consciousness is only an immediate issue for the flight crew member, especially the pilot.

Exceeding that time without adequate O2 pressure is not necessarily fatal or terribly dangerous to a passenger strapped in a cabin seat with no responsibilities.

For the pilot though, the ability to control the airplane and make timely and correct decisions is immediately affected ...with serious consequences, of course.

[aerolearner]

1.Receive and document the CVR condition
2.Determine how to dismantle the CVR given it's condition
3.Technically treat the CVR innards with the highest level of care, and with minimum risk, attempt to extract data
4.In the event you get data, preserve and document that data (backups, file characteristics)
5.Using a copy of the data, check it is readable / valid data i.e. not blank or corrupt
6.Preliminary assessment of the data - timings, matching to other data, clear / easy to interpret output
7.Process of establishing formal transcript
The above is a guess, but I got the impression we are somewhere about 3 from the bottom. When we get second from bottom, there will be political and commercial implications of releasing the info.

On top of that, being in a country with a judicial system based on the Napoleonic Code, you have to ensure the chain of custody of any piece of evidence and coordinate any test with the judiciary authority, whether you like it or not.
See the seals and the pink document of the judiciary authority on the case used to transport the CVR:
http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol.gwi18g/images/photo.cvr.1.jpg

[Volume]

Rémi Jouty is a BEA spokesperson.
Actually he is Head of BEA, and a well known aviation expert for decades.

[bdcer]

i don't want to give away too much, but the cabin manager can definitely enter the flightdeck post depressurisation.

[ams6110]

Such small pieces

Airliner at 300+ kts into a mountain? It's a tremendous amount of kinetic energy expended nearly instantly. Not much is going to remain intact.

[Wingswinger]

Are there other instances such a violent impact that caused such shocking break up?
The more I see the images, the more astounded I am by the number of such widely spread out tiny pieces of wreckage.
I suppose it is safe to assume that there are plenty of images that we won't see in the public domain but I'd have expected some larger pieces considering that it didn't hit a flat surface

If an aircraft hits a hard surface at high velocity this is exactly what to expect. If it hits a soft surface there may be no trace of the aircraft. That is certainly the case for a fighter jet which "tent-pegs" at transonic speed.

[DeafOldFart]

I wonder what the flight path is when spoilers are opened and autopilot is in cruise mode....
Partially conscious crew might have operated brakes to get back to thicker air... works for glider pilots as a get you down slower method.

[Teevee]

Not a pilot just interested in aviation, but even I can work out that if I can drive my car at 10 mph into my bendable gate post and leave a massive dent, expecting something of the mass of an A320 to survive in large pieces having flown into an unbendable rock wall at over 300 mph shows a certain lack in the joined up thinking department. I also note the very carefully worded statement that rules out a 'classic' depressurization situation. I think 'classic' is the key word here and could speak volumes.

[Iolar]

The A320 involved (D-AIPX, MSN147, ff 29.11.1990) was close to the Airbus quoted Flight Hours (FH) and Flight Cycles (FC) as intended Design Service Goal (DSG) according to another contributor (FH 58,300 hours, 46,700 FC, Airbus DSG 60,000 hours, 48,000 FC). As far as I understand the extension to service life has/had two phases. Phase I (Interim Service Goal, ISG, tradeoff of FH and FC) requiring an inspection and Phase II (ESG I) requiring airframe modifications. Had D-AIPX undergone both ESG (Extended Service Goal) phases? What kind of modifications are required for ESG I?

D-AIPX had just reached FL380 close to its certified max service ceiling, when things started to go wrong.

[butterfly68]

On the Italian press and on other several international newspapers it is said that after the first impression they got from listening the CVR ( there are voices and among them the last contact with the ATC ....) the explosive decompression is ruled out... :confused: so what?? ...they already know what was the cause ?? :confused:

[formulaben]

On the Italian press and on other several international newspapers it is said that after the first impression they got from listening the CVR ( there are voices and among them the last contact with the ATC ....) the explosive decompression is ruled out... :confused: so what?? ...they already know what was the cause ?? :confused:

Ruling out explosive decompression does not rule out rapid or slow decompression.

[SLFplatine]

any loss of structural integrity (e.g. windscreen or other) started in coincidence with reaching max cabin pressure differential with the outside pressure. This timing cannot be a coincidence

NLG bulkhead failure?

Re: the head of the BEA not having listened to the CVR: The head of BEA would not listen to the CVR unless and until the tech specialists whom he hired to do so could explain in the detail exactly what they determined was being said and when it was being said in relation to the timeline of the anomalous event.

[butterfly68]

but a slow decompression doesn't fit so well with an 8 minutes lack of communication ..if there is a slow decompression I suppose the pilots get the warnings first ( cab altitude alerts)..have time to put the masks, start a descent and then finally communicate....

[silvertate]

The cabin manager can definitely enter the flightdeck post depressurisation.


Yeah, we know. But it is no longer 'normal' it is 'emergency' and it makes a hellava noise. And most crew are trained to sit down, where their view of the outside is non-existent.

In days of yore they could slip in, see that 'things were being done', and slip out - with saying a word or disturbing anyone. You remember that 'cabin secure flip-flap', that used to magically change to 'secure' all by itself? They cannea do that now, captn.

[henra]

On the Italian press and on other several international newspapers it is said that after the first impression they got from listening the CVR ( there are voices and among them the last contact with the ATC ....) the explosive decompression is ruled out...

Could you point me to a source of that? Also specifically ruling out explosive decompression? Is it something written or just a Journo talking on TV?

[Niner Lima Charlie]

My question is, would visual recordings of the cockpit and the cabin help with investigations?

Not gonna happen as long as the cabin crew and flight deck officers are represented by labor unions.

[alserire]

Sky News reporting that decompression has been ruled out. Not that I trust Sky but they have reported this in news at 10. No qualification i.e. explosive or slow decompression. Suggestig it has been ruled it out as a whole.

[radiator33]

I would have thought that they can determine through a post-mortem how death occured. Ie Was it Hypoxia ?, or were oxygen levels in the blood low indicating a reduction in breathable oxygen levels.

[fireflybob]

Yeah, we know. But it is no longer 'normal' it is 'emergency' and it makes a hellava noise. And most crew are trained to sit down, where their view of the outside is non-existent.

In days of yore they could slip in, see that 'things were being done', and slip out - with saying a word or disturbing anyone. You remember that 'cabin secure flip-flap', that used to magically change to 'secure' all by itself? They cannea do that now, captn.

Absolutely true, silvertate.

Be careful when you "solve" one problem that you don't generate a load more.

We have kowtowed to the politicians who have to be seen to do something.

[SAMPUBLIUS]

I suppose it is safe to assume that there are plenty of images that we won't see in the public domain but I'd have expected some larger pieces considering that it didn't hit a flat surface

reading other posts in this thread, the terrain is mostly slate-rock. Such an impact could easily start an ' rock slide' or avalance with multi slabs breaking at inherent fault lines in slate ( sort of like a layer cake ). Thus further grinding up and possibly burying the ' small' pieces left after such a high speed impact.

Those on the ground will be able to ( hopefully) notice the ' fresh breaks' and map out the debris field while looking for the relatively small FDR which could easily be buried under a few tons of slate .

Time will tell.

[oldoberon]

AS HYPOXIA still seems to be the most "favoured" starting point and explosive decompression appears to be ruled out by BEA, it returns us to slow creeping hypoxia during climb

Q1) Maintenance-whatever controls the nose undercarriage doors ( elec/cable or hydraulic), the "power" input (elec or hydraulic) presumably exits/enters the pressurized zone through the roof or side walls of the nose bay. If maintenance need to access those on the inside is the O2 bottle in their way?

Q2) how long before the start of descent was the previous comm with ground and at what height was the aircraft.

BSIEKER you say the length of the fuselage acts as a crumple zone helping to protect the flight recorders.

NOT if it hits/clips a ridge at 300knts+. in fact the tail may have been the 1st part to hit the ridge.

FIRE
Initially I also thought the extended area of black could have been burning, however those familiar with the area confirm that is the natural rock colour, but in the valley bottom some of the tree clumps do show burning but not enough to destroy the whole clump, so there were small localised fires only.

Someone posted the cockpit had been seen and was relatively intact, any pics?

[cirr737]

One more thing nagging me - if it was an "Open Descent" as a last ditch effort, the crew must have been concious enough to also pull the speed selector - otherwise the aircraft should have slowed down to 250kts passing FL100 - and thinking of this but not adjusting heading seems a bit strange.

[milsabords]

If ever possible, it might be interesting to cross check FR24 annd ATC plots with primary radar detections. The crash site is within the coverage of one or two French AF control centers, Mont Agel and Mont Verdun.

[anderow]

Lot's of talk about depressurisation issues, not so much about potential foul play.
Given the current world events I would say that is sadly a strong possibility..

[AreOut]

I see many people mention hypoxia, but shouldn't pilots have different resistance to it so one pilot would see the other pilot getting hypoxic and take appropriate measure? It's a very low probability that two different humans get hypoxic at the very same moment. (yeah I know about Helios and that one was strange too)

[G-CPTN]

some of the tree clumps do show burning but not enough to destroy the whole clump, so there were small localised fires only.

Early images of the debris field showed 'wisps' of smoke among the scattered pieces - as if there had been some smouldering, but little actual 'fire'.

How does atomised aviation fuel burn? We know that fuel tanks burn furiously, but if you rupture the tanks and spray the fuel over a couple of acres . . .

[Karel_x]

They ruled out (explosive) decompresion after listening to the CVR - I suppose that A320 has specific sound alarm for cabin altitude..?

[DCP123]

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 (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/25/recordings-voices-alarms-extracted-cockpit-crashed-germanwings-flight-4u9525)

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.

[fyrefli]

I see many people mention hypoxia, but shouldn't pilots have different resistance to it so one pilot would see the other pilot getting hypoxic and take appropriate measure? It's a very low probability that two different humans get hypoxic at the very same moment. (yeah I know about Helios and that one was strange too)

As a pilot of the sort of aircraft that is often flown considerably above 10,000ft with no oxygen (or indeed engine), I agree that different pilots report being very differently affected and onset beginning at widely differing altitudes.

Most of this discussion, however, has focused on rapid decompression and therefore rapid onset of hypoxia, way above any altitude where conditioning or physiological factors might come into play, so no difference in onset rate or effects would be noticeable.

[Bralo20]

Sky News reporting that decompression has been ruled out. Not that I trust Sky but they have reported this in news at 10. No qualification i.e. explosive or slow decompression. Suggestig it has been ruled it out as a whole.


Probably because it was the head of BEA who said it was ruled out when he gave a press conference this afternoon.

He also said that it appeared the plane was in a controlled flight until the very end to quickly add that no pilot in his right mind would fly into mountains and that the AP could also do that.

[NSEU]

@Person from Porlock

I assume that the A320 pressurization uses bleed air, but does it take it from one engine or both?

www.smartcockpit.com/docs/A320-Pneumatic.pdf

The engines feed their respective airconditioning packs. The two packs feed into a common manifold which distributes conditioned air throughout the entire cabin (including the cockpit).

[henra]

Probably because it was the head of BEA who said it was ruled out when he gave a press conference this afternoon.

Where did he say that?

[fireflybob]

Just stumbled on this incident as a matter of interest:-

Airbus A320-232, G-MIDW (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/bulletins/july_2007/airbus_a320_232__g_midw.cfm)

Summary:
The aircraft was established in the cruise at FL380. A warning of excessive cabin altitude was displayed on the ECAM (Electronic Centralised Aircraft Monitoring) screen. However, the display showed the pressurisation parameters, including the cabin altitude, as normal so the crew believed that the warning was spurious, although they donned oxygen masks as a precaution. Eighteen minutes later they were advised by the cabin crew that the passenger oxygen masks had deployed and they initiated an emergency descent to FL100, at which level the flight continued to its destination without further incident. A fault was later found within the System 1 Cabin Pressure Controller and the manufacturer is reviewing the system architecture to establish how misleading information was displayed to the crew.

[Lookleft]

It didn't take long for the conspiracy theorists to show up.:ugh:If you can't contribute more than just dragging up an author who was probably suffering PTSD after his Spanish Civil War experience then :mad:off.

After having flown the A320 for quite a few years IMHO it is quite possible that the crew may have selected V/S instead of the altitude selector to commence a descent. In which case there is no altitude "floor" for the A/P to capture. Assuming they were incapacitated then it is inevitable that the aircraft just kept on descending.

[WillowRun 6-3]

On the U.S. news broadcast PBS Newshour this evening, video footage was aired showing the heads of state of France, Germany and Spain visiting the investigation scene (or the staging area, more accurately) and in a press event as well. I am wondering whether any veterans of observing events and happenings around prior airliner accidents in Europe recall any similar visitations by two or more heads of state. (Interest motivating this question is not political - is instead an interest, academically and professionally, in current safety monitoring and audit programmes of ICAO).
[Condolences to all sadly affected.]

[TheInquisitor]

As a pilot of the sort of aircraft that is often flown considerably above 10,000ft with no oxygen (or indeed engine), I agree that different pilots report being very differently affected and onset beginning at widely differing altitudes.

Most of this discussion, however, has focused on rapid decompression and therefore rapid onset of hypoxia, way above any altitude where conditioning or physiological factors might come into play, so no difference in onset rate or effects would be noticeable.

I would respectfully disagree.

I recall during chamber runs that we unmasked in small groups, and were encouraged to observe (whilst lucid and full of O2) the effects of hypoxia on others. Not only did everybody react completely differently, the rate of onset person-to-person was wildly different. Body type, body mass, fitness, smoker vs non-smoker - there appeared to be no correlation that would act as a reliable predictor. One or two people displayed hardly any symptoms at all - and reported feeling little to no different.

Your hypoxia onset rate & symptoms are personal - and that was partly the point of doing chamber runs; to recognise not just generalised symptoms in others, but your own personal symptoms - in order to aid recognition for real.

Right from the outset, I've found the 'hypoxia' hypothesis unlikely. I've even been dubious about incapacitation at all. But in the absence of any solid evidence in another direction, I'm happy to be proven wrong.

I think we've become a little fixated on "Lack of R/T call must mean incapacitation" scenario. I see it as a 'possible' rather than a 'must'.

I said it earlier, but FD capacity completely sucked up in dealing with any extended or complex emergency could also explain the lack of call.

[HubertWilkins]

Just stumbled on this incident as a matter of interest:-

Airbus A320-232, G-MIDW
That is interesting indeed. If this crew had a similar event, but reacted differently (i.e. warning goes but display shows correct parameters so lets disregard the 02 masks for now and look into it …)
It may explain the creeping Hypoxia.

[WillFlyForCheese]

If an aircraft hits a hard surface at high velocity this is exactly what to expect. If it hits a soft surface there may be no trace of the aircraft. That is certainly the case for a fighter jet which "tent-pegs" at transonic speed.

UAL 93 is another example of an accident with little to no identifiable pieces of wreckage. Frankly - even ValuJet 592 exhibited a similar level of debris even though it occurred in the everglades (swampy area).

[MatrixMan]

I think we've become a little fixated on "Lack of R/T call must mean incapacitation" scenario. I see it as a 'possible' rather than a 'must'.

Correct... Aviate, Navigate...Comunicate...

may have sadly not made it to Communicate...Or navigate.:sad: Would you willingly descend your aircraft directly in to terrain.

[fyrefli]

Your hypoxia onset rate & symptoms are personal - and that was partly the point of doing chamber runs; to recognise not just generalised symptoms in others, but your own personal symptoms - in order to aid recognition for real.

Completely agreed. (My own maximum was about 14,000ft, in the Himalaya, but I know plenty who've been considerably higher and experiences do differ hugely.)

[mypov]

I do not buy the suicide theory on the basis that had the aircraft not been depressurised then the other crew member would have gained access back into the cockpit.


Wrong, at least for my airline, a pilot in the cockpit can keep anyone including other pilots from entering the cockpit.

Don't know about the cockpit doors in Germanwings.

[vanHorck]

Jouty is alleged to have said today the plane apparently did not seem to have suffered a "classic decompression situation"

Whilst this could mean to some that decompression did not seem to be a factor I would think it can also mean "an out of the ordinary" decompression situation, whatever he means by that, perhaps a decompression situation compounded by some other factor? Or a decompression situation caused by a totally unexpected occurrence?

Source: Germanwings crash investigators review cockpit recordings found on black box | World news | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/25/recordings-voices-alarms-extracted-cockpit-crashed-germanwings-flight-4u9525)

[Capt Kremin]

See my post here (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/558654-airbus-a320-crashed-southern-france-27.html#post8916098)

The bewilderment of the Lufthansa CEO regarding this incident is telling.

There has been no mention of any faults being revealed via ACARS. If you cut back to AF447 they were referenced very early in the piece.

The Lufthansa CEO would be apprised very early by his own people if any hint of mechanical problems was evident. But nothing so far except extreme bewilderment.

The aircraft was travelling at excessive speed; in excess of VMO. That is acceptable if you are on fire and heading for Nice or somewhere like that. This aircraft remained on track.

Travelling in excess of VMO in a A320 disconnects the AP and triggers the high speed protections which pitch the aircraft up. This aircraft did not pitch up. Which probably means it was being over-ridden by whomever was flying it.

That raises the possibility that the aircraft was hand flown all the way down.

That is ok if you are trying to get to an airport quickly but this aircraft stayed on track and headed directly for the Alps.

This aircraft did not capture any altitudes. Either the descent altitude was set below 6000 feet on the FCU; unlikely but it could have been done in error for the initial descent, or it was being hand flown.

Pulling open des on an emergency descent, provided a lower altitude is set in the FCU, in cruise engages the speed mode which would have captured the cruise mach, which then would have crossed-over to an IAS somewhere on descent. The autothrust commands IDLE and the selected speed is controlled by the elevators.
Therefore only way to achieve max speed is if someone sets it there. There is no reason to do so, and you certainly don't deliberately fly in excess of VMO. The high speed protections would be fighting against you.

Barring some sort of irrecoverable autoflight glitch, the foul play aspect will be increasingly looked at.

[Leftexit]

There have been comments of around 12 secs of useful consciousness after an explosive decompression. Ignoring all the other chaos in the cockpit for a moment ( noise, debris, panic, cold etc ) why would pilots lose consciousness so quickly when people can swim underwater for much longer than this.

[VH-Cheer Up]

Originally Posted by bdcer
i don't want to give away too much, but the cabin manager can definitely enter the flightdeck post depressurisation.
Not if someone in the cockpit wants to keep them out, in the airline I work for at least.
The lockout feature is in case of a crew member going rogue, turning suicidally feral, or becoming unlawfully compromised by persons outside the hardened flight deck door.

However, you can see the holes in the cheese lining up if one pilot leaves the FD and the remaining pilot turns feral and locks him/her out for whatever reason... Not suggesting this is applicable in this case, but it's worthy of discussion at another time and place.

[Finbarr]

Don't know much about Airbuses (I was a Boeing man myself) and I have neither the time nor the patience to wade through 40+ pages of the usual drivel - but surely the only explanation is suicide by one of the pilots? Odd that nothing has been said about them unlike MH370. And thanks to the "aviation expert" in today's Times who's told the world what discrete transponder codes we use. Good grief!

[mcdude]

Quote:
Just stumbled on this incident as a matter of interest:-

Airbus A320-232, G-MIDW
That is interesting indeed. If this crew had a similar event, but reacted differently (i.e. warning goes but display shows correct parameters so lets disregard the 02 masks for now and look into it …)
It may explain the creeping Hypoxia.

Note that FCOM/ABN for EXCESS CABIN ALT states:

"Rely on the CAB PR EXCESS CAB ALT warning even if not confirmed on the CAB PRESS SD page. The warning can be triggered by a cabin pressure sensor different from the one used to control the pressure and display the cabin altitude on the SD".

[DCP123]

CNN has a transcript of the press conference:

CNN.com - Transcripts (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1503/25/se.01.html)

Remi Jouty - the head of the BEA - never made the statement attributed to him by the Guardian and some posting here ruling out explosive decompression. Here is what he actually said (as translated by CNN) when asked about a loss of pressure:

REPORTER (via translator): France TV (INAUDIBLE). Do you have any data on depressurization?

JOUTY: At the moment, no. Beginning of an idea. And without going into details, I can't elaborate intellectually and I wouldn't want to do it so as not to go along a path which might be wrong. A depressurization scenario, which might stand in depressurization scenario. I can't elaborate and I refuse to try. A standard depressurization scenario which might tie in with these elements.

I suspect the translation is imperfect, but what I hear is that he refused to speculate. I am hard pressed to imagine that the CNN translation could be so far off that the actual statement supported the Guardian's report that M. Jouty said that "the information investigators had put together suggested the plane had not exploded and did not suffer a “classic decompression situation”."

The Guardian, and any other media outlet saying that M. Jouty ruled out decompression, simply got the story wrong. It happens. Now they need to run a retraction.

Anyone who speaks French and listened to the press conference please let the rest of us know what you think of M. Jouty's comments.

[Dingo63]

Jouty is alleged to have said today the plane apparently did not seem to have suffered a "classic decompression situation" I find it curious that Jouty decided to say that... and I wonder if what he meant to say was to thwart speculation of a bomb or inflight breakup? Because with such preliminary CVR info, why would you speculate on explosive decompression versus rapid, etc? It just seems odd to throw that out so early. And I don't buy the idea that they heard something that ruled decompression out as a rule, ie, interference with FD/crew. They would be merely saying the police were getting involved, etc. Very puzzling initial press conference.

[bsg]

Leftexit - its to do with partial oxygen pressures.

At high altitude, if you breathe your lungs will actively pump oxygen out of the bloodstream/body.

So holding your breath is a better strategy. Good luck doing that during a decompression event.

[giggitygiggity]

On the U.S. news broadcast PBS Newshour this evening, video footage was aired showing the heads of state of France, Germany and Spain visiting the investigation scene (or the staging area, more accurately) and in a press event as well. I am wondering whether any veterans of observing events and happenings around prior airliner accidents in Europe recall any similar visitations by two or more heads of state. (Interest motivating this question is not political - is instead an interest, academically and professionally, in current safety monitoring and audit programmes of ICAO).
[Condolences to all sadly affected.]

I think that the motivation for this is most likely social media, in the modern age of 24-hour news, facebook, twitter and idiots - people feel like they have been forgotten if the head of state doesn't either make a personal comment or in this case attend. If for example Angela Merkel didn't attend the crash scene or comment on the accident and kept herself aside from the incident, political commentators and the public at large would disown her. It is (politically) the safest bet for them all to get as heavily involved and lead the public reaction to an incident.

[RTD1]

Can someone please post a link to a transcript of today's BEA press conference? I'd like to see Remi Jouty's exact words regarding a de-pressurization scenario being ruled out, not some journalist's paraphrasing of his words which is all I've seen thus far. Thank you.

[TheInquisitor]

There have been comments of around 12 secs of useful consciousness after an explosive decompression. Ignoring all the other chaos in the cockpit for a moment ( noise, debris, panic, cold etc ) why would pilots lose consciousness so quickly when people can swim underwater for much longer than this.

Because of the O2-Hb dissociation curve. Put simply, if the partial pressure of gaseous O2 in your environment is lower than that effective in your blood, Haemoglobin will release O2 in your lungs instead of absorbing it - effectively, you are breathing 'out' O2 instead of breathing it in.

At least that's how I remember it from AvMed trg...

[TwoHeadedTroll]

Under water, the semipressure of Oxygen in your blood is lower than the ambient semipressure, consequently it remains in your blood until consumed. In addition, you have the air in your lungs. For depressurisation, firstly you don't have air in your lungs at a sufficient pressure to absorb oxygen and secondly if the ambient pressure drops to below the semipressure of oxy-hemoglobin then the oxygen in your blood is breathed out.

At least that is my memory of University physics...

[sebaska]

There have been comments of around 12 secs of useful consciousness after an explosive decompression. Ignoring all the other chaos in the cockpit for a moment ( noise, debris, panic, cold etc ) why would pilots lose consciousness so quickly when people can swim underwater for much longer than this.

Because air pressure in their lungs is almost (to be exactly very slightly above) environment pressure. IOW. as decompression occurs air leaves their lungs too.

People holding their breath under water hold onto oxygenated air in their lungs. You can't (and shouldn't even try - if you'd forcibly try, your lungs would rupture and you'd be in even worse shape) to hold air while in decompression.

[EternalNY1]

Just stumbled on this incident as a matter of interest:-

Airbus A320-232, G-MIDW

Now that's an interesting find.

Not saying that was the cause of this event by any means, but it is certainly could have resulted in something that looked a lot like this.

[Don_Apron]

Some aircraft designers seem to favor the bottle pressure on the gauge, not system pressure. DA comes to mind. This can be a trap for the unwary. The main O2 valve maybe turned of during maintenance. During a system preflight check should include, the main valve checked on, EMG should be selected for at least 5 seconds to ensure you are not hearing residual O2 pressure, only. I am very wary of an aircraft straight out of maintenance.

On the subject of another possible cause of this crash. If there is a need to start checking the passenger manifest, maybe it's time to start profiling passengers before departure.

[SLFplatine]

The Head of the investigation today said that he believes there was no "classic decompression situation"

Which would perhaps raise the question of what exactly is a "classic decompression situation"? Additionally taken literally the statement does not rule out a decompression situation, just a "classic" one, no? Just a thought.

[DCrefugee]

Did the a/c not level off at some stage during descent ? If yes how can that be explained?

Publicly available data are too coarse, so far, and unofficial, but the flight appears to have maintained a roughly 3500-fpm average descent, constant heading and cruise power, according to public ADS-B data. We'll have a better idea in a day or so...

Be nice if they can find usable FDR data.

[vanHorck]

I stand corrected. Jouty did not say any such thing. The media made that from what he said.

He actually said he did not want to be drawn into whether decompression was a major factor.

The CNN transcript (translation, thank you DCP123) CNN.com - Transcripts (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1503/25/se.01.html) actually states:
JOUTY: At the moment, no. Beginning of an idea. And without going into details, I can't elaborate intellectually and I wouldn't want to do it so as not to go along a path which might be wrong. A depressurization scenario, which might stand in depressurization scenario. I can't elaborate and I refuse to try. A standard depressurization scenario which might tie in with these elements.

It s a poor translation but the gist is clear: Jouty did not wish to confirm or deny decompression was a factor.

[YPPH_Dave]

One pilot locked out of cockpit apparently.

[DAL208]

Questions that nag me

I seem to recall all major crashes over the last years always rapidly revealed the names of the pilots, their experience etc., in fact it was generally one of the first things that would come out, as a means of showing the airline is professional and experienced. This is not the case in this instance. No names have been given so far. This puzzles me.

The Head of the investigation today said that he believes there was no "classic decompression situation". If he means by this that there was no situation whereby the crew is incapacitated by a (sudden) decompression, what caused them to be incapacitated without an apparent ability to leave the heading and aim towards a suitable airfield?

In a decompression the cabin masks drop automatically. At a descent rate of 3500 ft/min would there be enough oxygen to stay alert till say 12,000ft? Assuming at least one of the crew also managed to stay alert, would their instinct not be to try and enter the cockpit if she/he failed to raise the pilots on the intercom?

Can flight crew block the door in such a way that the cabin crew (and possibly also the non-flying pilot) cannot re enter the cockpit?

For now it is still most troubling....

Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 -> Date: 8 - 3-2014
Name of the pilot released -> Date: 8 - 3-2014

We have been told Nothing about the co pilot . No name and no mention of flying hours....... All we know is the pilot had 10 years/10000 hours...

No passenger lists either.....

One would assume, for the likes of Sky News that the lack of this information would be more intriguing than the actual information itself.

If it were being withheld, we'd know about it.

[Undertow]

CNN reporting US sources say one pilot was locked out of the cockpit.

Only reporting what they just said not endorsing.

[scrunchthecat]

NYT has reporting based on sources familiar with the CVR contents:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/world/europe/germanwings-airbus-crash.html

[mypov]

From the NY Times

A senior military official involved in the investigation described “very smooth, very cool” conversation between the pilots during the early part of the flight from Barcelona to Düsseldorf. Then the audio indicated that one of the pilots left the cockpit and could not re-enter.

“The guy outside is knocking lightly on the door and there is no answer,” the investigator said. “And then he hits the door stronger and no answer. There is never an answer.”

He said, “You can hear he is trying to smash the door down.”

While the audio seemed to give some insight into the circumstances leading up to the Germanwings crash, it also left many questions unanswered.

"We don’t know yet the reason why one of the guys went out,” said the official, who requested anonymity because the investigation is continuing. "But what is sure is that at the very end of the flight, the other pilot is alone and does not open the door."

[Flyingdoc93]

There have been comments of around 12 secs of useful consciousness after an explosive decompression. Ignoring all the other chaos in the cockpit for a moment ( noise, debris, panic, cold etc ) why would pilots lose consciousness so quickly when people can swim underwater for much longer than this.

This is because of various factors.

Essentially, your heart continues to pump blood through the tiny exchange capillaries in the alveoli in your lungs where it comes into close contact with air over a large surface area. Normally there is a higher partial pressure (amount) of oxygen in the air than in your blood and due to diffusion the oxygen moves from high 'concentration' in the air to low 'concentration' in the blood and combines with hemoglobin.

If you change the atmospheric conditions such that there is a lower partial pressure of oxygen outside the body to that in the blood (ie 40000ft) the opposite will happen and the oxygen attached to the haemoglobin will actually dissociate and you will breath it out. Essentially things go down concentration gradients from high to low - diffusion.

Also other pathological changes occur as gases which are dissolved (such as nitrogen) will dissolve and cause nasty problems (due to Henry's law). Not to mention enormous amounts of adrenaline and potential trauma upping your demands for O2.

Its very very different from taking a deep breath and putting your head in the sink whilst your mate times 4 minutes.

See: When Humans Fly High: What Pilots Should Know About High-Altitude Physiology, Hypoxia, and Rapid Decompression - AVweb Features Article (http://www.avweb.com/news/aeromed/181893-1.html) for a decent guide.

[vanHorck]

The NY Times is not just any newspaper.

If this is reliable information we have the answer why the plane crashed. What we still don't know is who was flying and was he/she incapacitated physically or mentally.

[SAMPUBLIUS]

Now we have CNN and NYT with first person knowledge. Neither is known for accurate reporting in such cases. CNN apparently needed something to replace MH-370 etc.

Think I'll wait for a partial transcript of CVR from an authorized source:mad:

[Alloyboobtube]

So there was no depressurisation or the cockpit door would have opened automatically.
Victims of secure cockpit door policy.
Now we know why the names are withheld.
It's looking deliberate as the only way to stop the door from opening is to be awake inside.

[Don_Apron]

I for one are even more interested in the other pilot's details, on hearing this. If it is unlawful interference, then we all have a deepening problem, which must be addressed ASAP.

The bad guys seem to have us running around like headless chickens. Have done for years.

[DAL208]

It appears that BEA head Remi Jouty never said what the Guardian and some others have reported he said ruling out decompression. The transcript here - http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../25/se.01.html - is questionably translated or perhaps he was terribly clear, but he was declining to speculate, not denying the possibility. The translation would have to be incredibly for his actual statement to be a statement that there was no decompression event or no "classical" decompression event.

[AdamFrisch]

In our terrorism fears have we now made a terrible blunder by having a cockpit door that can only be opened by the other pilot? What if he's incapacitated?

[Facelookbovvered]

Either they had to descend or chose to descend

If the had to descend for what ever reason then its inconceivable that they would not contact ATC

If the chose to descend for operational reasons then again its inconceivable that they would have done so without ATC clearance, hence no sensible explanation

So the non sensible explantation is top of climb one pilot leaves the flight deck for a pee, the other pilot either a) has a problem and cocks it up or b) the remaining pilots decides to end it all for all on board.........by denying access to flight deck.

Locked cockpit doors if so will have killed more than terrorists........

[ACMS]

There are proceedures in place to cater for that situation.

If the Pilot inside inside doesn't want to let someone in deliberately then..........

[MrSnuggles]

NY TIMES:
If this was a deliberate act I am deeply saddened by whatever reasons a persons may have to commit the most despicable act of them all: murder-suicide. There is no way to justify murdering other people because of your... any reason, actually.


DEPRESSURISATION
Regarding the depressurisation debate: Mr BEA (Remi something) said neither this nor that about depressurisation, and I watched (and understood) that part. Unfortunately something must have been wrong with the audio during the press conference because I had to max both YouTube audio and my computer speakers and still I had problems hearing properly.

[Con Catenator]

If there was a pilot outside the flight deck, with the appropriate company knowledge, he could have got back in.

[chucko]

CNN (on their Website) cites the New York Times for the cockpit lock-out story, not any of their own sources.

[PC767]

Cannot override a manual bolt on the wrong side of a door. Oh dear. I hope this is uninformed speculation.

[DAL208]

just curious...

From the NY Times

A senior military official involved in the investigation described “very smooth, very cool” conversation between the pilots during the early part of the flight from Barcelona to Düsseldorf. Then the audio indicated that one of the pilots left the cockpit and could not re-enter.

“The guy outside is knocking lightly on the door and there is no answer,” the investigator said. “And then he hits the door stronger and no answer. There is never an answer.”

He said, “You can hear he is trying to smash the door down.”

While the audio seemed to give some insight into the circumstances leading up to the Germanwings crash, it also left many questions unanswered.

"We don’t know yet the reason why one of the guys went out,” said the official, who requested anonymity because the investigation is continuing. "But what is sure is that at the very end of the flight, the other pilot is alone and does not open the door."

Why would a 'senior military official' be involved in the investigation?

[Undertow]

If there was a pilot outside the flight deck, with the appropriate company knowledge, he could have got back in.

Even if the PF actively wanted to prevent access?

[NSEU]

In our terrorism fears have we now made a terrible blunder by having a cockpit door that can only be opened by the other pilot? What if he's incapacitated?

If he's incapacitated, the other pilot can get in. Entrance can only be inhibited by a conscious pilot on the flight deck.

[Dynamic Roller]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SilkAir_Flight_185

[MrSnuggles]

Why would a 'senior military official' be involved in the investigation?

1) They just loooove their army guys on that side of the pond. He might as well be retired.

2) His civilian life has earned him a place in the investigation due to his expertise.

Could be simple as that.

[ACMS]

Neektu:---- some Airlines already do just that.

[tatin]

This accident rates as a CFIT (controlled flight in to terrain) accident, with possible unlawful interference, (partial) crew incapacitation, and/or loss of situational awareness.

The Airbus seemed to be in a technically flyable state.

For all you putnuckers, Airbus illiterates and PPL holders, please take it from there.

[DrGitfinger]

The BEA's Rémi Jouty answers the question about a possible loss of cabin pressure at about
2:37:00 in the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAQOSveCJqc

My translation (not that different from the CNN one, but maybe a little clearer). Original French text is below translation:

ENGLISH:

Q: Do you have any information that indicates a loss of cabin pressure?

JOUTY: At this stage I don't have anything that begins to indicate a scenario and...[pauses]...without going into the details...[pauses]...I'm not able to put together - just like that - a reasoned scenario - and, incidentally, I refuse to do so because I don't want to go off in a direction which might prove to be wrong - for a loss of cabin pressure which corresponds directly to that - a standard scenario for a loss of cabin pressure.

Inaudible questions (presumably following up the first question about loss of cabin pressure)

JOUTY: I'm not able to put together, and I refuse to try to put together, a standard scenario for a loss of cabin pressure which corresponds to the information we have.

FRENCH:

Q: Est-ce que vous avez des éléments en faveur de la dépressurisation?
JOUTY: À ce stade-là, je n'ai aucun début de scénario et.... sans rentrer dans les détails... je ne sais pas construire comme ça intellectuellement - et d'ailleurs je m'y refuse pour pas partir dans une direction qui pourrait se révéler erronée - un scénario de dépressurisation qui collerait directement avec ça - un scénario standard de dépressurisation.

Question inaudible
JOUTY: Je ne sais pas construire et je m'interdis de chercher à construire un scénario standard de dépressurisation qui collerait avec ces éléments-là.

[david1300]

Don't know much about Airbuses (I was a Boeing man myself) and I have neither the time nor the patience to wade through 40+ pages of the usual drivel - but surely the only explanation is suicide by one of the pilots? Odd that nothing has been said about them unlike MH370. And thanks to the "aviation expert" in today's Times who's told the world what discrete transponder codes we use. Good grief!
If you don't have the time or patience to read back, then I respectfully suggest that you "surely" shut up instead of commenting: "...surely the only explanation is suicide by one of the pilots...". There are many, many possible explanantions being investigated. Good grief!!

[skyhighfallguy]

in some countries when a pilot leaves cockpit a flight attendant comes up to the cockpit to sit with the other pilot. I DO NOT KNOW IF THIS IS DONE IN GERMANWINGS LAND, perhaps someone will comment.


A return to a 3 member cockpit crew should be considered ;-)

[ACMS]

If the Pilot is incapacitated in the cockpit then there are proceedures to enable other Pilot to get back in......so having a cabin crew inside only makes it faster.....


However If the Pilot inside has bad intentions then the other ain't getting back in........

[david1300]

Reported in our local newspaper (attributed to New York Times):

AS investigators go through the audio recovered from one of the Germanwings black boxes, reports have emerged that one of the pilots became locked out of the cockpit and was unable to get back in.

The New York Times reports that a senior military official involved in the investigation described “very smooth, very cool” conversation between the pilots during the early part of the flight from Barcelona to Dusseldorf.

The audio then seems to reveal one of the pilots left the cockpit and was unable to get back in.

“The guy outside is knocking lightly on the door and there is no answer,” the investigator said. “And then he hits the door stronger and no answer. There is never an answer.”

He said, “You can hear he is trying to smash the door down.”

The cause of the crash, which killed all 150 people on board, is still unclear and it’s hoped the answers to many questions will be contained in the black boxes.

“We don’t know yet the reason why one of the guys went out,” said the official, who requested anonymity because the investigation is continuing. “But what is sure is that at the very end of the flight, the other pilot is alone and does not open the door.”

Almost 600 gendarmes and other police and rescue groups were yesterday involved in inspecting the site of Flight 9525 deep in the French Alps and unravelling what may have happened from the moment it took off from Barcelona to its crash about an hour later on Tuesday en route to Dusseldorf.

The last communication from the doomed jetliner was routine. The mangled black box has yielded sounds and voices, the lead investigator said, but so far not the “slightest explanation” why the plane plunged into an Alpine mountainside.

No Cookies | The Courier-Mail (http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/germanwings-airbus-a320-crash-grim-reality-of-crash-site/story-fniztvng-1227278795235)

[Mr Hankey]

The non professional pilot comments on this thread are exasperating... Can we just leave it to the professionals please? Airliners.net is awaiting the rest of you.

I'm staggered that there appear to be airlines where a cabin crew member is not required to be in the cockpit when a flight crew member leaves.

[AndyJS]

Britain's ITV news is now reporting the news about the pilot possibly being locked out of the cockpit:

Airbus pilot 'heard trying to smash cockpit door open' - ITV News (http://www.itv.com/news/update/2015-03-25/airbus-pilot-heard-trying-to-smash-cockpit-door-open/)

[mickjoebill]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/germanwings-plane-crash-airbus-a320-glide-to-destruction-took-18-minutes-not-8-10131891.html

French Transport Minister Ségolène Royal confirmed a French military Mirage jet fighter had investigated soon after the aircraft stopped respondingat 10.30am. The warplane was seen by eyewitnesses, following the airliner as it skimmed the Alpine ridges before it crashed. The pilot of the Mirage could, therefore, also possess crucial information on the Germanwings aircraft’s behaviour.

Note the last line is commentry by the writer, it is not confirmation (beyond the eyewitness) that a Mirage caught up to and tracked the flight.

[Lookleft]

Wasnt it the NYT that reported that the Captain of the Air Asia A320 was out of his seat pulling circuit breakers, then they retracted the story. In the absence of official confirmation I call BS. All the media outlets such as ITV are quoting the NYT! If the NYT has it wrong then they all have it wrong.

[West Coast]

Neektu

Richard Quest is bull@&$/-:g on TV, as usual. "When one guy leaves the flight deck, another person (a flight attendant, I presume) would enter it in order to always have two people in there!" Where does that come from?

In the US there's protocal requiring a FA to be upfront if the other pilot has to leave the cockpit. Perhaps he assumed that's the same everywhere.

[squak7700]

If it s true that one pilot is lockout....
The pilot inside incap......hands and/or body push sidestick full forward causing the dive
otherwise intentional CFIT..
The autopilot will happily fly at FL380 till fuel starvation..

[Undertow]

CNN (on their Website) cites the New York Times for the cockpit lock-out story, not any of their own sources.
The longer they go without saying: "CNN can't confirm this with our own sources", the more likely they are hearing likewise.

[voyageur9]

.... if germanwings with 150 on board is added to egyptair 590 with 217 on board and (maybe) Malaysia 370 with 239 on board, the total killed by pilot murderers will be double the number of airline passengers killed by terrorist murderers during the same period (since 1999)

perhaps passengers would be safer with access to cockpits.

[J.O.]

If it s true that one pilot is lockout....
The pilot inside incap......hands and/or body push sidestick full forward causing the dive
otherwise intentional CFIT..
The autopilot will happily fly at FL380 till fuel starvation..

Not even close to an accurate assumption. I will not elaborate here.

[Ollie Onion]

If this is true about the other pilot being locked out then it can only really be an intentional act. If the remaining pilot had a heart attack or similar surely you can just open the cockpit door by other means. Only time this wouldn't work would be if the pilot left inside was over-riding that request. Have we actually been given any details on the FO?? I have seem a bit of detail about the Captain but not the FO.

I hope this turns out to be bad info, you can imagine the change in SOP's coming our way if this turns out to be an intentional act. Once again, thoughts to all involved, it would have been a terrifying 8 minutes for all on board if this was deliberate. :suspect:

[incompleteness]

Talk relating to door systems should be avoided.

[FIRESYSOK]

CNN just gave a lecture on door lock operation complete with pictures. No one here should follow suit.

[Islay]

Exactly. For us who actually work on the aircraft know about cockpit doors. This is a public forum and I really don't think that discussions about them should be taking place

[dmba]

Have we been told any information at all about the First Officer, or just about the Captain?

[Airbubba]

The non professional pilot comments on this thread are exasperating... Can we just leave it to the professionals please? A********.net is awaiting the rest of you.

Back before Danny sold PPRuNe and it was more of a professional pilots rumour network we had some memorable vigorous discussions of possible pilot suicide scenarios.

I remember reading the possible cause of the MI 185 crash here long before the reports of the Captain's disciplinary record and financial deficits surfaced in the media. The original thread about the crash seems to be lost to one of the many server crashes here around Y2K. I was on PPRuNe when it was an e-mail list and got my 'seniority' reset a couple of times. As Ignition Override observed, kinda like the airline business I suppose.

Crockett lost family members in the Silk Air mishap and pursued legal action for years, here's one of his threads from 2001:

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/4267-silkair-185-i-do-not-get.html

Similarly, the cause of the SU 990 crash was hotly debated by those of us who are in the business, for example:

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/3872-ms990-report.html

As I mentioned in the thread above, I was earlier assured on PPRuNe that SU 990 wasn't a suicide because Muslims consider suicide haram.

The FX 705 would be hijacker was an acquaintance of mine back in the day. He was a nut case in my prior judgment and, like one of the pilots in both MI 185 and SU 990, had significant disciplinary issues, unlike most of us I must add.

Pilot suicide and terrorist actions are still somewhat taboo subjects here but as a professional pilot I know they have both brought down airliners in the past.

[skyhighfallguy]

remember the jet blue pilot nut job, and it was a result of an odd diet supplement?

can someone just SNAP?

or have evil intention and just be presented with opportunity?

would be odd if the copilot was not a german national.

THERE have been heart attacks in the plane but even during th elanding the pilot remained alive

[Brookfield Abused]

Question?
Was the PIC when the other was locked out?
The CP or FO?
The remaining PIC a member of Pilots’ union Vereinigung Cockpit (VC)?
Could this be a most nefarious form of sending a message to LH Management that cutting the new hire pay structure and 55 retiree's pensions?
The Pilot strikes cost Lufthansa more than €200-million ($213-million) in lost operating profit last year.
Experience so far shows that bookings drop sharply after a strike is announced, stay low for a couple of days and then recover fairly quickly.
If now the member pilots are falling under scrutiny, then the losses for LH will just become harder to recover from.

So for the PIC, get up, activate the physical deadlocks and then you are all alone until AB meets Alpine granite or the 7 runs out of fuel north of Antarctica!

No doubt there will be a trail leading up to this!

[olasek]

remember the jet blue pilot nut job, and it was a result of an odd diet supplement?
No, some psychiatrist stated it was result of sleep deprivation. Do I believe it, hell no. The guy simply went nuts for unexplained reason - apparently he went nuts again in the hospital later on. Why do we have to pretend we always must find explanation why someone goes crazy.

[Capt Kremin]

I'm a lowly private pilot, so I can't judge if you know your stuff- but if you do, that's most interesting.

Current Airbus pilot. Been in the industry for many years. This is the last outcome, if confirmed, that you would want as a pilot.

[underfire]

The door issue was recently a bit of a curiosity for me, as just having flown some extensively long legs.
During pilot breaks/rotation, a crew member stood in the doorway the entire time, and did not allow the door to close.

[PersonFromPorlock]

OK, question: most of my time was in military heavies and in those, the idea that you could hear someone tapping on a door in flight is a non-starter. Are A320s that much quieter? I just wonder if the CVR could really pick the sound up.

[boredaccountant]

I am a A320 Captain for a UK operator.

Whilst not wanting to discuss cockpit door procedures, I think it should be clear to those reading this thread that it requires a conscious person and a deliberate action of someone inside the flight deck to lock someone out and prevent entry to the flight deck.

[The Green Goblin]

I'll be ashamed to be an airline pilot if this is what it is purporting to be....

Gobsmacked is an understatement.

I suppose we are pretty close to finally installing that dog in the cockpit hey :(

[Reader not a writer]

PFP

Yes the cockpit is really that quiet.

[boredaccountant]

And yes. The CVR will definitely pick up the sounds associated with requests for access on the cockpit door.

In the right phase of flight it will pick up the forward lav flushing.

[FIRESYSOK]

At 38K, it's very quiet in the 320. Keep in mind a light knock picked up by the CAM isn't necessarily the same volume in situ.

[VH-Cheer Up]

OK, question: most of my time was in military heavies and in those, the idea that you could hear someone tapping on a door in flight is a non-starter. Are A320s that much quieter? I just wonder if the CVR could really pick the sound up.I seem to remember on UAL93 the sound of the attempts by persons external to the hijacked FD could be heard distinctly on the CVR, and that was a Boeing.

[LASJayhawk]

OK, question: most of my time was in military heavies and in those, the idea that you could hear someone tapping on a door in flight is a non-starter. Are A320s that much quieter? I just wonder if the CVR could really pick the sound up.

The area mic is very sensitive. And any other mic that is hot, like ICS, will record anything it picks up as well on its own track.

[BreezyDC]

Cockpit Door Panel | Cockpit Door Switch (http://www.efbdesktop.com/airplane-general/sys-1.3.1.html)
Cockpit Door Switch
UNLOCK
Unlocks door when raised above the detent and held in this position. Door must be pushed to open. UNLOCK is an override and reset selection of any previous action.

NORM
When NORM is selected, it allows the door to be locked when closed. It also allows the door to be opened after an emergency access code entry and 30 second delay in case of pilot incapacitation.

LOCK
Momentarily placing the cockpit door switch to LOCK illuminates the red cockpit access panel light, rejects keypad entry request, inhibits aural alerts, and prevents further access code entry for 20 minutes. The cockpit door switch returns to NORM when released, but remains in locked mode for 20 minutes or until UNLOCK is selected.

There is no cockpit indication when LOCK is selected; therefore, if the door is closed and the cockpit is unattended during a locked period, the door cannot be opened until the timer expires or power is removed from the airplane.

[svhar]

This is the last outcome, if confirmed, that you would want as a pilot.

Why? At least something can be done about it. For example reinstalling the third cockpit crew member or throwing away the locked door policy.

[aguadalte]

Would you mind to offer the general public the codes to open the doors, also?:ugh:

[lapp]

Would you mind to offer the general public the codes to open the doors, also?
He did not offer anything. This information (and much, much more) has been on the internet for many years already.

[olasek]

Would you mind to offer the general public the codes to open the doors, also?
And do you think there is ONE code that opens ALL such doors ALL the time? :rolleyes:

[thump]

For what it's worth, at my airline, we are never alone on the flight deck. Anytime someone leaves their station, we have an FA come and occupy the other seat.

[FIRESYSOK]

The FA should not be occupying a control seat. Poor policy.

[MitrePeak]

For some it is beyond comprehension that a Pilot would deliberately fly an aircraft into the ground, knowingly taking the lives of all on board. Regardless of profession, human beings are exactly that, human. EVERYONE has a breaking point. Work and private issues affect us all. Most deal with it well,...others don't.
I had an F/O threaten to jump off the top of the hotel on an overnight many years ago. It was very clear to myself and the F/E that he was quite serious !
His death at home some months later was more than likely self inflicted.
Divorced 4 times i was told.
We're human.....God forbid it turns out to be the cause of this crash:(

[Ollie Onion]

The policy of a crew member coming onto the flightdeck will be all well and good until there is an incident involving this crew member!

[jack11111]

Good policy...FA should also know how to call ATC.

[SLFplatine]

Also per the NYT:
The French aviation authorities have made public very little, officially, about the nature of the information that has been recovered from the audio recording, and it was not clear whether it was partial or complete. France’s Bureau of Investigations and Analyses confirmed only that human voices and other cockpit sounds had been detected and would be subjected to detailed analysis.So, can we not run off on the other bit in the article 'according to a senior military official' ...

[hughscot]

This video has been on the internet since 2002 and has seen a lot of play today. I don't think it is news to a terrorist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixEHV7c3VXs

[AreOut]

"For some it is beyond comprehension that a Pilot would deliberately fly an aircraft into the ground, knowingly taking the lives of all on board. "

if it was his intention why wasn't the final flight path more vertical(like in egyptian case)? It's not like someone would survive if he didn't hit the mountain but some flat meadow...

[Undertow]

FO flying and Captain trying to regain entry if twitterati to be believed.

[Ollie Onion]

As an aside, is it about time that we started taking mental illness amongst flight crew a bit more seriously. I was looking at my income insurance and loss of licence protection, both policies explicity rule out payments due to not being able to work after being diognosed with a mental disorder. The result of that may be for pilots who shouldn't be at work continuing to turn up.

'Are Out' maybe if there was someone responsible they just set 100' in the Altitude windon pushed EXP descent and sat back and watched it all unfold? Even if you wanted to fly the thing into the ground the overspeed protections would restrict how you could do this, unless of course you turned some things off to gain control without protections. This profile though seems to have been well controlled and stable all the way to the ground.

[thump]

The FA should not be occupying a control seat. Poor policy.

Technically, they are to occupy the observer's seat.

[short bus]

I was wondering the same thing. If you were intent on "ending it all" wouldn't the lawn dart method be preferable? Or do the A320 control systems prevent that?

[Undertow]

Also of note Lufthansa saying they are "aware" of NYT story but have no comment - according to CNN.

[_Phoenix_]

Both pilots were well trained, experienced Lufthansa pilots. They knew what they were doing. I would wait for more official answers, whilst the silence sounds like a loud confirmation. I don’t know their protocol, i.e. if one of the flight attendants is able to access the flight deck in case of an emergency as pilots could be incapacitated due to toxic fumes (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2276401/Mid-flight-horror-British-Airways-pilot-incapacitated-cockpit-filled-fumes.html)
Is there any possibility that actually not a pilot, but a flight attendant banged on the door after noticed that the aircraft is descending towards Alps?

[LASJayhawk]

I am a A320 Captain for a UK operator.

Whilst not wanting to discuss cockpit door procedures, I think it should be clear to those reading this thread that it requires a conscious person and a deliberate action of someone inside the flight deck to lock someone out and prevent entry to the flight deck.


If a lone pilot suffered a major medical issue ( heart attack, stroke, etc) the possibility of throwing a switch up instead of down is very real. Not saying this is the case, but I can't say I've ever met an experienced driver that hasn't got switch bit at least once in their career under normal conditions, let alone a person dieing.

It seems like about the time we say something can't happen in aviation, it does.

[Castlehard]

People need to take a breath and back off. There is just not enough info that is verified to come to a rational conclusion.

[Jeps]

CNN are crossing a line. There is too much discussion about security details for my liking.

[obmot]

One other question comes to mind - it seems I might not be able to post on threads but I'll give it another shot...

...can you guys think of/list all incidents (an admittedly tiny tiny list) where pilot 'suicide' is either known or largely suspected, and of that list, which ones (SilkAir 185? any others?) did the 'suicidal' pilot pull the CVR bus during or before the incident?

Half of me thinks the (eminently rare) 'suicidal' pilot would want to disable the CVR so as maybe to avoid being tagged as the cause, the other half says that pilots are very bright and all know full well that almost always - a cause of a crash is going to be discerned regardless of CVR status. And frankly, probably a suicidal crew member doesn't really care if hes going to be found as the culprit because basically he is nutso (at that moment) anyway and knows he'll be dead.

As an aside, I really really hope that crash investigators determine that something happened to 'disable' to the lone crewmember in the flight deck and for whatever reason the other guy couldn't get in . . . vs. a premeditated lockout situation - because as noted above by someone this sort of thing is so exquisitely rare yet the lay flying public will start casting stones where none should be hurled. This guy (if suicidal) will have marred a profession merely by virtue of his own mental insufficiency. And I hope that's not the case. We'll see.

[skyhighfallguy]

if you have a comment for cnn, post it on their twitter site or contact them in other ways.

same for the new york times.


I have to think that a legitimate incapacitating event, happening exactly after the other pilot left for a brief bathroom break, at the top of climb, is a little too coincidental for my liking.

it is interesting to me that the wording indicating that the conversation prior was considered cool.

cool can mean many things. she was cool to my advances. fonzie is cool.

etc.

I think we have a nefarious, well thought out act. surprised too that no one noticed my visine comment.

[costalpilot]

this page alone gives me the opportunity to "believe" in the NY Times or "Twitterati".

thats quite a choice.

:D

[TRF4EVR]

I have to think that a legitimate incapacitating event, happening exactly after the other pilot left for a brief bathroom break, at the top of climb, on an hour long flight is hysterically unlikely.

Fixed it for you.

[McGinty]

If this horrific scenario described by the NYT is true (and I sincerely hope this is a case of rotten journalism), then the passengers at the front of the plane would have been recording the attempted re-entry into the cockpit on their cameras and cell phones. Would the memory storage in these devices, SD cards and so on, survive this severe impact sufficient to be readable?

The scenes inside the plane if the passengers were not incapacitated are beyond imagination, and the possibility that these are recorded and can be replayed is the stuff of nightmares.

Please let this not be the explanation of the crash......

[JSmithDTV]

Assuming current information is correct regarding the PNF's re-entry to the cockpit, some serious questions will now need to be raised as to how this security measure after 911 has royally backfired.

Like in the US, if one of the two pilots needs to leave the cockpit, a crew-member should take their place until said pilot returns.

There should never be a situation where one pilot gets left in there with the capability to prevent the other returning.

It could be as simple as a heart attack surely, rather than a suicidal or terrorist pilot?

What a damn shame...

[SpeedyD]

I'm not seeing how the presence of another crew member prevents this scenario. Let's be realistic, if the pilot leaves the cockpit, and the FO has nefarious intentions (or vice versa), the extra crew member is very likely to be a female flight attendant. Not much of a deterrent against someone intent on doing harm.

[Nov71]

UK TV news - 'expert' suggesting that 1 component of CVR was so badly damaged in the impact, the timeline data was missing, so they can hear the audio but without knowing when it was recorded. More worrying was report that FDR casing had been found sans internal recording apparatus. Back to good old fashioned crash investigation then. I guess Lufthansa and Airbus Ind CEO's are 'bricking it'.

[Airbubba]

There should never be a situation where one pilot gets left in there with the capability to prevent the other returning.

Maybe that's how it outta be but this is nothing new, the Captain was locked out of the cockpit on the Ethiopian 702 pilot hijack to Geneva last year:

The high-altitude drama began when the chief pilot of ET702 left the cockpit of the Boeing 767-300 to use the toilet, Mr. Deillon said. Mr. Tegegn then locked the cockpit door and took control of the airliner, he said.

At about 4 a.m., the Italy-bound Ethiopian Airlines jet contacted air-traffic controllers with a request to land in Geneva. Shortly afterward, another message, this time using the number 7500—the aviation code for a hijacking—was transmitted over the aircraft's transponder.


Authorities: Co-Pilot Took Control of Ethiopian Airlines Plane, Wanted Asylum - WSJ (http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304899704579388082595012094)

[boredaccountant]

LASJayHawk.....


Remember, all an incapacitated pilot has to do to allow cockpit entry is simply do NOTHING. The cockpit door lock has a fence built around it so even if you are slumped over the centre console you cannot prevent the door being opened from the outside.

The door can easily be opened from the outside without ANY action whatsoever from the inside. It's specificially designed this way of course for the incap situation.

I have flown the A320 for three separate UK operators. NONE of these required a member of Cabin Crew present in the Flight Deck when a pilot leaves for physiological reasons. What would be the point? The ONLY case that requires a member of Cabin Crew to be present is when the CCTV is broken and hence a second pair of eyes is needed to look through the peep hole to verify entry when the other pilot is returning from his toilet break allowing the remaining pilot to stay in his seat flying the aircraft and monitoring the radio at all times.

[.Scott]

SD cards and so on, survive this severe impact sufficient to be readable?Absolutely. There appears to be very little heat damage. It would be bad luck for something as small as the chip in an SD card to be damaged by being hit so directly that it would be scratched or cracked. Even if damaged, there are methods for extracting some of the information.

[Dynamic Roller]

UK TV news - 'expert' suggesting that 1 component of CVR was so badly damaged in the impact, the timeline data was missing, so they can hear the audio but without knowing when it was recorded.

That would be a non-issue, as long as they can match even one word with ATC comms. The rest could be easily sync'ed from that.

[boredaccountant]

Is it possible that the remaining Pilot in the flight deck was incap, and the other crew on the aircraft simply forgot the appropriate code to regain access to the flight deck?

Highly unlikely I think for an experienced crew in a respected operator. Certainly in my airline, we regularly train for this and I sometimes ask my FO at the brief the procedure to gain access to the flight deck In these circumstances.

This would however alievate the theory of the pilot outside being ' deliberately ' locked out. Such a horrifying thought. . . . . .

[Capn Rex Havoc]

I have advocated (as annoying as it is) for a cabin crew to be present in the flight

deck whenever a pilot is out of the cockpit. Very hard for a pilot to deny entry to

his companion if the cabin crew is at the door and can open it in a second if the

sole pilot at the seat starts to get out of his seat.

Pilot suicides do occur.

[cockpitvisit]

Very hard for a pilot to deny entry to
his companion if the cabin crew is at the door and can open it in a second if the
sole pilot at the seat starts to get out of his seat.

And what happens if the cabin crew grabs the fire axe and kills the remaining pilot, then flies the plane into a nuclear plant's spent fuel pool?

The door itself is the cause of the problem - because it introduces a single point of failure in the pointy end of the plane. One rogue crew member is all it takes to commandeer a plane.

Even on 9/11, there was a chance to correct the situation - passengers could have fought the hijackers, and on UA93, they at least prevented deaths on the ground. In fact the only reason why it happened was that obeying hijackers was the standard practice back then.

With the new cockpit door, you have no such chance. And it is not impossible for a motivated terrorist to become a pilot or an FA - the 9/11 hijackers were not dumb either.

[hack404]

Why would a 'senior military official' be involved in the investigation?


The Gendarmerie in France is a military organisation.

[TRF4EVR]

The door itself is the cause of the problem - because it introduces a single point of failure in the pointy end of the plane.

Agree entirely. It was a stop-gap measure taken in haste to respond to a specific method of attack. Most sane people knew on 9/12/01 (or uh 12/9/01, if you prefer), that no one was going to be able to commandeer a jet with some sheet metal razor blades again. But our security measures are ever reactive, rather than proactive.

[VH-Cheer Up]

AndyJS
How strong is the cockpit door when locked? I imagine a lot of passengers would have helped the pilot to try to hit the door open. They wouldn't have just sat there.Apparently, it has to withstand a grenade or small arms attack. Press Release ? Airlines Meet FAA's Hardened Cockpit Door Deadline (http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=5623)

[Paul on the equator]

Maybe the days of 2-man flight crew will be challenged if this is in fact a horrible situation caused by a 2-man crew! Some may scream for the days of a 3 person crew ‘Captain, F/O and a 2nd officer (or there about) Very sad whatever the cause.

[TRF4EVR]

Try as you might, you can't yet take the person out of the equation, tech-friend. Not yet, anyway.

This is simply solved. MUCH more stringent screening of crew for warning signs of mental disturbance/political ideology which is, eh, shall we say "worrying"? I mean, no one likes Grosse Bruder, but the FBI (in the US, and I suspect the analogous agencies in other Western countries) investigates people who work in nuke plants before they're hired. Up to and including visiting their high school teachers and acquaintances to see what sort of things didn't come out in the hour long interview. There are JANITORS who were strapped to a polygraph at some point or another, but if you've an ATP and a willingness to work for poverty wages, congrats, you're an airline pilot!

[Wunwing]

I make the following comment with the rider that I dont want my old job back and I realise that technology has moved on.

When the Flight Engineer was done away with we said at the time that no one had analysed all the things that we did in that role. All they did was look at what we operated and computerised it.One of the unacknowleged parts of our job was crew "stabilty". That duty didnt often come into play but in my 30+ years on the flightdeck it came out a few times.

We had problem captains who in a couple of cases became big problems not long after my experiences and more that a few problem F/Os. In time they were sorted, sometimes with subtle input from the FEs to management. In other cases their subtle problems became too obvious to ignore. But what we did provide was a qualified crew member in addition to the 2 pilots and that meant there was never a time when there was one person alone in the cockpit.That is reflectedin the fact that the type of problem being suggested here as a possibility didn't exist then.I even seem to remember a hijacker being taken out in Fiji by a well aimed bottle of scotch but that is another story and from memory the FE never got his bottle back either.

Recently I flew to Bali on holidays at the front of the cabin having scored some cheap business class seats. I was very surprised to see how long single pilot ops went on.

It seems along with automated flightdecks we have also introduced a less humanised cockpit into the mix and that is proving to be dangerous. If that applies to this sad case is still to be proven but there is enough evidence from the past to say my opinion is worth considering. How to get that level of human interaction back into the flightdeck is another subject.

[jack11111]

A member of the intelligence services will certainly be present at the extraction of CVR data.

[TRF4EVR]

When the Flight Engineer was done away with we said at the time that no one had analysed all the things that we did in that role. All they did was look at what we operated and computerised it.One of the unacknowleged parts of our job was crew "stabilty". That duty didnt often come into play but in my 30+ years on the flightdeck it came out a few times.

Indeed. Even setting aside the notion that one pilot or the other might be a secret maniac, the social dynamics of three people making decisions together are extraordinarily different from the dynamics of two people doing the same. IMHO, there ought to be three people on the pointy end, full stop. Of course, I'd also like to see pigs fly, but that's a different discussion...

[Big Pistons Forever]

“We don’t know yet the reason why one of the guys went out,” said the official, who requested anonymity because the investigation was continuing. “But what is sure is that at the very end of the flight, the other pilot is alone and does not open the door.”

The above is a quote from the NYT article. It seems pretty definitive, so has anyone from the BEA or other official source denied the claim made by what was quoted as a "senior investigator"

[changer]

The door itself is the cause of the problem - because it introduces a single point of failure in the pointy end of the plane. One rogue crew member is all it takes to commandeer a plane.

Even on 9/11, there was a chance to correct the situation - passengers could have fought the hijackers, and on UA93, they at least prevented deaths on the ground. In fact the only reason why it happened was that obeying hijackers was the standard practice back then.

With the new cockpit door, you have no such chance.
Exactly right. Our passengers are not the enemy, they are our allies. It only took 40 minutes on that Sept 11 morning for the pax on UA93 to learn the hijackers have changed tactics.
This cockpit door we have now is a security risk, not a security asset. No one person should have sole control of the aircraft.

[bille1319]

Til we hear if from an official form France's Bureau of Investigation of the content on the Voice recorder I would recommend treating all other findings as absolute lies.

[andrasz]

The NYT article is too verbatim description of the LAM accident to sound credible. It was carefully timed to be released after nightfall in EU, ensuring maximum period of 'float' before official denial. It has achieved this, all news outlets are picking it up parrot fashion as fact.

I expect there will be a statement of sorts from BEA sometime in the morning, a couple of hours from now. Until then, I would give zero credibility to the story.

(Of note, I wholeheartedly agree with all the comments above that the reinforced cockpit doors are a safety risk, no matter whether it becomes a factor in this accident or not.)

[DozyWannabe]

A member of the intelligence services will certainly be present at the extraction of CVR data.
I'd be surprised if that's the case. You'd likely have a judicial presence at the handover to ensure the evidence is handled correctly, but there's no real reason to have military, intelligence or similar people present at playback.

...what was quoted as a "senior investigator"
Nope - the precise term used by the NYT was "A senior military official involved in the investigation", which could mean pretty much anything.

[Ultra Glide]

The initial reports that the airplane was in cruise in good weather and took 8 minutes to descend and crash greatly reduced the odds of mechanical or system failure in my mind.

More likely, something abnormal had to be going on in the cockpit.

The scenario from the NYT report is at least highly possible.

It's a major pain but there should never be only one person in the cockpit now that we have reinforced doors.

I don't want to go into too much detail but if there's only one person in the cockpit and they're not incapacitated they can most certainly prevent anyone else from entering the cockpit of an A-320 indefinitely. I assume the same applies for other aircraft types.

(I can't think of any way to physically break down the door with what is typically available in the cabin. Those doors are ROBUST!)

[andrasz]

AFAIK the accuracy of this [NYT] report has not been called into question by anybody

Look at the clock! It is just coming up to 6am in Europe...

Being one of the few who followed the thread from start, among the thousand posts so far there is ONE by Capt Kremin which deserves attention and closer scrutiny:

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/558654-airbus-a320-crashed-southern-france-27.html#post8916098

If the analysis presented is correct (and I'm not qualified to judge) it strongly implies that the A/C was under pilot control during the descent.

[TopBunk]

As a retired captain for a major European carrier, and having flown A320 family as captain for 4+ years (just to establish some credibility).

Having previously favoured the decompression / start drills through descent first loop, that left me a little troubled in that if they had completed the memory drills to start the descent and therefore had donned the oxygen masks, I would not expect both of them to subsequently lose consciousness before completing the drills. The spinning of the altitude selector to below MSA I could live with, and the subsequent vertical and horizontal paths, and indeed the rates of descent, although as commented elsewhere, I would have expected a decleration to 250 kts at FL100.

What I would like to observe is that, whilst CNN/NYT are potentially being speculative, that the scenario they outline does at least fit the known facts of the flight path and lack of comms.

One thing that we can rely on is that background checks on the pilots will be have been high on the to-do list from the very start. Whether or not they show anything remains to be seen and just may be the reason the names of the 6 member crew have not been released. Time will tell.

Should this unpalatable theory come to be proven, then for sure there will be swiftly implemented changes. Let's hope they are better thought out than after 9/11.

Having said I had flown the A320 family, I finished my career on the B747-400 which had it's own dedicated toilet, which would be the gold standard.

[olasek]

I expect there will be a statement of sorts from BEA sometime in the morning
I don't expect any comment from them unless the NYT story is totally false.

[TRF4EVR]

Being one of the few who followed the thread from start, among the thousand posts so far there is ONE by Capt Kremin which deserves attention and closer scrutiny:

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post8916098

Full points to Kremin. An impressive and if I may say so, incisive post. Must have missed it, somehow.

[Castlehard]

Per info from the Gendarmarie, the flight data recorder was spotted yesterday and an attempt to recover it will be made today.

Both NYT and AFP are reporting the cockpit door storyline.

[wiggy]

Good Morning/Bonjour.

It's not that long ago (yesterday PM in fact) that according to some here the NYT was claiming the FDR had been found (some posted links here), although the authorities on the spot were making clear it had not been found...and it hadn't. Quite why is anyone is giving the NYT any credibility at the moment on any other issue surrounding the accident is a mystery to me...

Across the Atlantic the (UK's) Guardian reporter's p. poor knowledge of French seems to have led to various incorrect claims about the contents of FDR circulating in the UK media even after the BEA news conference ( to paraphrase - the BEA head's comments that the CVR would allow them to hear/analyse "noises, voices, alarms" was translated as: "we have heard noises, voices, alarms")

Til we hear if from an official form France's Bureau of Investigation of the content on the Voice recorder I would recommend treating all other findings as absolute lies.

Pretty much agree.

[janeczku]

Looks like the flight crew can override the emergency keypad opening mechanism. Nothing wrong with that except when you have a terrorist or piloting nut job behind that bullet-proof door.
This cockpit security concept essentially introduced a single point of failure vulnerability in the plane.


https://www.dropbox.com/s/s0j0j2coumkyu12/a320-cockpit-locking-system.png?dl=1

[MU-2]

I normally sit and watch but this is getting seriously bad. Everyone wants to be the 'Man'.
I have 48 years driving aircraft including A340 and B747-400 and 24000+ hours.

For me if you post an opinion, mislead or copy comments and put them into the media you must be held accountable. And no, not good enough to say "not me sir I was reporting from a source". You must be prepared to put your credibility, proffessional career and personal assets to the test. That is whats required of most International Pilots. So put up or shut up.

[training wheels]

Being one of the few who followed the thread from start, among the thousand posts so far there is ONE by Capt Kremin which deserves attention and closer scrutiny:

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/558654-airbus-a320-crashed-southern-france-27.html#post8916098

If the analysis presented is correct (and I'm not qualified to judge) it strongly implies that the A/C was under pilot control during the descent.

Yes, a very good analysis by Capt Kremin .. thoroughly concur with that suggestion!

[White Knight]

Is the use of mobile 'phones dangerous, or is it not?

No it is not dangerous. Attested to by the fact that many airlines have onboard telephony and wifi connectivity! The 'no phone' thing with some airlines is a hang up from the days when mobile phones were new and the effects on aircraft systems was unknown!

Heck - I even remember reaching V1 many years ago in a 340 when my phone started ringing loudly... I got a very pained look from the F/O (possibly becasue of my choice of ringtone) but the 'plane didn't drop out of the sky!!!

[vapilot2004]

In nil wind that would true, but the real world is not like that. As you descend (or climb) the head/tail wind component will change. That will change your IAS and if you have select a 'pitch for speed' mode, the pitch attitude (and thus the V/S) will change to maintain the selected speed.

I've never noticed the oscillations like that in my V/S in VNAV PATH after the descent stabilizes. While I have seen V/S variations in LVL CHG and VNAV SPD, they are generally trending either up OR down and not up AND down. Is this behavior peculiar to the Airbus managed descent? Oh, and I think you mean GS not IAS regarding winds aloft change through the layers. Thanks for the response.

Yes there is. Not sure which but you're not sure of.

In an IAS/Mach Idle descent the VS and thus vertical path will vary with wind, temperature/density changes, vertical currents, IAS/Mach switchover and other factors. An Open Descent is always quite variable in terms of achieved profile.

Thanks BusTRE! So, as I understand this, Open Descent is another way of describing the Airbus Managed Descent - and if so, on a Boeing, the corollary would be VNAV SPD, not PATH.

Have you ever heard of wind?


Yes, NoD, and either my wife or my nephew's dog broke some just now.

[bilby_qld]

The banging frantically on the door is less likely to be panic, than it is to be a purely fictional event that has been exposed to the vacuum of news and as result has explosively spread itself all over the internet.

Sizable fragments have been found even in such sheltered spots as PPRuNe.

Any news at this early stage that doesn't come directly from the BEA should be treated with the disdain it deserves.

[janeczku]

French news agency AFP is now supporting the NYT story. They are reporting that first analysis of CVR indicates:


Normal conversation between flight crew at the beginning of flight
PIC is heard leaving cockpit before the descend
Later tried to gain access to the cockpit first knocking than pounding the door
First officer did not open the door or respond to PIC trying to access the cockpit and is never heard again on the tape from that moment on
First officer was hired in 2013 with just a couple of hundred flying hours collected at his previous job


SOURCE (German):Stimmrekorder der Germanwings-Maschine: Ein Pilot aus Cockpit ausgesperrt? | tagesschau.de (http://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/germanwings-absturz-141.html)
http://www.zeit.de/gesellschaft/zeitgeschehen/2015-03/germanwings-flug-4u9525-absturz-airbus-a320-frankreich-live

[Mahatma Kote]

The problem is not at all lack of coverage but too much coverage - at least with GSM.

When you are at altitude you can see many base-stations within the 25km (or 50km with software mods) range of GSM.

There are not that many frequencies available so they they are recycled across base stations and rely on ground level visibility to prevent interference.

In an aircraft all bets are off as there is no physical limitations on signals. This is also seen when in tall buildings. The higher you get the less likely you will get a clean call. I remember hiding in the toilets to blank out most signals and only use the strong local base station.

When considering SMS there may well be moments when the signal is clean but the phone generally won't try and send. The algorithm is for ever increasing delays between retries - sometimes up to days.

[wiggy]

French news agency AFP seems to have corroborated the NYT story with their own sources.

Anyone able to provide a link directly to the AFP's supposed corroboration?

[David75]

After MH370 and now this incident it is becoming clearer that the media needs a code of conduct in reporting these incidents. Confusing and inconsistent media reports fuels both a lack of trust(and appearance of disorganisation) in the responding agencies and breeds conspiracy theories when the intial media reports are later proven incorrect.


Timelines - UTC and local not just local time
Speculation - clearly marked as such.
Quotes needs to be attributed - so incorrect quotes by the media can be quickly disproven. Unnamed sources with bad information just destroy credibility of everybody involved.

[fgrieu]

All French media outlets including Crash de l'A320 de Germanwings : un des pilotes bloqué hors du cockpit? | France info (http://www.franceinfo.fr/actu/faits-divers/article/crash-de-l-a320-de-germanwings-y-avait-il-un-seul-pilote-dans-le-cockpit-660723) have this quote:Selon une source proche de l'enquête citée par l'AFP, "Au début du vol, on entend l'équipage parler normalement puis on entend le bruit d'un des sièges qui recule, une porte qui s'ouvre et se referme, des bruits indiquant qu'on retape à la porte et il n'y a plus de conversation à ce moment-là jusqu'au crash."
My translation:According to a source close to the inquiry cited by Agence France Presse "At the beginning of the flight, it is heard the crew speaking normally then it is heard the noise of one of the seat backing, a door that opens and closes, noises indicating it is knocked on the door again and there is no more conversation from this moment till the crash."

[EastofKoksy]

Mode S transponder data should provide information about the selected altitude - assuming the descent was initiated by one of the pilots.

[nezza]

If stories of PIC being locked out are true, doesn't this then point to FO being incapacitated rather than suicidal because if suicidal surely they would have just pointed it at the ground and pressed fast, rather than the 8 min descent?

[andre1990]

And if I saw the pilot struggling to return to the cockpit, id certainly be helping him kick that door down.

Surely they must have heard multiple people behind that door after a good 6 or so minutes

[sopwithnz]

They are simply quoting NYT as their source .. there is nothing to confirm it at all.:ugh:

[ChrisVJ]

Serious problem.

There is a growing awareness that aircraft are vulnerable when one pilot leaves the cockpit.

If you allow any form of access from the cabin, for instance to avoid a Helios situation, then it might be used by desperate cabin crew during a hijacking. If you don't then either pilots can not leave the flight deck during the flight of if they do the aircraft is vulnerable.

There haven't been nearly as many hijackings since armoured doors were installed but I am a little surprised that once they were mandated no one took the time to think it all the way through.

[Auberon]

If stories of PIC being locked out are true, doesn't this then point to FO being incapacitated rather than suicidal because if suicidal surely they would have just pointed it at the ground and pressed fast, rather than the 8 min descent?

If the FO was incapacitated, who initiated the descent? That he just happened to be incapacitated to press hard enough on the stick to start a descent but not hard enough to enter a dive or change heading doesn't sound feasible.

[Cows getting bigger]

Going back a decade and a bit, I was one of those who strongly argued against the concept of a Sky Marshall. Perhaps it is time to reopen the discussion as clearly there are risks/weaknesses associated with cockpit door procedures and mechanisms?

[Teddy Robinson]

"Isn't this forum called "Rumor" network?:

This defence of blatant trolling is wearing thin, akin to scientology claiming the right to free speech.
Notably, the people best qualified to offer an opinion based on actual line experience have steered clear from the 51 pages of mindless speculation posted in the 48 hours post accident.

Political correctness and inclusiveness is one thing, but when a Professional pilots forum becomes so diluted by guesswork that it's primary purpose is compromised perhaps it is time for a rethink.
Like it or not, these pages are considered a legitimate source of news by popular media, and the latest whacko theory can be plastered over the front page of any headline hungry rag worldwide at the click of a mouse.

It is rather akin to continually adding water to a filter coffee machine: in the end there is nothing in the output that justifies the investment in achieving an objective, the result is hot water, or in the case of this thread hot air from plenty of experts who have yet to operate in anything but a virtual cockpit.

Every time a major incident occurs, the magnitude of the trolling problem increases exponentially, and when challenged, the same defence is used.

Rumours and speculation are not the same animal.
Creating headlines from speculation is not the way that professional aviation operates, sorry if some flight-sim bubbles just got popped.

If there was ever a justification to create a professional forum along the lines of the dedicated airline forums, perhaps this is the time to consider the matter further.

Meanwhile, another thread has appeared on RN, pushing a particular line of speculation. Hopefully it will be removed, but in an increasingly PC justified environment the likelihood is that it will not.

From the information released to date, we know that the aircraft crashed, the location is known, and the number of people who died is also known.
As hard facts are released during the course of the investigation, certainly those will be the catalyst for informed discussion.

Whilst this may be a "virtual" discussion, the accident is all too real.
This is not the time nor the place for virtual cockpit experts to strut their stuff.

[LEM]

This scenario is the same as the suicide of the copilot on an Embraer195 in Mozambique last year, I think.

Unfortunately, banging on the door won't help.

The only way would be to smash a window and provoke a decompression.
In that case the door would automatically unlock.

I had raised the suicide issue years ago, because of the stupid door, but nobody would listen....

Terrible news, and it will for sure be even more disgusting after nothing will have changed because it's not feasible to interrupt the cabin service to have a flight attendant in the cockpit when one of the pilots goes to make a phone call....

[Tu.114]

In many airlines, it is SOP to always have two people in the flight deck.

When one of the pilots leaves to follow natures call, the other one of course stays in his seat, and one of the flight attendants will join him. After the business in the lavatory has been done, the F/A will let him back in after verification.

Does GWI not observe this simple rule?

[Castlehard]

Does anyone know GW's procedure for locking the door when one pilot leaves the flight deck? Is it possible they prefer to engage lock mode, and a pilot suffering a health event might be alone for a preprogrammed interval?

JAFP

Good question, especially since discussions on German TV do not acknowledge the possibility of a keycode entry. The discussions here state it is not possible to enter unless person inside opens the door.

[Teddy Robinson]

BBC : the New York Times quoted an unnamed investigator
UK Independent :The Independent was unable to independently verify The New York Times' report.

un named, unattributable … but news worthy

[Cagedh]

Stop asking about how the A320 door works.
It's all in this Youtube movie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixEHV7c3VXs

[janeczku]

Sadly, nothing seems to have been learned from previous pilot suicide/murder crashs that would not have happened without the bullet proof cage in the pointy edge of the plane.

Minutes before the crash the co-pilot left the cockpit to the aircraft lavatory. The captain then manually changed flight altitude from 38,000 feet to an altitude of 592 feet below ground level. He did this three times, according to investigators. He also retarded the throttles to idle. He also repeatedly manually selected the maximum operating speed (Vmo).
One the cockpit voice recorder sounds were heard of someone pounding on the cockpit door.


ASN News » Investigators: LAM Embraer 190 accident likely intentionally caused by pilot (http://news.aviation-safety.net/2013/12/22/investigators-lam-embraer-190-accident-likely-intentionally-caused-by-pilot/)

[capster]

An easy solution, that will not happen due to accountants, is to include a toilet and galley behind the locked cockpit door.

[dr dre]

An easy solution, that will not happen due to accountants, is to include a toilet and galley behind the locked cockpit door.

Contrary to popular opinion, most professional pilots don't have time to cook their own food preflight or inflight. And their isn't simply enough space or the ability to retrofit a toilet and a galley in any modern airliners.

[BitMoreRightRudder]

An easy solution, that will not happen due to accountants, is to include a toilet and galley behind the locked cockpit door.


An easy solution?

[Greenlights]

another easy solution is to always keep 2 crew member in a cokpit for exemple ? :ugh:

[efatnas]

U are absolutely right. With eliminating the engineer, the stability of the crew is compromised. A tripot is the most stable construction in the universe. Take a leg away and it crashes. I was ten years Captain on a B727 and found it the safest platform mainly because of the third crew. I flew also single pilot fighters and several two cockpit crew airplanes in corporate and airlines, B767 at the moment. Humanity is missing, that's right. At least the FAA got away from computers only flying now, others will follow, but engineers probably wont come back. Gladly I'm on a long range widebody now and we have usually one extra around.

[INeedTheFull90]

If it were an incap, the crew could still gain entry. To deny access to all takes a concious effort by someone.

[timmermc]

I thought it would be good idea to post a link to a French TV-station following events minute by minute. For those who understand French.

BFMTV en Direct: regarder la chaine info en live - BFMTV (http://www.bfmtv.com/mediaplayer/live-video/)

The debate now on air, is with a French Female Pilot and a retired BEA official.

[capster]

In the freighter I fly, we manage to make our own coffee, heat our own meals and use the toilet without the help of an air hostess, all the whilst complying with our SOP. If a galley and toilet were located behind the cockpit door and my colleague were to become suicidal, at least I would have a chance to disable him without being locked out of the office, as long as he doesnt have over 100ml of toothpaste or deoderant on him.

[INeedTheFull90]

That's lovely, but for those of us who carry hundreds of passengers, each of which could pose a threat, we need something to protect us.

[londonman]

@full90

I'm not convinced that would work. 6ft determined pilot vs petite cabin crew member. Quick knock-out punch. Tied up. Locked door.

[Simplythebeast]

So we have a European built aircraft operated by a European Company , Flying between two European Countries. The investigation is being carried out by European Agencies yet for some reason Americans tell us almost immediately that there is no terrorist connection and now a Senior American Military official is allegedly leaking information the the NYT about information gleaned from the CVR. Not comfortable with how this is playing out.

[capster]

What I am suggesting is that in airliners that carry pax, the flight deck crew have their own toilet and galley behind the cockpit door. This would result in a few less rows of seats, and will therefore never happen.

[twalfa]

I thought it would be good idea to post a link to a French TV-station following events minute by minute. For those who understand French.

BFMTV en Direct: regarder la chaine info en live - BFMTV

The debate now on air, is with a French Female Pilot and a retired BEA official.
Thanks.
The plot thickens again...

[soupisgoodfood]

And if I saw the pilot struggling to return to the cockpit, id certainly be helping him kick that door down.

Surely they must have heard multiple people behind that door after a good 6 or so minutes

No, I doubt you would. I'm not sure I would, if I put myself in the position of the average passenger without the benefit of hindsight:

1) I wouldn't want to be mistaken for a terrorist and risk being attack by cabin crew or other passengers, or shot by a sky marshall.

2) If the pilot wanted the help, he would surely have asked.

3) How would I know that he was the pilot anyway, and not a terrorist with a uniform?

4) What reason would I have to believe that this was going to be anything but an embarrassing incident for the pilot, until it was too late?

[SandyW]

I would prefer that they didn't have to lock the door in the first place. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the locked door is a critical flight safety issue.

[CJ Romeo]

I'm not an Aviation Professional, but I am an industry expert in things that are also prone to the odd media frenzy over 'disasters'.

It's not just aviation, but there are all sorts of daft theories and so called experts (and people who know a bit, but who's knowledge is not quite current or close enough to the incident) the media are all too willing to report on any of this.

It's also rather easy to spot the journalists on here with their fishing rods!

[akaSylvia]

However, in those rare cases of pilot suicide/mass murder, there's not a single instance of a safe descent leading to CFIT. Why risk eight minutes of possible interference, listening to your co-pilot and ATC when you have control of the cockpit and could get it over with much quicker.

Not that I like any of the other explanations any better, quite frankly.

[jack schidt]

1) The cockpit door keycode is used to call the flight deck to open the door. At that point a pilot would verify the person trying to access the cockpit and only then swictch a switch to "release" the magnetic locks securing the door closed.

2) If the "in cockpit" pilot is unconcious while the other is out of the cockpit, a different code can be entered from the outside with a timer delay which would auto open the door if not permanently locked (using the deadbolt) by the pilot inside the cockpit. (This timer delay is there to allow a number of seconds to pass with the buzzer sounding in the cockpit for the "incapacitated" pilot to open the door using the console switch. Should the incapacitated pilot not open the door then the normal (magnetised) door locks would automatically open after the timer has expired.

3) Should any of the codes be used to try to gain access to the cockpit then, a lock door (spring loaded) switch can be held in the cockpit by a pilot until the "deadbolt" is put on to prevent the entry into the cockpit. To put the deadbolt on and prevent permanent access to the cockpit, a pilot has to get out of his seat normally and "slide/move" the deadbolt across the door preventing any access if the door was tried to be opened.

If the deadbolt was pushed across the door from the inside of the cockpit then, no matter what normal actions someone takes from outside the door, you will not be able to gain access.

[FlyingStone]

However, in those rare cases of pilot suicide/mass murder, there's not a single instance of a safe descent leading to CFIT. Why risk eight minutes of possible interference, listening to your co-pilot and ATC when you have control of the cockpit and could get it over with much quicker.

Crash: LAM E190 over Botswana/Namibia on Nov 29th 2013, captain intentionally crashed aircraft (http://avherald.com/h?article=46c3abde/0010&opt=0)

[BuzzBox]

So, which airline will be the first to require a member of CC to be in the flight deck whilst one of the pilots attends to a call of nature ?

Plenty of airlines already do just that!

[GAZIN]

IMO the aviation authorities have put security above safety.
Security measures get in the way of best practice, on the ground and in the air.
It has and will continue to result in loss of life. Perhaps this approach has saved more lives than have been lost. Who knows?

[NigelOnDraft]

So, which airline will be the first to require a member of CC to be in the flight deck whilst one of the pilots attends to a call of nature ? All this does is shift the problem from pilots with poor intentions to CC. A CC member, locked in the Flt Deck almost has an easier task than a sole pilot to create mischief - especially considering the equipment in the Flt Deck.

If the person's intent is terrorism related i.e. a sleeper, decide which is easier to plant: a pilot with an intensive six figure training process to go through, or a few week CC induction course?

Currently, a CC member would be pushed to rely on getting cockpit access with only 1 pilot present.

[fireflybob]

So, which airline will be the first to require a member of CC to be in the flight deck whilst one of the pilots attends to a call of nature ?

Many already do and have done so for a long time since locked door policy was introduced.

[Whopity]

Sounds very like the RAF's Airbus incident (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/293230/interim_si_voyager_report.pdf#)! Just throw in a locked door and all the holes in the cheese line up.

[first_solo]

Enough regional airlines fly around with single cabin operation, impossible for the CA to leave the cabin unattented.

[fireflybob]

Never mind a toilet break, quite often on a quick turnaround I never got out the seat - it's not very healthy to sit in one position for long periods and the activity of getting out the seat and freshening up keeps you alert and awake.

[kevinbr]

Having experimented in that region with phone signal from an aircraft, no signal. Also having driven on the ground in the area, very very poor signal. Lots of black spots. Generally it is very very hard to get out a text when above 2-3000 meters. You might have signal but text will hang.

[Cagedh]

However, in those rare cases of pilot suicide/mass murder, there's not a single instance of a safe descent leading to CFIT. Why risk eight minutes of possible interference, listening to your co-pilot and ATC when you have control of the cockpit and could get it over with much quicker.

Very good question indeed!
But anyway, locked cockpit door or not, two pilots at the controls or not:
If one of the pilots is determined to kill himself and the passengers, it's more then probable that he will be able to do so.

Discussion about the need of a locked cockpit door are useless. One should perhaps be more careful about WHO is allowed to pilot an airliner, but then again it can never be guaranteed that someone perfectly sane, might freak out at the wrong moment.

I always need to laugh when I see airport security taking a bottle of water or Swiss knife away from a pilot! Utterly futile!

[Pace]

This is absolutely shocking if true that this was an intentional act by a crew member. The security put in place created an awful event which itself was an act of terror (ism)
Someone suggested a changeable code which both crew members select for the day and which overrides any locking action from within but surely any person of the mindset to take himself out and 150 innocent people wouldn't think twice about killing the other crew member to get control of the aircraft!
Since 9/11 all focus has been on aircraft and a multi billion security industry has grown around aviation when there are other modes of transport where equal passenger numbers are carried with zero security
Where do we stop?
The next thing will be retina detection systems to identify crew members of an airline and only allow them access

[silverstrata]

Nigeldraft

All this does is shift the problem from pilots with poor intentions to CC. A CC member, locked in the Flt Deck almost has an easier task than a sole pilot to create mischief - especially considering the equipment in the Flt Deck.



It does not shift anything, Nigel, its been like this for years.

We used to put paper wedges in the door-lock so it would not lock behind us, when flying with certain f/os. The only difference is that people might start talking about the problem, instead of deleting 'troublesome' posts on blogsites and denying it in parliament and the media.

[DarkStar]

Frankly, this thread is losing all credibility.

Lets wait for the next BEA news conference and await the findings from the CVR .

[INeedTheFull90]

It's all economy. And it's been a while since I've see a sat phone on any euro short haul.

Much is being made about phone calls. I don't understand it. What could it possibly do to help the situation?

[twentyyearstoolate]

When the locked door policy was introduced, it was blatantly obvious that something or other disastrous was bound to happen eventually. Fortunately I had retired when locked doors came into use. Had they been introduced before I was due to retire then I might well have been seeking early retirement.

The locked door policy is not only dangerous but signifies a resounding victory for the terrorists.


Totally agree. Things need to change before anything else sinister happens.

[fflyingdog]

My previous post removed to seems i'm in good company ,as for the question on door lock checking ,with my previous company it was checked every pre-flight by crew and maintenance and we (maintenance) changed the code every 7 days.

[gpbeck]

Whatever cabin door procedures are to be, they should not and cannot rely on secrecy for their effectiveness.

[keithpenny]

Would it be prohibitively costly to have ground control of door locks, with a cabin radio communication with a ground station?
And zozo, that's a good question.

[Cagedh]

we (maintenance) changed the code every 7 days.

What's the use of that? Only makes it harder for the crew to remember them and that in itself is dangerous in case of incapacitation! It's simply used as a way to open the cockpit door AFTER A CERTAIN DELAY. If a terrorist were to use it without prior intercom contact with the cockpit or without being on the galley cam, the cockpit crew would simply lock the door. The cockpit door code itself is not that important!

[elfary]

Old cockpit doors policy allowed more than 3000 souls taken away by a few guys with cutters.


I mean, obviously the policy must be improved to cope with suicidal pilots but i can not see how you can have to cope with this without creating new hazards.


I mean it can get really hard to fight human stupidity as it's endless. If you have to protect an airplane from its pilots...then i get lost.