Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Airbus A320 crashed in Southern France

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Airbus A320 crashed in Southern France

Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:08
  #2361 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Age: 78
Posts: 3,681
Purely as a matter of interest, Mrs 411 and I were discussing this crash last night. She flew as CC on the 1-11, the 707 and the DC-10 with Laker (I only ever flew the DC-10). She tells me that it was standard procedure on the 1-11 for one of the CC to sit up front whenever one of the pilots took a break and that was 30 - 35 years ago. (All the other aircraft in the Laker fleet carried a flight engineer so the problem didn't occur).
JW411 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:10
  #2362 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,963
Odyssues, You did read the article, didn't you?

The point being that a little bit of perspective wouldn't go astray. It's happened before, it'll probably happen again, and no amount of 'do this, do that' will change it. Odds are you'll die in a car accident on the way to the airport, so just relax and put it down to a statistical anomaly.
Hempy is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:11
  #2363 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Newcastle
Age: 49
Posts: 562
What a heart wrenching statement by the father of Paul Bramley. Very dignified and full of what looking to the future should be.
MATELO is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:14
  #2364 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Windy City
Posts: 8
Not sure how credible Maria W. Is. She claims she was locked in a bathroom by Lubitz. That's not my understanding of how bathroom doors typically function.
Castlehard is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:15
  #2365 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Clinton WA
Age: 71
Posts: 74
The total environment

Great post Mark Beacon (currently 2390). Trust, wisdom, familiarity with the team, all in decline. I could tell a similar story. Trust amplifies when it is given, but has a hard time growing when not given. Familiarity provides more windows into another person. Randomized crews may be graphed as being capable of efficient action but I will never believe they function together as a cohesive, well informed team.

But would you have done the same thing if you 1) had just met the person; 2) found you had some unexplainable dislike for the person?

Last edited by Leightman 957; 28th Mar 2015 at 17:16. Reason: 2390, for what that's worth
Leightman 957 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:17
  #2366 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,045
Piloto2011
I cannot see why so many are opposing the two-crew rule ... Just the presence of cabin crew on the flight deck would have prevented this tragedy
I am afraid I disagree - it likely would have just altered the exact way he did it.
Why not further restricting the two-crew rule to only the purser allowed on the flight deck with only one pilot present and the door shut?

Being appointed the role of the purser requires longer employment with an operator plus a decent performance record. Also, cabin crew allowed onto the flight deck from now on are to undergo a more thorough background check including a more restrictive medical similar to a flight crew's.
Such mitigations would reduce the concerns many have (including my own), but in the same breath would be why the airlines would likely resist (cost).

But they still leave the biggest problem unanswered - you are trying to "mitigate" having pilots on board who will deliberately crash the aircraft. That to me is an unacceptable premise, and not possible to comprehensively mitigate against. So I think the basic issue needs to be addressed, not accepted?
NigelOnDraft is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:22
  #2367 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 309
After 9/11, certainly in the airline I worked for (very big wide body operator) , the doors just appeared - no scenario guidance, no what ifs,no training, nothing
Good Business Sense is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:25
  #2368 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 91
@Castlehard:

Not sure how credible Maria W. Is. She claims she was locked in a bathroom by Lubitz. That's not my understanding of how bathroom doors typically function.
In continental Europe, internal doors often open outwards rather than inwards. You can lock someone in by blocking the door and refusing to let it open.
AirScotia is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:27
  #2369 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Gone Flying...
Age: 59
Posts: 274
FullWings:
Trying to find a technical solution on the aircraft to the “problem” of a suicidal pilot is pointless, IMHO. Whether it involves doors, other people, computers or whatever, if the guy trying to crash the aeroplane and kill himself and possibly others is determined enough, they will succeed despite any precautions.

There have been many fatal accidents in the past where the pilot(s) have been doing everything in their power NOT to crash, yet it has still happened. I think most people who don’t fly for a living truly don’t understand how a moment’s inattention or an incorrect control input during a critical phase of flight (like takeoff and landing) can lead very quickly to disaster. A deliberate contrary action could speed that up to almost instantaneous.

For non-pilots, imagine sitting in the passenger seat of a car doing 60mph. Just as you are about to pass a car going in the opposite direction at the same speed, the driver turns sharply into the path of the oncoming vehicle. Even if you had a duplicate steering wheel fitted on your side, it would be too late to do anything in the fraction of a second that remained.

The real problem is how to avoid having a pilot with severe mental health issues operating an aircraft. By the time they are sat in the seat it is too late...
(my bold)

Thanks FullWings! Finally a sensible post in this forum. The airline companies who have just decided to add a second person into the cockpit while one of the pilots are out are only responding to media hysteria! To add another person into the cockpit is to add another potential for hazard, once if a pilot wants to do harm, he will find a way to do it!!!
aguadalte is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:29
  #2370 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Age: 65
Posts: 294
But they still leave the biggest problem unanswered - you are trying to "mitigate" having pilots on board who will deliberately crash the aircraft. That to me is an unacceptable premise, and not possible to comprehensively mitigate against. So I think the basic issue needs to be addressed, not accepted?
There may be another way. Most agree that drone/remote control/pilotless is not the way to go at least for the foreseeable. The PF could crash deliberately in close ground proximity by sudden gross control action impossible for PNF to overcome let alone a FA. In this case the pilot chose to set an un-cleared course, speed and descent towards high terrain. It would be fairly easy for an algorithm either onboard, ground or interactive ground/flight to take or prevent contol action in extreme circumstances. It would require a huge amount of technical evaluation and pilot input to find an appropriate balance but I think it could be done and implemented in a useful timescale.
Lemain is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:38
  #2371 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,045
It would require a huge amount of technical evaluation and pilot input to find an appropriate balance but I think it could be done and implemented in a useful timescale.
Trouble is the only "useful timescale" most are working to now is that for tomorrow's newspapers
NigelOnDraft is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:44
  #2372 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: England
Posts: 8
ASN News » List of aircraft accidents and incidents intentionally caused by pilots

40 years: 591 dead in 11 world jet suicide events. Matched in the USA every 1 day (hospital errors) & every 6 days (gun deaths). Get a grip.
Right. But 422 of them were in the past 3 years, suggesting this is something the airlines are right to be concerned about.

And your entire premise is wrong. Imagine if the industry had adopted your "acceptable loss" / "grip-getting" attitude? Presumably an occasional mid-air collision or door falling off would simply have required some corporate manning-up rather than spending millions to develop collision warning systems and redesigning doors...?
McRotor96 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:47
  #2373 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Outer space
Age: 48
Posts: 3
The ex-gf interview

To all who are speculating about quotes taken from this interview with his ex:

Please bear in mind that this "exclusive interview" with his ex-girlfriend was conducted by German newspaper "Bild". A sensationalist publication, comparable with Daily Mail and such, or even worse.

It's also well known that they pay good amounts of $ for "exclusive interviews".

I wouldn't pay too much attention to what is written in that newspaper.
SilverCircle is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 17:56
  #2374 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 33
The reinforced locking doors were certainly a reaction to 9/11 but I disgree that they were not carefully considered. No solution is perfect. The reinforced doors and locking mechanisms prevented some possible risks and introduced others. These new risks were doubtless considered and thought to be far less likely than the ones that were prevented, and thus a resonable trade off for the benefit provided, as nearly every safety and design decision is.

Life is not risk-free and it cannot be. We can never assure 100% safety.
ams6110 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 18:08
  #2375 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Age: 50
Posts: 201
Sanity Check

aguadalte

The real problem is how to avoid having a pilot with severe mental health issues operating an aircraft. By the time they are sat in the seat it is too late...
Are you suggesting a sanity cross check pre-flight?
Paramedics establish if a patient is mentally altered at a scene by confirming they are 4x4. Meaning you ask 4 basic questions and verify 4 correct answers e.g. name, todays date, who is the President, do you know where you are. Any hesitation or spurious answer helps assess the individuals state of mind.

IMHO this is flawed and far better to assume that one flight crew might become mentally altered at any time i.e. mid-flight. So you should have at least 2 people behind the security door at all times. Maybe consider putting a bathroom inside the secure cockpit area. Allowing only one person up front is clearly a single point of failure in an environment engineered for redundancy.
xcitation is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 18:09
  #2376 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,950
Quote:
ASN News » List of aircraft accidents and incidents intentionally caused by pilots

40 years: 591 dead in 11 world jet suicide events. Matched in the USA every 1 day (hospital errors) & every 6 days (gun deaths). Get a grip.
Right. But 422 of them were in the past 3 years, suggesting this is something the airlines are right to be concerned about.

And your entire premise is wrong. Imagine if the industry had adopted your "acceptable loss" / "grip-getting" attitude? Presumably an occasional mid-air collision or door falling off would simply have required some corporate manning-up rather than spending millions to develop collision warning systems and redesigning doors...?
McRotor96, not sure that logic is correct - rather than the number of deaths would not number of fatal accidents be a better comparison? 40 years ago there were not as many aircraft capable of carrying 300/400 passengers given that most of the accidents involving suicidal pilots caused the deaths of all on board.

Last edited by fireflybob; 28th Mar 2015 at 19:41.
fireflybob is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 18:16
  #2377 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: California
Posts: 16
@McRotor96

For people stating that they don't like the idea of a '2 person' rule - or who are uncomfortable with the extra person being a FA. Perhaps it is worth looking at the rest of the world - specifically at the USA where that IS the rule. How many pilot killings have been on US carriers operating that rule? It seems to be zero.

The '2 person rule' is not a perfect solution - that doesn't exist - but the evidence to date suggests that it is an important, simple and inexpensive precaution that appears to be largely effective. Which is presumably why it has been implemented (in true stable-door fashion) by many carriers in the last few days.
It is seeing yet another knee-jerk reaction that worries me. You may well be correct, but I would have thought making this change and doing it correctly would require a fair amount of careful planning. Also, the huge publicity of this recent event may have caused the bad guys to see weaknesses in the system that they had not seen before.
nsmith is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 18:20
  #2378 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,209
The doors have since inception constituted an opportunity for a sole person to do what he wants with the aircraft without interference.

As long as the problem of pilot suicide only manifested itself in third world airlines, we first world folks perceived ourselves safe. I still remain disappointed that the regulatory authorities took no action the first time this happened.

Human nature is such that where there is an operational weakness, somebody someday will take advantage of it.

Back in the days when Stevenson et famille were putting up lighthouses in remote locations, much thought was given to minimum crewing.

Two keepers were deemed insufficient since one keeper could quietly do in the other and claim an unfortunate accident without any witnesses to the contrary.

The lighthouse minimum crew was set at three.

As for cabin crew being up front, many are given the training to help out in case of incapacitation. What we have here is the most severe form.

As for limited hours flown, military pilots are flying fast jets with far fewer hours.
RatherBeFlying is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 18:25
  #2379 (permalink)  

Freight God
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: LS-R54A
Posts: 308
nsmith

especially the last part of your post deserves a big thumbs up. I just had some user PM me in forcefull languague because I in a previous post had suggested a complete rethink of securty procedures involving the flight deck (and I gather from some commentators that I am not alone on this) outside of the public eye.

Of course any realistic and balanced approach to any procedure in therms of security needs to be outside of the public eye. Every procedure has weaknesses and a public discussion especially in a procedure design phase only highlights them to any misbehaving party.
Hunter58 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2015, 18:35
  #2380 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Coastal Georgia
Age: 67
Posts: 40
Time flys...

40 years ago there were no aircraft capable of carrying 300/400 passengers
We had widebody aircraft by three different manufacturers at that time.
number0009 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.