Airbus A320 crashed in Southern France

[Denti]

Can we completly discount the benifit of the deterrent effect on an unstable mind of a second person in the cockpit?

No, we can't. In this singular case. The next case will be different.

So, it is essential that sensible decisions are made but the professionals will not be there to help that decision making process if they abstain from it because they don't realize how far reaching it could be and that they cannot stop that decision process happening that will affect everyone in aviation especially front and rear crew.

I do agree. And yes, of course the professionals will be in that process, or at least try to be heard. Interestingly enough the relevant minister in germany is already talking about removing that dreaded door altogether. That of course will never be possible in the US and probably the UK neither. As always, the decision process will take a lot longer than the limelight of the public will on it and there is a chance that cooler heads will prevail once the politicians and the press have something juicier to talk about.

[NigelOnDraft]

Can we completely discount the benefit of the deterrent effect on an unstable mind of a second person in the cockpit?

I would say no - it cannot be completely discounted, but nor should it be over-emphasised. It is but one factor to add to the "mix" that a complete risk-assessment requires, and would need expert opinion.

I agree with Ian W that the ramifications of this will be felt and perception will play a part. The press are publishing some more balanced articles, including that "2 on Flt Deck" is not necessarily a good thing. Both the BEA, and now Germany, have announced "reviews" of the main factors.

What I am awaiting is the realisation that the basis for this Co-Pilot being on the aircraft was the regulator, not the airline Eventually LH will get bored of being blamed, and state who is responsible for, and issued a certificate for, his medical "fitness".

[Pace]

So, why not have a stipulation added. Say at a cost of approximately £20 per letter, whereby a professional pilot has to go to his GP and request a letter stating that for the previous 12 months he has had no visits to the doctors for what could be a set of issues ie mental/serious physical. This letter can be emailed by the gp, using the pilot ref number, to the CAA medical branch and entered onto the file of the pilot in question.

Helimut

Do you not think that where a persons livelihood career could be at stake that making such moves would not drive these pilots away from the GP?
Surely such highlighting would create a situation where a pilot dealing with a divorce or financial problems will go through it on his/her own by being forced into alternative medicine, Hypnosis or other secret treatments so as to keep their GP records clean when the system should be encouraging the opposite a witch hunt against pilots using a broad brush is NOT the answer. We do not even know what specific mental issue the FO had which would allow him to premeditate a suicide and murder of [ 150 ] people? I would think that was unusual
I am not medically qualified but imagine you need to identify the personality trait that can commit mass murder,identify and target that specific condition and yes remove those people who can harm others from the pilot bank

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by xollob

There are lots and lots of possible outcomes other than the FO.

Decompression incapacitation (is a320 O2 generators in cabin, perhaps wreckage can establish if they had activated). Perhaps forgot to put mask on before initiating descent, planning to not open door till MSA or 10k as per SOP (if that is SOP) captain banking on door to come in might not be SOP to come in in a decomp. If more genuine footage does materialise then state of cabin can help asses if rubber jungle was down.
Medical incapacitation of FO
Door mechanism not working - why haven't they released CVR of door alert opening tone ?
Captain not knowing correct code for re-entry ?
Aircraft doing an uncommanded descent as per other recent A320 ?
Perhaps an electrical situation which reset the MCP modes and altitudes (I dont know what MCP default alt is on airbus when powered up)
A/P disconnect
Defect Situation that threw a/p out
Coffin corner
Window blow out
Another technical defect
Highly stressed FO due to a distraction, not hearing door re-entry (hearing goes first under stress)

Even though there are relatively few undisputed facts known so far, they are already sufficient to cast doubt on at least some, if not most, of those scenarios.

[McRotor96]

For all those putting up theoretical reasons not to make any changes to the "one person in the cockpit" situation, two facts:

1. All 6 of the most recent pilot killing / suicides took place while one person was alone in the cockpit.

2. In the same time period not a single pilot killing / suicide has taken place on a US airline where "one person in the cockpit" is not permitted at any time.

Adopting a policy that has clearly worked is a sensible, measured and appropriate response to this, the sixth mass pilot killing since 1994 and the third in three years.

[Tom Bangla]

@IanW

I think that this crash is going to have a big effect on the industry.

I wonder if it will. It will have, and already has had, a big effect on the psyche of SLF and crew alike. From a crew perspective, people will be thinking about those they have flown with in the past and those they do fly with now (I always had misgivings about X...., etc). And from a pax perspective, people will imagine themselves in the situation of those unfortunate GW passengers and think, there but for grace of God go I. As you say, it's all to do with perceptions.

The way news is consumed these days means that it won't be long before such fears are subsumed and softened by the next major story of relevance to its audience. And the severity of those perceptions - although they won't disappear entirely - will reduce and be filed, mentally and emotionally, with all the other flotsam and jetsam that litter the horizon of daily life. Which leaves a clear field for mature, considered examination of what, if any, changes can and should be made in response to the GW crash. This thread suggests that few would argue against no changes being made to SOP (with the possible exception of four eyes versus two in the FD), while the spotlight may ultimately turn its attention as much on the medical profession as on pilots.

Separately, regarding Lubitz's reported prediction that his actions will change aviation -- what changes might he have thought necessary, and what changes would he have envisaged or wanted?

[Seat 32F]

@Chronus

Delta flight1651 of 01/02/2015, Minneapolis to LA. The Captain was locked out of the cockpit and the F/O landed the plane. Less than two months later we have another lock out, but with disasterous results. Did the incident of Flight 1651 not prompt the need to consider emergency access to cockpit.

I'm confused. It's been stated that in the US there is a two-person in the cockpit rule already in place, in which case if this happened, it must be an ineffective policy, at least in this instance.

[Sublogic]

There is no limit to safety

The safety record of the airline industry is indeed impressive. However, one should not get too carried away with it. The fact that once airborne, miles are quickly flown makes any statistics that counts fatalities versus distance traveled look very good. It seems to me more honest to compare numbers of "transport cases". Meaning that a trip to the supermarket by car counts the same as a non-stop intercontinental flight. These numbers are hard to find, but the ones I saw show that car and plane transport are about equal in safety. This means that it does not harm to work towards even safer air travel and not give up on that subject even when faced with "impossible" cases like this one.

[superq7]

BBC news second recorder found.

Germanwings crash: Second Alps flight recorder found - BBC News

[ensco]

From the BBC story:

"In a separate development, German prosecutors have revealed that Lubitz had researched suicide methods and cockpit door security."

Odds of any other explanation are vanishingly slim now (probably nonexistent).

[londonman]

Anybody looking at my computer's browsing history would show the same searches.

Searching 'cockpit door security'? Why would he need to do that as I'm sure they must cover it in Airbus 320 101 course.

[Isotope Toast]

"Searching 'cockpit door security'? Why would he need to do that as I'm sure they must cover it in Airbus 320 101 course."

That was my first thought exactly. Wouldn't he know more about it than most anything he could find on the internet?

[GHEVY]

As reported today, the German Justice department released information that Lubitz was searching for methods to commit suicide as well as cockpit door systems between the period of March 16th - 23rd. I'm not sure how much proof the doubters require.

[ThoddyEADS]

Yes, suicide is a possibility, but by no means the only possible cause of this tragedy.

Yes. There are other possible causes in such a case. But not in this case. The blackbox 2 has been recovered. Then you will learn:

Denial -> you are still here
Anger
Bargaining
Depression
Acceptance

Most of us have analyzed all data released and have accepted the hard and cold truth: suicide. And it will change the industry. And that is what Lubitz has told to his girlfriend.

[seafire6b]

Originally Posted by Chronus

Delta flight1651 of 01/02/2015, Minneapolis to LA. The Captain was locked out of the cockpit and the F/O landed the plane. Less than two months later we have another lock out, but with disasterous results. Did the incident of Flight 1651 not prompt the need to consider emergency access to cockpit.

Therefore in view of the pre-existing USA "always minimum two crew per cockpit" rule, in the above case was it actually the FO plus an accompanying CC who became locked in the cockpit during flight?

[BOING]

Frankly I doubt if this will cause more than a tiny blip in airline travel bookings.
The public is desperate to travel for various reasons and has soon learned to accept all sorts of mechanical and training incidents as the cost of convenience.

Did people stop flying in 747s when cargo doors blew off, did people stop flying in DC10s after a #2 motor broke up disabling all primary flying controls, have people stopped flying with Malaysian after two major losses? Did people stop flying after 9/11?

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by seafire6b

Delta flight1651 of 01/02/2015, Minneapolis to LA. The Captain was locked out of the cockpit and the F/O landed the plane. Less than two months later we have another lock out, but with disasterous results. Did the incident of Flight 1651 not prompt the need to consider emergency access to cockpit.

Therefore in view of the pre-existing USA "always minimum two crew per cockpit" rule, in the above case was it actually the FO plus an accompanying CC who became locked in the cockpit during flight?

Reportedly, yes.

[DIA74]

FDR found ?

It will be interesting to hear, eventually, what the FDR reveals. I keep thinking, Lubitz operated into BCN that morning. It seems his Capt saw no reason to be concerned by his mental state or actions on that sector, or on the turnround. Initial phases of the return leg also appear to have been routine. They had been working together several hours that day. If he had had any doubts as to Lubitz's mental state,or ability to operate, he surely would not have handed him control and left him alone and unsupervised on the FD.

[xtp]

Maybe uncertainty and speculation will reduce now they have found the FDR.

Germanwings crash: Co-pilot Lubitz 'researched suicide' - BBC News

[ACMS]

There is a very good reason why the crew inside the cockpit can override the emergency code, the event someone under duress is using it.

So, how do you stop one of the cockpit crew using this "special code" under duress??

Can't can you.

The cockpit needs to be kept safe, end of story.