Airbus A320 crashed in Southern France
Pax here. Puzzled by all the discussion about the subtleties of suicidal tendencies. This guy was a mass murderer and a suicide. Suicidal isn't the whole picture.
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still trust the pilot
I'm a passenger, so can't contribute to the technical aspects of this discussion, but I did want to add my personal view.
When I take a taxi, I trust the driver to not swerve into oncoming traffic. When I take a bus, I trust the driver. When I take a train, I trust the driver.
And when I fly, I trust the pilot. I also trust the maintenance engineers, the air traffic controllers, the manufacturers and their assembly technicians, and their subcontractors, inspectors, etc, etc. I trust all these people to have put together a package and service that will get me from A to B, safely.
This trust existed before this crash, and it exists today. I would fly Germanwings tomorrow if I had to, because I'm trust it's staffed by good people and good pilots who do a professional job.
Given enough samples and enough time, travel by any means (even walking) will encounter a fatal event. Sometimes with a technical root-cause and sometime with a human one. Internally triggered or externally. It's a statistical certainty, but you can't live your life afraid.
Flying remains incredibly safe. Things happen, rarely, and when they do we must all take a moment for those that were affected, and ask the questions that must be asked. Sometimes there are things that can make a material difference in future outcomes, but sometimes it comes down to just bad luck and statistics.
I'd love to get a flight deck tour mid-flight, but... you know... regular people are crazy, and I feel over the years people are getting even more so. Maybe people have always been crazy and it's just camera phones and youtube that now we're seeing more examples. Although it's a shame, I prefer the pilots behind a locked door.
TL;DR: I trust pilots.
When I take a taxi, I trust the driver to not swerve into oncoming traffic. When I take a bus, I trust the driver. When I take a train, I trust the driver.
And when I fly, I trust the pilot. I also trust the maintenance engineers, the air traffic controllers, the manufacturers and their assembly technicians, and their subcontractors, inspectors, etc, etc. I trust all these people to have put together a package and service that will get me from A to B, safely.
This trust existed before this crash, and it exists today. I would fly Germanwings tomorrow if I had to, because I'm trust it's staffed by good people and good pilots who do a professional job.
Given enough samples and enough time, travel by any means (even walking) will encounter a fatal event. Sometimes with a technical root-cause and sometime with a human one. Internally triggered or externally. It's a statistical certainty, but you can't live your life afraid.
Flying remains incredibly safe. Things happen, rarely, and when they do we must all take a moment for those that were affected, and ask the questions that must be asked. Sometimes there are things that can make a material difference in future outcomes, but sometimes it comes down to just bad luck and statistics.
I'd love to get a flight deck tour mid-flight, but... you know... regular people are crazy, and I feel over the years people are getting even more so. Maybe people have always been crazy and it's just camera phones and youtube that now we're seeing more examples. Although it's a shame, I prefer the pilots behind a locked door.
TL;DR: I trust pilots.
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Chissay en Touraine, France.
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nigelondraft, your response to my post typifies the mediocrity that currently exists.
And you offer some, predictable, crashing glimpses of the obvious.
It can be better than this. And 150 or so now dead people, their relations and friends have a right to expect it to be so.
Visit not your simplistic, mediocratic views on me, please. This is Aviation. And it can, and should be Better.
And you offer some, predictable, crashing glimpses of the obvious.
It can be better than this. And 150 or so now dead people, their relations and friends have a right to expect it to be so.
Visit not your simplistic, mediocratic views on me, please. This is Aviation. And it can, and should be Better.
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Centre of Universe
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Middlesbrough
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Training in any industry should not simply be focused on teaching a skill but also in building character."
The General Medical Council in the UK think that this is something to be introduced to doctors training in the light that their investigations have resulted in at least 28 suicides while under investigation by them.
Push hard and you will break committed individuals, You might well break more than you had already.
The General Medical Council in the UK think that this is something to be introduced to doctors training in the light that their investigations have resulted in at least 28 suicides while under investigation by them.
Push hard and you will break committed individuals, You might well break more than you had already.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London, UK
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Psychological Fitness
How are pilot candidates tested today?
Around 40 years ago I applied to BOAC to become a pilot, along with 1,000s of other applicants. I passed two selection stages down at Eastleigh.
Besides the math & English tests, I will always recall the day we had 1000 yes/no questions to do in - IIRC - a couple of hours. Simple yes/no questions on the face of it, one I especially recall "Do you like tall women?"
On the face of it this test seemed simple until you realised that batches of questions were being repeated, in slightly different order, or with new questions interlaced. And, one couldn't recall with any certainty what had been answered 10 paged back, or even if I would agree with my previous answer in the light of new questions! The time limit precluded any possibility of looking back through the questions/answers.
I can only assume this was a mixture of 'Psych' test and a stress test.
Do pilot applicants today go through anything like those rigorous tests we did?
As it turned out, the fuel crisis of the 1970s' and being just pre all the war-time pilots retiring, BOAC had 'very limited' need for pilots and took less than 100 that year and I wan not amongst them.
Around 40 years ago I applied to BOAC to become a pilot, along with 1,000s of other applicants. I passed two selection stages down at Eastleigh.
Besides the math & English tests, I will always recall the day we had 1000 yes/no questions to do in - IIRC - a couple of hours. Simple yes/no questions on the face of it, one I especially recall "Do you like tall women?"
On the face of it this test seemed simple until you realised that batches of questions were being repeated, in slightly different order, or with new questions interlaced. And, one couldn't recall with any certainty what had been answered 10 paged back, or even if I would agree with my previous answer in the light of new questions! The time limit precluded any possibility of looking back through the questions/answers.
I can only assume this was a mixture of 'Psych' test and a stress test.
Do pilot applicants today go through anything like those rigorous tests we did?
As it turned out, the fuel crisis of the 1970s' and being just pre all the war-time pilots retiring, BOAC had 'very limited' need for pilots and took less than 100 that year and I wan not amongst them.
Here is an article written by a psychiatrist on the subject:
Andreas Lubitz, Psychiatry, and the Germanwings Disaster - The New Yorker
Andreas Lubitz, Psychiatry, and the Germanwings Disaster - The New Yorker
Germanwings plane forced to land in Venice after fears over cabin crew member's health | Daily Mail Online
Here is a prime example of inaccurate and completely unresponsible reporting.
The headlines reads that two emergency landings were performed.
One was a precautionary engine shutdown and the other was a standard medical diversion. (Almost certainly caused by the mass illogical fear and panic the media propagates). There was no emergency landing.
In both cases, as usual, the pilots performed splendidly.
I'm for freedom of the press, but when will we somehow cease to allow hacks like this from praying on public fears to sell advertising spots?
One of these so-called emergency landings was almost certainly created by the media. Instead they should be covering heart disease and car crashes in the same proportion as to which they are killing the public.
Here is a prime example of inaccurate and completely unresponsible reporting.
The headlines reads that two emergency landings were performed.
One was a precautionary engine shutdown and the other was a standard medical diversion. (Almost certainly caused by the mass illogical fear and panic the media propagates). There was no emergency landing.
In both cases, as usual, the pilots performed splendidly.
I'm for freedom of the press, but when will we somehow cease to allow hacks like this from praying on public fears to sell advertising spots?
One of these so-called emergency landings was almost certainly created by the media. Instead they should be covering heart disease and car crashes in the same proportion as to which they are killing the public.
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: seaside
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re post #3144 "People develop their character and become 'professional' through training and experience. " Exactly.
"Training in any industry should not simply be focused on teaching a skill but also in building character." Right on.
"Does the present day airline industry have such a training schedule?"
Maybe. Sometimes. Maybe not. It depends on the specific airline and it's plans.
Lufthansa has trained their pilots Ab-Initio since 1955, so they got their schedule figured out pretty much to their liking.
Then, Lufthansa switched to the Multi Crew Pilot License program in 2008, as noted.
The MPL training schedule at LFT is the following: (212.5 sim, 99 hrs aircraft, course length 23 months)
- Ground school 813 hrs, like ATPL ground school
- Core phase 87 hrs aircraft with 20 hrs solo flight time and 3.5 hrs upset recovery training included. FNPT II 28.5 hrs
- Basic phase 12 hrs aircraft CJ1+. FNPT II CJ1+/MCC 100 hrs
- Intermediate phase FFS A320/B737 20 hrs
- Advanced phase FFS 64 A320/B737/EMB 64 hrs
- LT 12 TO/LDG
- IOE 40-60 sectors
Out of 1326 MPL students 528 MPL graduates produced as of May 2014.
As an alternative and new system of training, the MPL program has not yet come under careful scrutiny and evaluation. Most people have not even heard of it, have not met any MPL holders, and those that have cannot relate, or don't even give a second thought. Although, the MPL program may prove to have merits, it will also carry hindrances. To put it bluntly, it's a corporate experiment, and the participants are corporate guinea pigs.
"Training in any industry should not simply be focused on teaching a skill but also in building character." Right on.
"Does the present day airline industry have such a training schedule?"
Maybe. Sometimes. Maybe not. It depends on the specific airline and it's plans.
Lufthansa has trained their pilots Ab-Initio since 1955, so they got their schedule figured out pretty much to their liking.
Then, Lufthansa switched to the Multi Crew Pilot License program in 2008, as noted.
The MPL training schedule at LFT is the following: (212.5 sim, 99 hrs aircraft, course length 23 months)
- Ground school 813 hrs, like ATPL ground school
- Core phase 87 hrs aircraft with 20 hrs solo flight time and 3.5 hrs upset recovery training included. FNPT II 28.5 hrs
- Basic phase 12 hrs aircraft CJ1+. FNPT II CJ1+/MCC 100 hrs
- Intermediate phase FFS A320/B737 20 hrs
- Advanced phase FFS 64 A320/B737/EMB 64 hrs
- LT 12 TO/LDG
- IOE 40-60 sectors
Out of 1326 MPL students 528 MPL graduates produced as of May 2014.
As an alternative and new system of training, the MPL program has not yet come under careful scrutiny and evaluation. Most people have not even heard of it, have not met any MPL holders, and those that have cannot relate, or don't even give a second thought. Although, the MPL program may prove to have merits, it will also carry hindrances. To put it bluntly, it's a corporate experiment, and the participants are corporate guinea pigs.
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Chissay en Touraine, France.
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that in today's news, the head of Lufthansa appears to be making a strong apology for the 'accident'. And separately, the German aviation authority has been criticised for its under-scrutiny of aircrews.
The latter should, imho, have been in the public domain before now. I wonder if any other authorities are similarly underperforming.
The latter should, imho, have been in the public domain before now. I wonder if any other authorities are similarly underperforming.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: In the room next to the lift
Posts: 52
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nigelondraft, your response to my post typifies the mediocrity that currently exists..
Yes, 149 innocent people have been murdered by the hands of a 'pilot'.
We are all searching for answers to this unbelievable crime, but...
Unrealistic, out-of-touch suggestions such as yours deserve clear, simple (not simplistic) explanations as to why simplistic knee-jerk solutions are unlikely to improve the safety of the public.
Safer air transport is a work-in-progress. We are always improving our understanding of what causes crashes. The large effort that has gone into improving safety the last 50 years or so is one we should be immensely proud of. No mediocrity there.
PS Your suggestion that pilots should be trained 'to meet every scenario' helps me to understand the depth of knowledge you may or may not have about the subject.
737er
May I suggest you stop reading the Daily Mail, which thrives on appeals to lower common denominators. There's much better out there to choose from.
Good suggestion. It was probably a poor choice in media to frame my point but that story with all the same hype is running all over the place.
The media exploits our collective risk illiteracy and the result is less overall public safety than if they were to cover real risk, even if it were just in approximate proportion.
It's making the public neurotic about things they should have confidence in and that detracts from addressing more deadly risks.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How are pilot candidates tested today?
Around 40 years ago I applied to BOAC to become a pilot, along with 1,000s of other applicants. I passed two selection stages down at Eastleigh.
Besides the math & English tests, I will always recall the day we had 1000 yes/no questions to do in - IIRC - a couple of hours. Simple yes/no questions on the face of it, one I especially recall "Do you like tall women?"
On the face of it this test seemed simple until you realised that batches of questions were being repeated, in slightly different order, or with new questions interlaced. And, one couldn't recall with any certainty what had been answered 10 paged back, or even if I would agree with my previous answer in the light of new questions! The time limit precluded any possibility of looking back through the questions/answers.
I can only assume this was a mixture of 'Psych' test and a stress test.
Around 40 years ago I applied to BOAC to become a pilot, along with 1,000s of other applicants. I passed two selection stages down at Eastleigh.
Besides the math & English tests, I will always recall the day we had 1000 yes/no questions to do in - IIRC - a couple of hours. Simple yes/no questions on the face of it, one I especially recall "Do you like tall women?"
On the face of it this test seemed simple until you realised that batches of questions were being repeated, in slightly different order, or with new questions interlaced. And, one couldn't recall with any certainty what had been answered 10 paged back, or even if I would agree with my previous answer in the light of new questions! The time limit precluded any possibility of looking back through the questions/answers.
I can only assume this was a mixture of 'Psych' test and a stress test.
There is a lot of work put into designing those tests. Asking questions twice with different semantics that 'beg' a particular but different response will flag up those who are trying to 'look good' in their answers. Others will ask questions that cannot be true such as: True or False - I am always early for meetings. Again shows up someone wanting to answer what they believe is wanted. These questions are added to what Eysenck called a 'lie scale' once the value on the lie scale goes above a certain level then the subject fails the test.
There are 'spot the odd one out' questions where every one of the 5 examples could be the odd one out dependent on how your brain works. (imagine a list of animals - each odd one out: only single syllable word, only word that is more than 7 characters, only bird, only domesticated, only carnivorous etc etc) These are very very hard to create.
The 'subject' is then given say 120 seconds to answer 100 mixed questions and told that the number answered is one of the test criteria. Just reading the test may take 3 minutes, so you know that the subject cannot finish but the point is to not have them give considered answers.
These days the tests are more likely to be flashed up or scrolled on a computer screen at a particular rate which provides a similar metric.
These tests will not identify empathy, sociopathic tendencies etc. There are tests that can do that as there are brain scans that can show potential sociopaths. But these tests are not very effective. For example not all sociopaths will be picked up by the tests and scans and some that are picked up are demonstrably not sociopathic. So there are many false positives and false negatives.
Anyone putting their faith in tests of emotions and mental states of subjects will be sorely disappointed. They are far more likely to be counter productive by alienating the flight crew community.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you, 737er, for posting that piece from The New Yorker by psychiatrist Gary Greenberg. I'm no psychiatrist or psychologist but there's no mistaking good common sense, of which you can never get enough. Kudos to Mr Greenberg!
I hope Lufthansa and Germanwings will not be pilloried to kingdom come.
I hope Lufthansa and Germanwings will not be pilloried to kingdom come.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am constantly surprised by the low opinion 'front crew' have of the 'rear crew'.
Most of the cabin crew are very very aware of the progress of the flight as they have a set number of tasks to carry out in sometimes very brief periods. Starting descent just after level off when the flight attendant is aware that there is an hour to go would be extremely suspicious. All the flight attendant does then is open the door. This becomes extremely likely when the aircraft is in high rate descent approaching mountains.
You also need to take into account that the 'alone in the cockpit' part was needed as most suicides are solitary events.
Most of the cabin crew are very very aware of the progress of the flight as they have a set number of tasks to carry out in sometimes very brief periods. Starting descent just after level off when the flight attendant is aware that there is an hour to go would be extremely suspicious. All the flight attendant does then is open the door. This becomes extremely likely when the aircraft is in high rate descent approaching mountains.
You also need to take into account that the 'alone in the cockpit' part was needed as most suicides are solitary events.
How many crew have you spoken to about this recently? I've asked four if they'd know what I was doing and how to stop me and ALL of them admitted they wouldn't have a clue. They wouldn't open the door if I asked them not to. The two person in the FD rule will not stop a recurrence of Lubitz.
And I'm speaking as someone who has flown for two airlines who have had the two person rule since 9/11 and I don't have a problem with it.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I expect we will have to agree to disagree, I would have thought with the captain outside asking to be let in, screaming/panicking flight attendants and passengers (probably visible to the cockpit flight attendant) and the aircraft in rapid descent toward mountains, most flight attendants in the cockpit would take a little more reassurance than you telling them not to let the captain in. Indeed, I would think it would be extremely unlikely now that they would not let the captain in after Lubitz flew the GermanWings A320 into the ground. That's what happens when you have lost people's trust.
who pays the pilots salaries on a commercial airliner? So with all respect the guests on board have a right to have a sane brain sitting in the cockpit.
But ridiculous expectations like pilots trained for any possible scenario and no risk at all? Please.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Close to EBOS
Age: 67
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to the German newspaper "Welt Am Sonntag". http://www.welt.de/vermischtes/artic...erungsnot.html
Laut EU-Verordnung 1178/2011, die seit April 2013 auch in Deutschland umgesetzt ist, müssen Fliegerärzte das Amt von einer Depression informieren und den Fall ans LBA verweisen. Nun können die Lufthansa-Fliegerärzte zwar behaupten, L. sei geheilt gewesen, so dass es keinen Grund mehr für eine Verweisung gegeben habe. Aber es gab ja immer noch den SIC-Eintrag in der Lizenz. Ganz gleich, wie man es wendet: Es sieht nicht gut aus für die Lufthansa und ihre Ärzte.
Translation
According to the EU Regulation 1178/2011, which is implemented in Germany since April 2013 Aeromedical Examiners must inform the Office of a depression and refer the case to the LBA. Now the Lufthansa Flyer doctors can indeed say that L. had been healed, so that there was no reason for referral. But there was still the SIC entry in the license. No matter how you turn it: It does not look good for Lufthansa and their physicians.
Laut EU-Verordnung 1178/2011, die seit April 2013 auch in Deutschland umgesetzt ist, müssen Fliegerärzte das Amt von einer Depression informieren und den Fall ans LBA verweisen. Nun können die Lufthansa-Fliegerärzte zwar behaupten, L. sei geheilt gewesen, so dass es keinen Grund mehr für eine Verweisung gegeben habe. Aber es gab ja immer noch den SIC-Eintrag in der Lizenz. Ganz gleich, wie man es wendet: Es sieht nicht gut aus für die Lufthansa und ihre Ärzte.
Translation
According to the EU Regulation 1178/2011, which is implemented in Germany since April 2013 Aeromedical Examiners must inform the Office of a depression and refer the case to the LBA. Now the Lufthansa Flyer doctors can indeed say that L. had been healed, so that there was no reason for referral. But there was still the SIC entry in the license. No matter how you turn it: It does not look good for Lufthansa and their physicians.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to the EU Regulation 1178/2011, which is implemented in Germany since April 2013 Aeromedical Examiners must inform the Office of a depression and refer the case to the LBA. Now the Lufthansa Flyer doctors can indeed say that L. had been healed, so that there was no reason for referral. But there was still the SIC entry in the license. No matter how you turn it: It does not look good for Lufthansa and their physicians.
An SIC entry in the license is just an "for information only" and not binding, the only place where it is binding is in the medical. The EASA license doesn't have an expiration date whereas the medical has.