Airbus A320 crashed in Southern France

[Klauss]

Questions:

a) in the beginning, there was a reference that an oxygen-mask was worn by the copilot.
>>> has that been confirmed, or not ?

b) in some german news, it was stated he wanted to marry soon.
>>> confirmed, true, or rumor ?

Thanks.

[NigelOnDraft]

Would any genuine commercial pilot beg to differ?

Yes... if someone who has just done 6+hrs LHS A320 today satisfies your criteria?

I refer back to my previous post (which you described as 'mediocrity') to give, IMO, an accurate response to your points.

Since you either did not like or understand my response, please could you expand on your post's questions:

A: Are they mentally fit for purpose?
B: Are they physically fit for purpose?
C: Are they trained, and current, to meet any scenario that faces them on any particular flight?
D: To the point where there is zero risk of 'pilot error', whatever?
E: It would appear that those who control (who?) and enforce (who?) such matters are still falling short of their responsibilities (which are?).

e.g. by saying how you think they either are, or should be conducted?

The genuine passengers I met today expressed their thanks for their flights today, and getting them to their destinations safely and comfortably. I saw no sign of the lack of trust expressed by "passengers who pay our wages" on here

[Sky Wave]

The genuine passengers I met today expressed their thanks for their flights today, and getting them to their destinations safely and comfortably. I saw no sign of the lack of trust expressed by "passengers who pay our wages" on here

Absolutely. I also believe that this very sad event has made our passengers appreciate us more. On the few flights that I've operated since the event far more passengers than usual are expressing their thanks and coming out with statements like "Thank You for getting us home safely"

[rottenray]

Originally Posted by NigelOnDraft

Yes... if someone who has just done 6+hrs LHS A320 today satisfies your criteria?

The genuine passengers I met today expressed their thanks for their flights today, and getting them to their destinations safely and comfortably. I saw no sign of the lack of trust expressed by "passengers who pay our wages" on here

I consider myself to be one of those genuine pax you're speaking of, and this crash hasn't altered my opinion of pilots and safety one bit. I know I have more to fear from the average idiot on the highway.

The FA stepping in for a pilot leaving the flight deck seems to be working fine in the US, and it might provide a small deterrent in some cases.

Better screening might help as well.

After all, every little bit helps - and as someone up-thread mentioned, air safety is a work in progress.

[goldfish85]

Mental health screenings for pilots

I have been asked many times in the past week about why don't we screen you pilots to avoid this kind of problem. I simply report what the Aerospace Medical Association says. (This is the professional society for flight surgeons.)

Following a March 27, 2012, incident in which a pilot of a major commercial airline experienced a serious disturbance in his mental health, the Aerospace Medical Association formed an Ad Hoc Working Group on Pilot Mental Health. The working group met several times and analyzed current medical standards for evaluating pilot mental health. The result of the working group was a letter sent to the FAA and other organizations worldwide interested in mental standards. The Committee found that it is neither productive nor cost effective to perform extensive psychiatric evaluations as part of the routine pilot aeromedical assessment. However it did recommend greater attention be given to mental health issues be aeromedical examiners, especially to the more common and detectable mental health conditions and life stressors than can affect pilots and flight performance. They encouraged this through increased education and global recognition of the importance of mental health in aviation safety.
published in Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine: 83, 2012, pp 1185-1186

[highflyer40]

Everyone keeps referring to the U.S. In regards to it works there, so why not use it elsewhere. As has been posted on here at least twice, there is a study of US pilots where it is shown that only about 25% of US pilots actually following the rule about having 2 person on the flight deck at any given time.

[Bill G Kerr]

If only 25% of US pilots obey the 2 in the cockpit rule..... it still seems to work!

[uffington sb]

It seems that some non US airlines have it as SOP. We came back from Goa in a A320 before the GW incident and a CC member went into the FD and a pilot came out and used the toilet. She came out of the FD as he went back in.

[framer]

most flight attendants in the cockpit would take a little more reassurance than you telling them not to let the captain in.

I've asked three flight attendants to open the door when the F/O was ready to come back in. Not one of them could do it. 100% fail rate of the new system. I'll keep asking but I don't think the stats will improve until the new procedure requires training of the flight attendants.
This says quite a lot about the implementation of the new procedure, and the motivation for it's existence.

[de facto]

So what you are saying it that your cabin crews so far were unable to turn a door knob and open it??

[framer]

Yip.
All I said was , you let him in, it's good practice. To a person they all started looking for a switch in the center consol, one couldn't find it, the other two found it but could not operate it even when aware of which way it needed to be moved. Not one of them thought about the door knob.
I then talked them through it and everyone was happy. Isn't it interesting though that there is no requirement to give them any instruction in how to carry out their new role? That is my main point, the whole thing is window dressing. If management thought there was any real risk of losing an aircraft and that the new procedure might mitigate the risk, there would be training.

[de facto]

Oh boy..
In the scenario of one pilot in his/her seat and a cabin crew standing behind,if the CA hand starts to wander around the center pedestal it would be a direct slap on the hand.
There is no need for them to manipulate that switch really,unless you let them seat on either pilot seat which is a big no no.
Ill get my coat...

[Ian W]

Originally Posted by framer

Yip.
All I said was , you let him in, it's good practice. To a person they all started looking for a switch in the center consol, one couldn't find it, the other two found it but could not operate it even when aware of which way it needed to be moved. Not one of them thought about the door knob.
I then talked them through it and everyone was happy. Isn't it interesting though that there is no requirement to give them any instruction in how to carry out their new role? That is my main point, the whole thing is window dressing. If management thought there was any real risk of losing an aircraft and that the new procedure might mitigate the risk, there would be training.

Then it is up to you to provide that training - a few seconds in your preflight brief would be all that is needed. If, or perhaps when, there is another Lubitz the airline involved will go the way of PanAm and TWA and politicians will get involved and then everyone will lose.

[DirtyProp]

'ridiculous expectations'?
Hardly.
Seems an entry-level requirement to me.
Would any genuine commercial pilot beg to differ?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but your expectations are unrealistic and, frankly, ridiculous.
Life is unpredictable, and so is air travel.
No 2 flights are exactly alike, and even if they are similar to each other for 99.9%, there will always be something unusual or unexpected.
And that's exactly the reason why we have humans in the cockpit and not computers. With so many variables playing in every flight, it is downright impossible to predict every possible scenario like you suggest.
If we could do that, pilots would be replaced by computers already. That might happen, but not anytime soon.
I suggest you review your expectations.

[Basil]

the CA hand starts to wander around the center pedestal

Agreed, a VERY dangerous route to follow.

[mickjoebill]

Originally Posted by framer

Yip.
All I said was , you let him in, it's good practice. To a person they all started looking for a switch in the center consol, one couldn't find it, the other two found it but could not operate it even when aware of which way it needed to be moved. Not one of them thought about the door knob.
I then talked them through it and everyone was happy. Isn't it interesting though that there is no requirement to give them any instruction in how to carry out their new role?

So you set up fellow workers? To what end? To belittle them?
You and your airline put cc in a position they were locked in without training to carryout their duties.

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

Procedures and Training are Essential

That's unbelievable. This is serious business, but not rocket science. People who are trained and trusted to manage the evacuation of a burning aircraft should also be trained and trusted to handle "two in the cockpit" duties. Those should be thought out by experts, just as the emergency evacuation procedures are.

[framer]

Then it is up to you to provide that training - a few seconds in your preflight brief would be all that is needed.

Thanks for the tip. Strangely enough that's exactly what I have been doing lately. I'm 99% sure that not all crew are getting this 'training' though. My point remains, management don't believe in this policy, if they did it would be trained like all other procedures.

So you set up fellow workers? To what end? To belittle them?

Calm down Mick, everything is ok. I am actually one of those Flight crew who really does care about c/c and I have more than once gone in to bat for them against managers who use bullying tactics against them. The sole purpose of them being there is to open the door, I gave them a shot at practicing it and then talked them through it, nobody felt belittled so you'l have to find another topic to wring your hands over.

[RatherBeFlying]

Grievance a driver in mass killings

What’s become clear over the past 30 years of research is that there’s virtually always a personal grievance that will start a person on a pathway to mass murder

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/07...hemselves.html

[Pace]

That's unbelievable. This is serious business, but not rocket science. People who are trained and trusted to manage the evacuation of a burning aircraft should also be trained and trusted to handle "two in the cockpit" duties. Those should be thought out by experts, just as the emergency evacuation procedures are.

i agree 100% with that comment but would add that only CC who have worked for the airline for 3 plus years should be eligable for flight deck duties that will help close another potential threat from relatively unknown CC