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 10th Apr 2015, 12:19
  #3181 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Alba
Posts: 32
Very serious! you cannot have a policy where a young inexperienced CC can be placed doing flight deck duties after a few weeks training to become a CC and no real knowledge of his /her background.
surely it would require a level of training and background with the company of possibly 3 years to be a safe option.
The best security should include a degree of randomness, as a rigid prescribed system can be subverted by any decent problem solver. So why not leave it to the senior CA? Or the Captain could choose:- "could XXX come in while I take a leak?"

That way you get someone who is both available and suitable.

Your way would be a rostering nightmare. If there Must be a half-bar CA on every flight, in the front galley, what happens if they take ill and there is no qualified standby? Do you cancel the flight?
Then think about "How could a person with ill intent USE this system?"
jaytee54 is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 12:21
  #3182 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Reisterstown, Maryland USA
Age: 65
Posts: 6
News reports suggest that Lubitz may have slipped the captain a diuretic in a beverage. Thus, premeditation to get the captain out of the flight deck. No matter what new technology and procedures are introduced, some diabolical mind will calculate a work around.

Aircraft are really safe and dependable, the rare maniac is not.

Last edited by winterymix; 10th Apr 2015 at 12:23. Reason: spelling
winterymix is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 12:38
  #3183 (permalink)  

Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,267
News reports suggest that Lubitz may have slipped the captain a diuretic in a beverage.
Speculation or based on facts?
sky9 is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 12:55
  #3184 (permalink)  
TWT
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: troposphere
Posts: 690
News reports suggest that Lubitz may have slipped the captain a diuretic in a beverage.
Came from a media allegation that he had Googled 'diuretics' in the days leading up to the crash.Even IF it is true that he did an internet search on the subject,there cannot possibly be any proof that he actually spiked the Captain's beverage.
TWT is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 14:40
  #3185 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 6,000
Your way would be a rostering nightmare. If there Must be a half-bar CA on every flight, in the front galley, what happens if they take ill and there is no qualified standby? Do you cancel the flight?
Then think about "How could a person with ill intent USE this system?"
jaytee

Surely the same argument would go for a Cabin Crew manager/ess or senior Cabin crew and rostering? if they are not available do you let the aircraft go with newbies?

who ever is allowed to enter the flight deck to diminish the likelihood of another Lubitz must surely be trained for that role and know how to unlock the door or handle different situations with a difficult or potentially dangerous flight crew member.

He/ She will be alone with that potentially dangerous flight crew member so probably not the best idea to send up a 22 year old girl who has been one month on the job and doesn't have a clue what she is looking at or dealing with?

Have you considered the possibility of a planted terrorist taking such a job ? at least this way you will only use CC with three years on the Airline which itself will reduce that possibility! Nothing that is done will make a future Lubitz impossible only less likely.

There are already private reporting systems in place where a pilot can report a safety concern without making it official and keeping a degree of anonymity. Part of the reason that lubitz got through the net was that no body noticed anything wrong with the guy. Colleagues and friends are best placed to notice and report concerns over any pilot so maybe such a site could be accessible to pilots, friends or relatives to make their concerns known whether justified or not?

Last edited by Pace; 10th Apr 2015 at 14:53.
Pace is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 15:00
  #3186 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: The blasted heath
Posts: 238
@Pace

' Nothing that is done will make a future Lubitz impossible only less likely'

That is it in a nutshell.
gcal is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 15:31
  #3187 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,615
Pace . . .

Any cabin crew is qualified not to sit in the vacant pilot's seat, but to sit in a jump seat nearest the door, or to stand next to the door and to open the door manually to preclude the other pilot from being locked out.
GlueBall is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 15:32
  #3188 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: USA
Posts: 122
Once again posters are just NOT reading the foregoing 3244 posts.

Pace - there is NO need for the 'replacement' crew member to be trained to open the door in normal circumstances:

1) A fully equipped 'normal' door can be opened easily and safely by the remaining flight crew member from their seat

2) Should this flight crew be physically unable to do so, there is an emergency ingress system to allow access from the cabin

The only time the 'extra' crew would need to open the door is if THEY judge it is necessary to over-ride the authority of the Captain of the aircraft (the remaining flight crew) where they do not wish it to be opened. This is the major issue most of us have with the system. It opens a huge can of worms.

I don't think it has still been clearly established exactly what happened on the JetBlue flight where the nominated Captain was 'locked out' by the F/O, whether there was an extra crew member in the cockpit and how the situation was handled by them.
Groucho is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 16:48
  #3189 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 70
Peekay4
So he spent SIX YEARS (since 2009) convincing numerous doctors that he had a mental illness, all so he can hide his motive crashing a plane in 2015?

A terrorist wants the world to know why he commits mass murders, not hide it.
The first time you knew about the 911 terrorists was just after 2 planes crashed in to buildings and after years of hiding and training as pilots
fastjet45 is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 18:19
  #3190 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Santa Rosa, CA, USA
Age: 66
Posts: 169
FBI report on JetBlue Lockout

Groucho: "I don't think it has still been clearly established exactly what happened on the JetBlue flight where the nominated Captain was 'locked out' by the F/O."

I found the FBI report, which is quite interesting. OUTSTANDING response by
the FO and CC. Briefly, the captain was acting erratically, so the FO suggested they invite an off-duty captain to the cockpit. The captain abruptly went to the lavatory, but alarmed the CC by "not following protocol". It's short, you'll want to read the whole thing.
FBI ? JetBlue Pilot Charged with Interference with a Flight Crew
PrivtPilotRadarTech is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 18:35
  #3191 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Originally Posted by Pace View Post
Very serious! you cannot have a policy where a young inexperienced CC can be placed doing flight deck duties after a few weeks training to become a CC and no real knowledge of his /her background.
Well what, exactly, do you think happens at the moment?!
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 18:40
  #3192 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 6,000
Well what, exactly, do you think happens at the moment?!
LSM

We are talking about in Europe where we do not have a two crew in the cockpit policy when one flight crew vacates and did not have that policy when Lubitz crashed the jet so enlighten me because I don't know if you know something different ?

Maybe that policy existed all the time and the fact that Lubitz was alone was a breach of that policy so exactly put me right )

If your saying any CC takeS them a drink and one might be called in or pop her head around the door to flash a smile when the one flight crew is alone then yes I am sure that does happen. So??

The chances of this happening again are very very small probably less than that CC flashing a smile being a planted terrorist so the other option is to do nothing? Business as usual?

Last edited by Pace; 10th Apr 2015 at 18:58.
Pace is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 18:50
  #3193 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
It's not a regulation but for many airlines it's SOP and they've done it for over a decade, including the two I've worked for since 9/11.

It's also a standing arrangement that the first sector a CC works they spend at least the take off and landing on the jump seat.

Many times I've flown with senior CC who have only one year of flying experience, prior to being promoted, and the other crew have less.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 19:18
  #3194 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 3,953
that Lubitz studied the door locking system days before on his home computer and this was a major part of his plan to carry out this mass murder undisturbed
If you read the original text about that it just states that he apparently only used a few minutes. That is not research and he didn't need to, he had all the relevant information on his company notebook anyway.

It's also a standing arrangement that the first sector a CC works they spend at least the take off and landing on the jump seat.
We do it during their ACM flight, but yes, that is normal. However, there are two pilots present and at the controls, still quite a chance for some mischief.

The new rule is unnecessary for those airlines that have phase 2 doors, i haven't flown for one that didn't. That they now use the two crew rule is simply to show the public that they do something. It doesn't increase safety, at best it leaves it at the same point where it was, more probably it lowers it.

Especially in those companies that just use non background/medical checked zero hour contractors in the cabin and have a high turnover.
Denti is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2015, 19:33
  #3195 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,361
Originally Posted by Denti View Post
Especially in those companies that just use non background/medical checked zero hour contractors in the cabin and have a high turnover.
If one wants to raise the institutional security red flag, one need only look at that to recognize a vulnerability that must be addressed and mitigated.

PPRT:
FBI summary was most interesting. Thanks for the link.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2015, 03:06
  #3196 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
The first time you knew about the 911 terrorists was just after 2 planes crashed in to buildings and after years of hiding and training as pilots
But they didn't spend years planning to disguise the aftermath of their heinous attacks as something else other than a terrorist attack!

In fact they made it damn obvious it was a terrorist attack! That's the whole point of terrorism, to make a clear statement of action for their cause!

No terrorist is going to deliberately crash a plane and want it mistaken for a mental health issue!!!!
peekay4 is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2015, 12:32
  #3197 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Alba
Posts: 32
@gcal +1
@Pace

' Nothing that is done will make a future Lubitz impossible only less likely'

That is it in a nutshell.
The purpose of legislating the existing informal practice of having a CA in the cockpit for breaks is so that regulators can show they are doing something, to reassure the public.
As a mental health professional observed way back in the thread it also reduces the likelihood of a mentally unstable person committing this kind of mass murder.

But professional pilots know that even if there were four fully qualified pilots in the cockpit, if one of the pilots seated at the controls were determined he could easily crash the aircraft by applying extreme control inputs, 90+ roll and max positive or negative g and it is unlikely the others could stop him before bits started coming off the 'plane. All he has to do is wait until the other pilot gets up from his seat. The three not strapped in at the controls would be thrown around the cockpit or unable to reach.
The SilkAir aircraft broke up and went down in under a minute, didn't it?
As did the BAe 146 whose crew were shot by a deranged passenger.

Consider the Russian pilot's young son. He wasn't deranged, but still managed to crash the aircraft despite the presence of two fully qualified sane pilots who should have been able to overpower him, you would think.

The best (only) chance we have is not to allow such a person from strapping in at the controls.

I still say admit a CA to the cockpit, and let the pilots or senior CA decide who it is.
jaytee54 is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2015, 17:54
  #3198 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Berkshire
Age: 75
Posts: 118
All these views on cabin crew attending the flight deck for the purposes posted seem to me to miss the point, in that, CC are employed primarily to serve their customers food and refreshments and attend to their needs as per their company policy.
The other, and main function, is cabin safety procedures in an emergency situation.

Now, to expect them to monitor pilots whilst one goes out of the cockpit, seems to me quite ridiculous, due to the fact that (no reflection on them) they haven't been trained so to do.
Even if they got the necessary training, what have we ended up with, a CC member who is trying to do a fairly stressful job, to then change hats and become a person on the same professional standard as pilots and start supervising them !

Come on chaps.......there must be a better solution than this.
victor tango is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2015, 19:15
  #3199 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 3,953
Come on chaps.......there must be a better solution than this
That is the price solution everyone is trying to find. Of course each party with their own agenda in mind. At the moment it is impossible to be seen inactive, so everyone is scrambling. I know it is a big issue at the currently running IFALPA conference, it is a big issue with airline companies and ICAO is already trying to find their own way as well.
Denti is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2015, 19:16
  #3200 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
There isn't a solution.
Lord Spandex Masher 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.