Airbus A320 crashed in Southern France

[Groucho]

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.

[fastjet45]

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

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

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

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Originally Posted by Pace

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?!

[Pace]

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?

[Lord Spandex Masher]

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.

[Denti]

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.

[Lonewolf_50]

Originally Posted by Denti

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.

[peekay4]

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!!!!

[jaytee54]

@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.

[victor tango]

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.

[Denti]

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.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

There isn't a solution.

[Denti]

Indeed. But the public has to be convinced that something is being done. So the usual game is on.

[RobertS975]

Pace posted: "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? "

Another reason why the 1300 hours or whatever that one needs for an ATP is a good idea... more time to weed out the moonbats fom the ranks. That may not have mattered a whit, but we'll nevr know.

[dr dre]

I've posted this elsewhere but I'll do it again:
Egyptair -FO was 59yrs old and had 12'000hrs
Silkair - Captain had 20 years experience, former fighter instructor pilot
JAL and LAM Mozambique - both Captain's involved in those incidents

Now how doing would doing 1500hrs in predominatly single pilot flying (charters, instructing etc) whilst flying alone weed out moonbats, if in this case flying with an experienced professional for 600hrs on the A320 no-one saw anything to be too concerned?

[SamYeager]

Originally Posted by victor tango

All these views on cabin crew attending the flight deck for the purposes posted seem to me to miss the point..[snip]

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 !

A number of posters do seem to be making (unwarranted IMHO) assumptions of the purpose of the CC on the flight deck. I believe the primary purposes of the CC are to (a) alert the pilot who is currently absent if the flying pilot becomes ill or in any other way erratic and (b) open the sodding door so that the other pilot can enter.


There has been speculation that the flying pilot might disable the CC but given the pilot will be strapped in (at least initially) I think the only way that could easily happen would be by means of a gun which is a different bag of worms.


Will this proposal solve the problem completely? NO! It is however comparatively easy to implement, from the airline's point of view does not increase crew costs although there may well be some increased costs for training.

[Citation2]

I was wondering why the french military did not send fighters to intercept the aircraft as he didn't declare emergency nor sqwaked 7700.
It happened many times when pilots unintentionally deviated from track or altitude and they were intercepted in no time.
Any clues?

[Smudger]

Just don't think there was enough time to recognise the situation and react.. if fighters were scrambled what could they have done ?

[ATC Watcher]

Fighters were scrambled early and were on it pretty fast ( from nearby Orange AFB) but they came too late, There were the ones that gave the exact crash position to ATC/SAR.