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 12th Oct 2015, 21:32
  #3341 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 929
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
B2N2 it is obvious 911 refers. 1 pilot + 1 cabin crew Hijacker. Mmm.
Not a well thought out solution IMHO
IcePack is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2015, 05:49
  #3342 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,587
Received 18 Likes on 15 Posts
Greasy Monkey

The autopilot system having the ultimate control over the door lock - whenever pre-set deviation limits for the flight controls are exceeded, the door is unlocked....
These deviation limits should be set according to the flight plan/route (automated calculation of % deviation, or similar), and if they are to be over-ridden, require two valid pass-codes from the assigned crew.
Great ...so how would that work if one of the pilots becomes incapacitated and the other pilot decides to initiate an diversion to an en-route airport? He/she might be OK with the door becoming unlocked, but he/she and perhaps the Feds might not be...How would it work if you had to engage in serious weather avoidance - in addition to doing the weather avoidance, liase with ATC/cabin crew, etc, you've now got to enter (repeatedly?) codes? A "simpler solution" it is not....

1201

To bring a flight attendant upfront creates many other issues.
Agreed. If not done properly and with great care it certainly has the potential to create serious problems, and no, I'm not going to spell them out here.

Last edited by wiggy; 13th Oct 2015 at 06:01.
wiggy is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2015, 06:20
  #3343 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: FL490
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by gcal
I do not understand how simply having two people there would have helped in this case.
How would a non pilot have understood what the intentions could be by the initial variations of height?
What could they have done once the realisation had settled in?
A second person in the case of incapacitation so they could call for help yes; but not in this case.
Firstly brother, having a second person on the flight deck, they would have noticed the captain banging on the door and even seen him on the CCTV panel.

Secondly brother, the first officer (the scumbag coward that he really was and his parents must be so proud of him) would never have dared such a move with a second body in the flight deck.

All pilot suicide accidents have occurred when one pilot has been in the flight deck, except for Egypt Air (and some claim Air France 447 as well but no comment from me).
THR RED ACC is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2015, 06:28
  #3344 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: 41S174E
Age: 57
Posts: 3,077
Received 550 Likes on 155 Posts
To bring a flight attendant upfront creates many other issues.
Name one...just one.
1/ The 1 pilot + 1 cabin crew hijacker scenario ( unless you want to start vetting cabin crew in the same manner as we do pilots......cabin crew don't even do one on one interviews in some airlines, they do mass interviews......hardly the same standard)
2/ Distraction. How many pilots have been distracted by conversation with the cabin crew and missed position reports or a looming CB while they are organising their post flight drinks session? I'd suggest quite a few, I know that both myself and my Captain missed top of descent once when we had a particularly attractive young lady up front with us. When I go to the loo and I have a good looking twenty something male First Officer who is green on type, I know I return as quickly as possible if the cabin crew member who goes in is a young and attractive female. Distraction.
framer is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2015, 12:22
  #3345 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: FL490
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by framer
1/ The 1 pilot + 1 cabin crew hijacker scenario ( unless you want to start vetting cabin crew in the same manner as we do pilots......cabin crew don't even do one on one interviews in some airlines, they do mass interviews......hardly the same standard)
We may as well stop all modes of transport because this scenario could occur anywhere, be it trains, subway, ISS... plus the chance of two airline employees organizing a hijacking together is a very remote possibility. Yes the possibility still exists but for that argument, we may as well ban knives, forks and any sharp objects to protect our children.



Originally Posted by framer
2/ Distraction. How many pilots have been distracted by conversation with the cabin crew and missed position reports or a looming CB while they are organising their post flight drinks session? I'd suggest quite a few, I know that both myself and my Captain missed top of descent once when we had a particularly attractive young lady up front with us. When I go to the loo and I have a good looking twenty something male First Officer who is green on type, I know I return as quickly as possible if the cabin crew member who goes in is a young and attractive female. Distraction.
I am sorry but if something like that distracts you, then you have demonstrated a lack of airmanship and have jeopordized the safety of every soul on board. God forbid anyone who is that easily disoriented and distracted takes off from a coastal airport towards the sea/ocean in the middle of the night without any visual cues!
THR RED ACC is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 10:48
  #3346 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by THR RED ACC
...
I am sorry but if something like that distracts you, then you have demonstrated a lack of airmanship and have jeopordized the safety of every soul on board. God forbid anyone who is that easily disoriented and distracted takes off from a coastal airport towards the sea/ocean in the middle of the night without any visual cues!
I have to agree. If I knew which airline you fly/flew for I would avoid it.
david1300 is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 11:36
  #3347 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
THR RED ACC, brother!!

What if the captain bangs on the door to let him in but the copilot claims he's having psychotic episode!! What to do?? Legally she's obliged to open the door!

Think that's far fetched? I remember a incident on a jet blue flight where the captain developed such an episode!! Granted, the second person on the flight deck happened to be an off duty pilot, but what if there was not an off duty pilot onboard?

Wow, what choice would. A CA face, the copilot which a strange look on his face claiming the captain is crazy or the copilot is crazy. Just saying!!
flyburg is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 13:07
  #3348 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by flyburg
THR RED ACC, brother!!

What if the captain bangs on the door to let him in but the copilot claims he's having psychotic episode!! What to do?? Legally she's obliged to open the door!

Think that's far fetched? I remember a incident on a jet blue flight where the captain developed such an episode!! Granted, the second person on the flight deck happened to be an off duty pilot, but what if there was not an off duty pilot onboard?

Wow, what choice would. A CA face, the copilot which a strange look on his face claiming the captain is crazy or the copilot is crazy. Just saying!!
In that incident, the reporting says it was crystal clear to everyone which crew member was bonkers and which one was not. In real life, a flight crew member would need to have a very compelling case to lock the second pilot out and I can not imagine a flight attendent not being able to work out which of the crew had lost the plot in this situation.

I find it quite concerning that European pilots are both so afraid of their cabin crew (i.e. they are a real risk of incapaciting the pilot and taking over the aircraft while watching the door) and so easily distracted by cabin crew's looks and charm that they can't concentrate on flying. The US carriers all seem to employee pilots who are able to concentrate enough to fly while cabin crew man the door for their copilot to answer the call of nature.
mm_flynn is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 14:10
  #3349 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wow,

I don't know how to begin to even answer that!

I merely stated that there are different scenarios!

Your statement regarding European pilots being distracted by CA's to the point the can't concentrate on flying. I remember a U.S. Crew so distracted by their laptops that they over flew their destinations by what? A hundred miles or so? Wasn't it a CA that alerted them to the fact that they should have landed by now?

Don't make this a U.S. versus European pilots! Totally uncalled for!

It is not about being afraid of a CA. It is just about is it really a solution!
What is the CA going to do when the remaining pilot rolls the aircraft upside down?
flyburg is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 14:12
  #3350 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 65
Posts: 7,378
Received 565 Likes on 355 Posts
Originally Posted by 1201alarm
Absol I would argue the two pilots have to be the two people who always stay upfront. We need to redesign the forward space so the pilot does not have to leave the safe perimeter to go to the loo.
Be careful what you wish for. Management may wish to make you use piddle packs. Cheaper for them ...

@TheRedACC
All pilot suicide accidents have occurred when one pilot has been in the flight
deck, except for Egypt Air (and some claim Air France 447 as well but no comment
from me).
No evidence supports that claim.
@Flyburg
What is the CA going to do when the remaining pilot rolls the aircraft upside
down?
If he doesn't pull any back stick, hit the ceiling/overhead.
Lonewolf_50 is online now  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 17:14
  #3351 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by flyburg
Wow,

Don't make this a U.S. versus European pilots! Totally uncalled for!
The reason I made the contrast was that the CC in the cockpit answer is the standard in the US and doesn't appear to have suffered from any of the issues raised in this thread. It was not a comment on the relative skills of US and European pilots (Although I was poking fun at the concept that any pilot anywhere in the developed world would be distracted from flight critical activity by CC manning the door)

I am genuinely surprised by the number of posters who have raised the possibility that CC can be so readily infiltrated by terrorists that being alone in the cockpit for a short time with a CC member could present a credible risk of terrorist action ... yet having that same person with an airside pass and free to move about the aircraft in flight is OK.
mm_flynn is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 18:46
  #3352 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 929
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The US carriers all seem to employee pilots who are able to concentrate enough to fly while cabin crew man the door for their copilot to answer the call of nature.

But not when using laptops QED (missed destination remember)
IcePack is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 19:45
  #3353 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Potomac Heights
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In many (several) of these believed pilot suicide instances, the perpetrating pilot appears to have taken some effort to mask what went on from investigators. This has taken the form of pulling CVR circuitbreakers, shutting down all comms systems, heading for the deepest Indian Ocean, etc.

This suggests that any action that ensures that the perpetrating pilot will be revealed beyond all doubt is likely to dissuade this pilot from making the attempt. Thus, a FA in the cockpit, while perhaps not trained to counteract a rogue pilot's rollover effort, is still likely to yell/scream what is going on, etc. By having all of this captured on the CVR, rather than silence, ensures that the perpetrating pilot and his/her family will not be able to evade condemnation/embarassment, etc. I suggest that this knowledge is likely to dissuade such dingbats from this form of suicide attempt.
SeenItAll is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 20:36
  #3354 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 80
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
You suggest that pilot-suicides take measures to avoid proof, yet those gun-assassin-suicides seem to go out of their way to publicise their intentions - witness the recent case where the investigator said that he refused to mention the name of the assassin (to deny them the oxygen of publicity).
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 21:13
  #3355 (permalink)  
c52
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,268
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
What would happen if the plane had a mode - selectable by ATC or from a switch in each pilot's pocket or the purser's - that made it disable everything in the cockpit and fly itself to the nearest suitable airport with autoland?

It would be fine if you were sure the plane was otherwise doomed. The very existence of such a device would stop suicide attempts, and also the case where a plane took off from Cyprus and crashed for lack of pressurisation.

But I think it would be unsellable to pilots and passengers alike.
c52 is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 22:04
  #3356 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: germany
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Attack vector

Your suggestion with an autoland feature is a very good attack target for anybody intending to down a plane.

Crack the system, and you won. No-one will be able to stop it from happening, by design. And it even can possibly be done anonymously, from remote!

You think, autoland will stop a harmful end? No, just irritate the computer by erroneous sensor input, or even data that will cause the autopilot to crash the plane.

Adding more complexity adds more attack surfaces.

If you look at the reports about the 'safety' of the data buses in planes, it is a miracle to me nothing happened yet in that direction. Up to now, an attacker must still be physically on the plane. Offer external system overrides and it will be mis-used sooner or later.
c2j2 is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2015, 00:19
  #3357 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Near St Lawrence River
Age: 53
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In fact, the idea of a function "Autoland" žs not that bad. What can go wrong? Autoland is a routine in a bad weather:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwCDolQ0e2I

In case the computer receives erroneous data, simple autopilot disconnects and autoland function is disabled.
But when the plane's systems, FAC and FBW are 100% operational and the flight crew do not respond and the trajectory is dubious, then "Autoland" might save the day. ATC could initiate it or by one of the pilots and one of the cabin crew from outside of the cockpit, by entering a known code.
To be clear, only command Autoland is send, then autopilot does its job independently and undisturbed. It's better to command Autoland instead to scramble fighterjets to take down the rogue airplane.
On the other hand, after a bad landing the pilot can say: "We apologize for this autoland, time to time we have to test this function"
_Phoenix is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2015, 04:10
  #3358 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,511
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
I am genuinely surprised by the number of posters who have raised the possibility that CC can be so readily infiltrated by terrorists that being alone in the cockpit for a short time with a CC member could present a credible risk of terrorist action ... yet having that same person with an airside pass and free to move about the aircraft in flight is OK.
Because we do know how easy it is to get that airside pass, sadly enough. Usually CC are cheap rented labor from some third rate agency, there for a couple months and then gone again. Yes, there are some airlines that still do employ most of their CC on real contracts and do not rent them in on an ad hoc basis, but i believe that will probably vanish as the other way is so much cheaper, especially if there is no business/premium product on offer.

The reason I made the contrast was that the CC in the cockpit answer is the standard in the US and doesn't appear to have suffered from any of the issues raised in this thread.
In my opinion there is a cultural difference. As far as i know the CC is required on both sides of the atlantic if there is no video system to identify the person in front of the door and make sure that the area is clear. Those systems are the norm in europe (apart from ryanair) but apparently weren't in the US. Therefore our US brethren are used to the CC in the flightdeck, we were used to not needing them and working without them, since they are not required (and trained) to open the door from the inside. Even now that they are supposedly trained most are not able to operate the electronic lock, not to mention the video system.

The whole thing is a farce to be honest, the result is that pilots do drink a lot less during a work day and dehydrate to prevent interrupting the passenger service and get some disgruntled CC and another one blocking the galley. If they have to do it anyway the remaining pilot has to cope with that disgruntled untrained person on the flight deck and still operate the door/video system anyway. It is simply a measure to placate the travelling public, not a real security measure.
Denti is offline  
Old 20th Oct 2015, 11:45
  #3359 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: SOF BG/EU
Age: 63
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
EU launches "Action Plan".....

Today the EU launched an "Action Plan"

20/10/2015 - Transport

"EASA intends to use both existing rules and innovative regulatory solutions for the implementation of the recommendations. Concrete actions will be launched in the areas of air operations, aircrew, Information Technology (IT) and data protection. The next steps will be:
- An Aircrew Medical Fitness workshop to be organised in early December 2015. The workshop will gather European and world-wide experts to discuss the implementation of the recommendations. The results of this workshop will be a draft proposal of concrete actions to implement the recommendations, to be further discussed and approved among all the interested parties: European Commission, EASA, airlines, crews, doctors, etc.
- Operational Directives in the area of air operations and aircrew might be published by EASA in the first quarter of 2016 to address specific safety issues and prepare proposals for new rules. Operational Directives are a new regulatory tool which may be used for the first time on this occasion. They will provide operators and national aviation authorities with indications on how to pro-actively implement the recommendations, and what are the actions required.
- New rules such as new acceptable means of compliance (AMC) and guidance material (GM) to existing regulations will be developed as needed before the end of 2016."

The integral "Action Plan" can be found here:
http://easa.europa.eu/download/vario...plan_final.pdf
D Bru is offline  
Old 12th Feb 2016, 15:59
  #3360 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Third planet from the sun
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
EASA is organising a survey about the 2-person-cockpit recommendation it made after the Germanwings crash.

You can participate here:
https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/runner/2-person-cockpit
sabenaboy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.