Airbus A320 crashed in Southern France
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dubai - sand land.
Age: 54
Posts: 2,831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by OldManRiver
Is the use of mobile 'phones dangerous, or is it not?
Heck - I even remember reaching V1 many years ago in a 340 when my phone started ringing loudly... I got a very pained look from the F/O (possibly becasue of my choice of ringtone) but the 'plane didn't drop out of the sky!!!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,692
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In nil wind that would true, but the real world is not like that. As you descend (or climb) the head/tail wind component will change. That will change your IAS and if you have select a 'pitch for speed' mode, the pitch attitude (and thus the V/S) will change to maintain the selected speed.
Yes there is. Not sure which but you're not sure of.
In an IAS/Mach Idle descent the VS and thus vertical path will vary with wind, temperature/density changes, vertical currents, IAS/Mach switchover and other factors. An Open Descent is always quite variable in terms of achieved profile.
In an IAS/Mach Idle descent the VS and thus vertical path will vary with wind, temperature/density changes, vertical currents, IAS/Mach switchover and other factors. An Open Descent is always quite variable in terms of achieved profile.
Have you ever heard of wind?
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The banging frantically on the door is less likely to be panic, than it is to be a purely fictional event that has been exposed to the vacuum of news and as result has explosively spread itself all over the internet.
Sizable fragments have been found even in such sheltered spots as PPRuNe.
Any news at this early stage that doesn't come directly from the BEA should be treated with the disdain it deserves.
Sizable fragments have been found even in such sheltered spots as PPRuNe.
Any news at this early stage that doesn't come directly from the BEA should be treated with the disdain it deserves.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
French news agency AFP is now supporting the NYT story. They are reporting that first analysis of CVR indicates:
SOURCE (German):Stimmrekorder der Germanwings-Maschine: Ein Pilot aus Cockpit ausgesperrt? | tagesschau.de
http://www.zeit.de/gesellschaft/zeit...rankreich-live
- Normal conversation between flight crew at the beginning of flight
- PIC is heard leaving cockpit before the descend
- Later tried to gain access to the cockpit first knocking than pounding the door
- First officer did not open the door or respond to PIC trying to access the cockpit and is never heard again on the tape from that moment on
- First officer was hired in 2013 with just a couple of hundred flying hours collected at his previous job
SOURCE (German):Stimmrekorder der Germanwings-Maschine: Ein Pilot aus Cockpit ausgesperrt? | tagesschau.de
http://www.zeit.de/gesellschaft/zeit...rankreich-live
Last edited by janeczku; 26th Mar 2015 at 07:21.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Antipodes Islands
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mobile Phone Coverage in flight
The problem is not at all lack of coverage but too much coverage - at least with GSM.
When you are at altitude you can see many base-stations within the 25km (or 50km with software mods) range of GSM.
There are not that many frequencies available so they they are recycled across base stations and rely on ground level visibility to prevent interference.
In an aircraft all bets are off as there is no physical limitations on signals. This is also seen when in tall buildings. The higher you get the less likely you will get a clean call. I remember hiding in the toilets to blank out most signals and only use the strong local base station.
When considering SMS there may well be moments when the signal is clean but the phone generally won't try and send. The algorithm is for ever increasing delays between retries - sometimes up to days.
When you are at altitude you can see many base-stations within the 25km (or 50km with software mods) range of GSM.
There are not that many frequencies available so they they are recycled across base stations and rely on ground level visibility to prevent interference.
In an aircraft all bets are off as there is no physical limitations on signals. This is also seen when in tall buildings. The higher you get the less likely you will get a clean call. I remember hiding in the toilets to blank out most signals and only use the strong local base station.
When considering SMS there may well be moments when the signal is clean but the phone generally won't try and send. The algorithm is for ever increasing delays between retries - sometimes up to days.
French news agency AFP seems to have corroborated the NYT story with their own sources.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Perth
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After MH370 and now this incident it is becoming clearer that the media needs a code of conduct in reporting these incidents. Confusing and inconsistent media reports fuels both a lack of trust(and appearance of disorganisation) in the responding agencies and breeds conspiracy theories when the intial media reports are later proven incorrect.
Timelines - UTC and local not just local time
Speculation - clearly marked as such.
Quotes needs to be attributed - so incorrect quotes by the media can be quickly disproven. Unnamed sources with bad information just destroy credibility of everybody involved.
Timelines - UTC and local not just local time
Speculation - clearly marked as such.
Quotes needs to be attributed - so incorrect quotes by the media can be quickly disproven. Unnamed sources with bad information just destroy credibility of everybody involved.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Paris, France
Age: 62
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All French media outlets including Crash de l'A320 de Germanwings : un des pilotes bloqué hors du cockpit? | France info have this quote:
Selon une source proche de l'enquête citée par l'AFP, "Au début du vol, on entend l'équipage parler normalement puis on entend le bruit d'un des sièges qui recule, une porte qui s'ouvre et se referme, des bruits indiquant qu'on retape à la porte et il n'y a plus de conversation à ce moment-là jusqu'au crash."
My translation:According to a source close to the inquiry cited by Agence France Presse "At the beginning of the flight, it is heard the crew speaking normally then it is heard the noise of one of the seat backing, a door that opens and closes, noises indicating it is knocked on the door again and there is no more conversation from this moment till the crash."
Last edited by fgrieu; 26th Mar 2015 at 07:50. Reason: punctuation
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If stories of PIC being locked out are true, doesn't this then point to FO being incapacitated rather than suicidal because if suicidal surely they would have just pointed it at the ground and pressed fast, rather than the 8 min descent?
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: London
Age: 33
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And if I saw the pilot struggling to return to the cockpit, id certainly be helping him kick that door down.
Surely they must have heard multiple people behind that door after a good 6 or so minutes
Surely they must have heard multiple people behind that door after a good 6 or so minutes
Serious problem.
There is a growing awareness that aircraft are vulnerable when one pilot leaves the cockpit.
If you allow any form of access from the cabin, for instance to avoid a Helios situation, then it might be used by desperate cabin crew during a hijacking. If you don't then either pilots can not leave the flight deck during the flight of if they do the aircraft is vulnerable.
There haven't been nearly as many hijackings since armoured doors were installed but I am a little surprised that once they were mandated no one took the time to think it all the way through.
There is a growing awareness that aircraft are vulnerable when one pilot leaves the cockpit.
If you allow any form of access from the cabin, for instance to avoid a Helios situation, then it might be used by desperate cabin crew during a hijacking. If you don't then either pilots can not leave the flight deck during the flight of if they do the aircraft is vulnerable.
There haven't been nearly as many hijackings since armoured doors were installed but I am a little surprised that once they were mandated no one took the time to think it all the way through.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: KSJC
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the FO was incapacitated, who initiated the descent? That he just happened to be incapacitated to press hard enough on the stick to start a descent but not hard enough to enter a dive or change heading doesn't sound feasible.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going back a decade and a bit, I was one of those who strongly argued against the concept of a Sky Marshall. Perhaps it is time to reopen the discussion as clearly there are risks/weaknesses associated with cockpit door procedures and mechanisms?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Defending the right to free speech
"Isn't this forum called "Rumor" network?:
This defence of blatant trolling is wearing thin, akin to scientology claiming the right to free speech.
Notably, the people best qualified to offer an opinion based on actual line experience have steered clear from the 51 pages of mindless speculation posted in the 48 hours post accident.
Political correctness and inclusiveness is one thing, but when a Professional pilots forum becomes so diluted by guesswork that it's primary purpose is compromised perhaps it is time for a rethink.
Like it or not, these pages are considered a legitimate source of news by popular media, and the latest whacko theory can be plastered over the front page of any headline hungry rag worldwide at the click of a mouse.
It is rather akin to continually adding water to a filter coffee machine: in the end there is nothing in the output that justifies the investment in achieving an objective, the result is hot water, or in the case of this thread hot air from plenty of experts who have yet to operate in anything but a virtual cockpit.
Every time a major incident occurs, the magnitude of the trolling problem increases exponentially, and when challenged, the same defence is used.
Rumours and speculation are not the same animal.
Creating headlines from speculation is not the way that professional aviation operates, sorry if some flight-sim bubbles just got popped.
If there was ever a justification to create a professional forum along the lines of the dedicated airline forums, perhaps this is the time to consider the matter further.
Meanwhile, another thread has appeared on RN, pushing a particular line of speculation. Hopefully it will be removed, but in an increasingly PC justified environment the likelihood is that it will not.
From the information released to date, we know that the aircraft crashed, the location is known, and the number of people who died is also known.
As hard facts are released during the course of the investigation, certainly those will be the catalyst for informed discussion.
Whilst this may be a "virtual" discussion, the accident is all too real.
This is not the time nor the place for virtual cockpit experts to strut their stuff.
This defence of blatant trolling is wearing thin, akin to scientology claiming the right to free speech.
Notably, the people best qualified to offer an opinion based on actual line experience have steered clear from the 51 pages of mindless speculation posted in the 48 hours post accident.
Political correctness and inclusiveness is one thing, but when a Professional pilots forum becomes so diluted by guesswork that it's primary purpose is compromised perhaps it is time for a rethink.
Like it or not, these pages are considered a legitimate source of news by popular media, and the latest whacko theory can be plastered over the front page of any headline hungry rag worldwide at the click of a mouse.
It is rather akin to continually adding water to a filter coffee machine: in the end there is nothing in the output that justifies the investment in achieving an objective, the result is hot water, or in the case of this thread hot air from plenty of experts who have yet to operate in anything but a virtual cockpit.
Every time a major incident occurs, the magnitude of the trolling problem increases exponentially, and when challenged, the same defence is used.
Rumours and speculation are not the same animal.
Creating headlines from speculation is not the way that professional aviation operates, sorry if some flight-sim bubbles just got popped.
If there was ever a justification to create a professional forum along the lines of the dedicated airline forums, perhaps this is the time to consider the matter further.
Meanwhile, another thread has appeared on RN, pushing a particular line of speculation. Hopefully it will be removed, but in an increasingly PC justified environment the likelihood is that it will not.
From the information released to date, we know that the aircraft crashed, the location is known, and the number of people who died is also known.
As hard facts are released during the course of the investigation, certainly those will be the catalyst for informed discussion.
Whilst this may be a "virtual" discussion, the accident is all too real.
This is not the time nor the place for virtual cockpit experts to strut their stuff.
Last edited by Teddy Robinson; 26th Mar 2015 at 08:39. Reason: typo
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Roman Empire
Posts: 831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This scenario is the same as the suicide of the copilot on an Embraer195 in Mozambique last year, I think.
Unfortunately, banging on the door won't help.
The only way would be to smash a window and provoke a decompression.
In that case the door would automatically unlock.
I had raised the suicide issue years ago, because of the stupid door, but nobody would listen....
Terrible news, and it will for sure be even more disgusting after nothing will have changed because it's not feasible to interrupt the cabin service to have a flight attendant in the cockpit when one of the pilots goes to make a phone call....
Unfortunately, banging on the door won't help.
The only way would be to smash a window and provoke a decompression.
In that case the door would automatically unlock.
I had raised the suicide issue years ago, because of the stupid door, but nobody would listen....
Terrible news, and it will for sure be even more disgusting after nothing will have changed because it's not feasible to interrupt the cabin service to have a flight attendant in the cockpit when one of the pilots goes to make a phone call....
In many airlines, it is SOP to always have two people in the flight deck.
When one of the pilots leaves to follow natures call, the other one of course stays in his seat, and one of the flight attendants will join him. After the business in the lavatory has been done, the F/A will let him back in after verification.
Does GWI not observe this simple rule?
When one of the pilots leaves to follow natures call, the other one of course stays in his seat, and one of the flight attendants will join him. After the business in the lavatory has been done, the F/A will let him back in after verification.
Does GWI not observe this simple rule?
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Windy City
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone know GW's procedure for locking the door when one pilot leaves the flight deck? Is it possible they prefer to engage lock mode, and a pilot suffering a health event might be alone for a preprogrammed interval?
JAFP
Good question, especially since discussions on German TV do not acknowledge the possibility of a keycode entry. The discussions here state it is not possible to enter unless person inside opens the door.
JAFP
Good question, especially since discussions on German TV do not acknowledge the possibility of a keycode entry. The discussions here state it is not possible to enter unless person inside opens the door.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so here is the news
BBC : the New York Times quoted an unnamed investigator
UK Independent :The Independent was unable to independently verify The New York Times' report.
un named, unattributable … but news worthy
UK Independent :The Independent was unable to independently verify The New York Times' report.
un named, unattributable … but news worthy
