Airbus A320 crashed in Southern France
As a pilot I would have no objection to being videod whilst on the flight deck so long as this data is only for accident investigation and it will not be in the public domain.
When CVRs were first mooted in the UK the pilot unions and indeed the regulators I believe would only accept the idea being mandated so long as the actual recordings would notappear in the public domain although transcripts of conversations in accident reports would be acceptable.
When CVRs were first mooted in the UK the pilot unions and indeed the regulators I believe would only accept the idea being mandated so long as the actual recordings would notappear in the public domain although transcripts of conversations in accident reports would be acceptable.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite apart from the autopilot flying the plane, I don't believe I've heard of automated communications facilities - ie, the plane's computer generating radio messages in an emergency situation? It's producing synthesized voice inside the cockpit - is there no value in it broadcasting 'Emergency: depressurisation!' to ATC or nearby aircraft?
Join Date: May 2013
Location: home
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But he is still wrong. Take a look at this Embraer 145 manual, using the standard Eros oxy system.
.. Only normal (N) oxy selection is required for all flight conditions, and it is normally diluted.
.. Above 33,000' the mask auto switches to 100% oxy.
.. (The valves sense the pressure. Note that it says if there is a depressurisation the mask will auto revert to 100%.)
.. There is a backup manual 100% switch, if you require.
.. But constant flow (emergency selection) is only required to prevent the pilot breathing fumes.
.. (That is why it is called 'emergency selection', and not the 'above 35,000' selection'.)
This is what our system says too, if I can find the book...
http://www.smartcockpit.com/docs/OXYGEN_E1.pdf
Again, if you have a reference that says something different, then please provide it.
.. Only normal (N) oxy selection is required for all flight conditions, and it is normally diluted.
.. Above 33,000' the mask auto switches to 100% oxy.
.. (The valves sense the pressure. Note that it says if there is a depressurisation the mask will auto revert to 100%.)
.. There is a backup manual 100% switch, if you require.
.. But constant flow (emergency selection) is only required to prevent the pilot breathing fumes.
.. (That is why it is called 'emergency selection', and not the 'above 35,000' selection'.)
This is what our system says too, if I can find the book...
http://www.smartcockpit.com/docs/OXYGEN_E1.pdf
Again, if you have a reference that says something different, then please provide it.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Brussels
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good question. I haven't seen a trace of the Center Wing Box so far in the pictures. Nor a mark in the ground where it hit.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LPPT
Age: 58
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By the look of things, whatever happened, prompted the crew to leave cruise alt immediately, but left the crew incapacitated in seconds, as they couldn’t execute any logical subsequent actions, to save their pax (and their own) lives.
Rapid decompression due to structural failure (or even a collision with some FOD dropped from another passing plane) could explain this scenario.
One of the possible keys to unlock this mystery is the reaction of the pax and cabin crew; in 8 long minutes, were there any attempts made to call or text somebody? Or the event that rendered the crew incapacitated also affected the pax and cabin crew at the same time?
Rapid decompression due to structural failure (or even a collision with some FOD dropped from another passing plane) could explain this scenario.
One of the possible keys to unlock this mystery is the reaction of the pax and cabin crew; in 8 long minutes, were there any attempts made to call or text somebody? Or the event that rendered the crew incapacitated also affected the pax and cabin crew at the same time?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Age: 73
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Air OPS apply
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by AfricanSkies
This bothers me. Here we have a flyable aircraft with an incapacitated crew. A CLEVER aircraft full of computers. It knows it's cabin altitude and it's altitude. It's got a terrain database. It's got a GPWS. It can tell if it's been suddenly depressurized. It's under control. But it can't automatically fly itself down to a safer altitude and then avoid terrain on autopilot?
Autopilot works on the principle of a computer - you tell the computer what you want it to do in each situation you program it for. It doesn't figure it out on its own.
If your point is "current air navigation / flight management systems are outdated", I'd agree 110%. There is so much more potential but not enough initiative. Or money.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: LFBO
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@wigyori: Good points, thanks. I see what you're saying about retail/industrial, and I wasn't quite suggesting that the airlines just pop down to the shops and buy a few GoPros off the shelf for each craft 
But nonetheless the technology is getting better and cheaper all the time, and one would imagine that principle would apply on an industrial scale just as it does in the consumer market, even if the actual numbers are higher.
But nonetheless the technology is getting better and cheaper all the time, and one would imagine that principle would apply on an industrial scale just as it does in the consumer market, even if the actual numbers are higher.
The pilot unions have been against this for years though on the grounds of privacy.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The first town on the Thames
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
2 Posts
This explanation might possibly help the oxygen debate:
"At 10,000 ft the partial pressure of the oxygen in the lung reaches 80 mbs. This is the minimum that a healthy person can tolerate and accordingly, above this height, the first symptoms of lack of oxygen, or hypoxia, appear. Between 10,000 and 15,000 ft the ability to perform skilled tasks such as aircraft control and navigation are impaired while between 15,000 and 20,000 ft there is a marked deterioration of performance, even of simple tasks, together with a loss of critical judgment and willpower. Thinking is slowed while muscular incoordination and clumsiness result. Above 20,000 ft the symptoms become severe, rapidly leading to unconsciousness.
The onset of hypoxia can be delayed by increasing the proportion of oxygen in the inspired air with the result that the partial pressure of oxygen in the lung is increased. Assuming that the pilot is breathing 100% oxygen, then the partial pressure of oxygen in his lungs will not fall below 130 mbs until above 34,000 ft. Above this altitude, even when breathing 100% oxygen, the partial pressure of oxygen in the lung will reduce, and breathing 100% oxygen at a height of 40,000 ft is equivalent to breathing air at 10,000 ft. Above 40,000 ft, hypoxia can only be prevented by employing pressure breathing."
"At 10,000 ft the partial pressure of the oxygen in the lung reaches 80 mbs. This is the minimum that a healthy person can tolerate and accordingly, above this height, the first symptoms of lack of oxygen, or hypoxia, appear. Between 10,000 and 15,000 ft the ability to perform skilled tasks such as aircraft control and navigation are impaired while between 15,000 and 20,000 ft there is a marked deterioration of performance, even of simple tasks, together with a loss of critical judgment and willpower. Thinking is slowed while muscular incoordination and clumsiness result. Above 20,000 ft the symptoms become severe, rapidly leading to unconsciousness.
The onset of hypoxia can be delayed by increasing the proportion of oxygen in the inspired air with the result that the partial pressure of oxygen in the lung is increased. Assuming that the pilot is breathing 100% oxygen, then the partial pressure of oxygen in his lungs will not fall below 130 mbs until above 34,000 ft. Above this altitude, even when breathing 100% oxygen, the partial pressure of oxygen in the lung will reduce, and breathing 100% oxygen at a height of 40,000 ft is equivalent to breathing air at 10,000 ft. Above 40,000 ft, hypoxia can only be prevented by employing pressure breathing."
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: U.S.
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More to do with the fact that a small pressure vessel will lose all the pressurization very rapidly. A large aircraft could lose a few cabin windows and easily hold the cabin pressure, not so of a corporate type jet.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does get one thinking about being caught outside. In the font loo, take a big gulp from the dropdown, hold your breath then scramble in. Down the back, grab one of the portables and take it with you...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ---------->
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: the discussions on automatic terrain avoidance, I find it incredible that an Airbus which can automatically ensure it is not flown outside of it's flight envelope can still be flown into terrain
No doubt the cockpit was full of blaring sirens, the radar altimeter knew (or thought it knew) what was happening, GPS knew where they were, and yet the aircraft seems to have flown straight into a mountain
Assuming these things can be manually overridden, and accepting nothing is infallible, I've seen no explanation yet as to why it wouldn't be better for the aircraft to halt it's descent and possibly climb if it thinks it's about to fly into terrain with landing gear not down, and perhaps even inititate a transponder code to indicate it has just manually intervened and the pilots may be incapacitated
I would wager most SLF would gladly fly on an airline that implemented such a solution
No doubt the cockpit was full of blaring sirens, the radar altimeter knew (or thought it knew) what was happening, GPS knew where they were, and yet the aircraft seems to have flown straight into a mountain
Assuming these things can be manually overridden, and accepting nothing is infallible, I've seen no explanation yet as to why it wouldn't be better for the aircraft to halt it's descent and possibly climb if it thinks it's about to fly into terrain with landing gear not down, and perhaps even inititate a transponder code to indicate it has just manually intervened and the pilots may be incapacitated
I would wager most SLF would gladly fly on an airline that implemented such a solution
Germanwings crash: Evidence points to mechanical failure, say experts | News | Travel Trade Gazette
This may be the source that Aeromar was referring to wrt decompression being 'ruled out'.
This may be the source that Aeromar was referring to wrt decompression being 'ruled out'.
Last edited by susier; 25th Mar 2015 at 13:46. Reason: Clarify point of link
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I notice that although almost of the plane seems to have been reduced to tiny fragments (according to media coverage so far), the large section showing the D-AIPX registration survived intact, and landed face up; a useful design feature.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: europe
Age: 67
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not going to speculate, but as rapid decompression has been discussed, here is my tuppence worth.
Irrespective of what many here have stated, and despite how many times you practice in the sim, a rapid decompress at or above FL400 is certainly going to present any pilot with a major challenge. You can forget the procedure we are all ready for while sitting in our nice warm sim every six months, because the first sign of anything abnormal in real life is 100% for sure going to scare and confuse the cr@p out of you (quite probably, literally). There is one video posted previously that illustrates this very well....the pilot, who was fully prepared for the event, sat for about three or four seconds like a startled rabbit, and following this was unable to get his mask on without assistance. Again, this was someone who was fully ready and prepared to do only one thing....get his mask on!
It surprises me that some here are not able to imagine the physics behind what happens - all air suddenly expelled from your lungs, eardrums, and bodily cavities, and finding oneself shocked by the dramatic temperature reduction, terrible noise, fogged air and debris flying around the cockpit. Total confusion doesn't even begin to describe the state most of us would be in.
I would even go so far as to state that as airliners are now cruising at higher and higher levels compared with 30 years ago, a re-think on the rules is needed to get this uncomfortable elephant out of the room.
Irrespective of what many here have stated, and despite how many times you practice in the sim, a rapid decompress at or above FL400 is certainly going to present any pilot with a major challenge. You can forget the procedure we are all ready for while sitting in our nice warm sim every six months, because the first sign of anything abnormal in real life is 100% for sure going to scare and confuse the cr@p out of you (quite probably, literally). There is one video posted previously that illustrates this very well....the pilot, who was fully prepared for the event, sat for about three or four seconds like a startled rabbit, and following this was unable to get his mask on without assistance. Again, this was someone who was fully ready and prepared to do only one thing....get his mask on!
It surprises me that some here are not able to imagine the physics behind what happens - all air suddenly expelled from your lungs, eardrums, and bodily cavities, and finding oneself shocked by the dramatic temperature reduction, terrible noise, fogged air and debris flying around the cockpit. Total confusion doesn't even begin to describe the state most of us would be in.
I would even go so far as to state that as airliners are now cruising at higher and higher levels compared with 30 years ago, a re-think on the rules is needed to get this uncomfortable elephant out of the room.
Last edited by deefer dog; 25th Mar 2015 at 13:58. Reason: change of title
I find the concept of an automatic descent due to (insert failure scenario) , especially given the possibility of nonsense input which could trigger same, not a little disconcerting.