Jump to content

Alps A320 Crash


Dripc

Recommended Posts

The truth is unveilling to be a horrible one, for sure.

 

As Wingnut pointed it out, it happened in the past :

http://www.vox.com/2015/3/26/8294971/pilot-suicide-crash

 

The world is becoming more and more crazy and this tragedy is putting pressure on all airways companies to derive something new from preventing this kind of event in the future.

As we sometime say : To any misfortune there is something good.

It's now time to find something in order that no such things occur anymore.

Some companies are now trying to keep at least two crew members in the cockpit, if the pilot or co-pilot has to go for some rest or simply to the restroom.

In the present case, it's still weird to me why this co-pilot commited suicide taking 149 innocent lives with him. That's completly crazy and insane from him.

So so sad, indeed

Asus P8Z68 Deluxe, Intel Core i7-2600K (3.4 GHz), Corsair Vengeance 2x4096 Mo DDR3 1866 MHz, SSD 120 Go Vertex 2, EVGA GeForce GTX 970 FTW ACX 2.0 4Go (04G-P4-2978-KR), TM HOTAS Warthog #03797 (MB replaced), Saitek Combat Pro Rudder, TrackIR 5, TM Cougar MFDs with Lilliput 8" UM 80

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 149
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Some companies are now trying to keep at least two crew members in the cockpit, if the pilot or co-pilot has to go for some rest or simply to the restroom.

 

two crew or two pilot ?

there is a big difference.

if they need two pilot in the cockpit always then the aircraft needs three pilots, however that's not a real solution as well

if one of the pilot a "bad guy" his first action will be "bypassing" the other pilot and things will go same way after that

and that "2 pilot always in the cockpit" thing will bring distrust between pilots

and passengers will lose their trust/confidence/faith instantly, however that's already a past tense

sign-pic4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
two crew or two pilot ?

there is a big difference.

if they need two pilot in the cockpit always then the aircraft needs three pilots, however that's not a real solution as well

if one of the pilot a "bad guy" his first action will be "bypassing" the other pilot and things will go same way after that

and that "2 pilot always in the cockpit" thing will bring distrust between pilots

and passengers will lose their trust/confidence/faith instantly, however that's already a past tense

 

Two crew, I believe they said North American airlines require an flight attendant to enter the cockpit if a pilot leaves, so there is always two people up there in case one has issues.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two crew, I believe they said North American airlines require an flight attendant to enter the cockpit if a pilot leaves, so there is always two people up there in case one has issues.

 

a stewardess ?

do you think she will have any chances against a man/pilot while she locked up with a decided "bad guy" ?

it's a joke imho

sign-pic4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some thoughts of mine :

 

why the co-pilot waited 30 minutes (after takeoff) to that "action" ?

 

He probably waited to be high enough over a mountaineous area, where he thought that recovery of evidences would be the most difficult, meaning he really had a twisted mind

 

why the co-pilot slowed down the aircraft on that flat descent ? and why not went down vertically with full power ? - much higher chance to destroy evidences/black boxes in a mach1 impact

 

May be in order to delay the time for this plane to be detected as a "problematic" flight. As you may have seen, even at 800 km/h, only "confetis" are left

 

why the co-pilot wanted to kill 149 innocent people ? and why they didnt want to kill hundreds/thousands more in a densely populated area crash (center of Marseille?)

 

For me that's the main question. Until now, he's not recognized as a terrorist. Why would he have crashed on a densely populated area ? Probably because he didn't have the skill to, or killing 149 innocent people was enough for him

Asus P8Z68 Deluxe, Intel Core i7-2600K (3.4 GHz), Corsair Vengeance 2x4096 Mo DDR3 1866 MHz, SSD 120 Go Vertex 2, EVGA GeForce GTX 970 FTW ACX 2.0 4Go (04G-P4-2978-KR), TM HOTAS Warthog #03797 (MB replaced), Saitek Combat Pro Rudder, TrackIR 5, TM Cougar MFDs with Lilliput 8" UM 80

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
a stewardess ?

do you think she will have any chances against a man/pilot while she locked up with a decided "bad guy" ?

it's a joke imho

 

If someone wants to do something bad, they will do something bad, I think this is more for an issue if the other pilot collapses or has something medical happen...

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

things are stink

 

1)why the co-pilot waited 30 minutes (after takeoff) to that "action" ?

 

2)why the co-pilot slowed down the aircraft on that flat descent ? and why not went down vertically with full power ? - much higher chance to destroy evidences/black boxes in a mach1 impact

 

3)why the co-pilot wanted to kill 149 innocent people ? and why they didnt want to kill hundreds/thousands more in a densely populated area crash (center of Marseille?)

 

things are stink

 

1)That's when the Captain left the flight deck

 

2)the Airbus has over speed protections and will not let you do Mach 1. The plane was doing a high speed descent. A regular thrust idle descent from FL380 to 6000' will take twice as much time.

From the AOM

As the speed increases above VMO/MMO, the sidestick nose-down authority is progressively reduced, and a permanent nose-up order is applied to aid recovery to normal flight conditions.

The High Speed Protection is deactivated when the aircraft speed decreases below VMO/MMO, where the usual normal control laws are recovered. The autopilot disconnects when high speed protection goes active.

 

PITCH ATTITUDE PROTECTION

Pitch attitude is limited to :

– 30° nose up in conf 0 to 3 (progressively reduced to 25° at low speed).

– 25° nose up in conf FULL (progressively reduced to 20° at low speed).

– 15° nose down (indicated by green symbols “=” on the PFD's pitch scale).

 

3) never will know that answer.

:thumbup:[sIGPIC]http://i.imgur.com/27wvRIj.png[/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a stewardess ?

do you think she will have any chances against a man/pilot while she locked up with a decided "bad guy" ?

it's a joke imho

 

She might not be able to incapacitate a pilot, but she won't let him just close the door and use the dreaded "lock" switch easily. It's a routine which has been used by numeorus US carriers and Ryanair for years.

 

There's been a couple of similar "go with a bang" pilot suicides during last decade, up to that point however, they used to happen in Asian / Middle East / African companies.

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May be we should consider, that he actually did not 'plan' to kill all these innocent people, or in a weird twisted mind didn't even think about them.

A depressive, suicidal person doesn't act rational. A little talk triggering bad thoughts can push somebody over the edge.

That would make sense with the flight attendant as well... Just the presence of another human can have a positive influence... What troubles me, is how somebody with severe depression, problems or mood swings can slip through pilot assessment and training unnoticed.

Lufthansa is said to have quite high standards for training and does a thorough check on their pilot program... If that is failing to show such flaws in a personality, what could do the trick?

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this tragedy might lead to something like :

a) reduced intervals between evaluations for less experienced pilots

b) added psychology topic to the human performance book

c) Crew duties expanded to regular assessment of other crew members

 

P.S. I always considered medical certificate to be buggy. Good doctors are fully aware that many things can happen between the checks so they write a lot of stuff on certificate itself ...like : "Licence owners shall not excercise the priviledge of their licence and related ratings or certificates at any time when they:"......."are AWARE of any decrease in their medical fitness that might render them unable to safely exercise those priviledges"

 

If pilot is insane...hmm...my guess is that we should be trained to observe the changes in personality of other crew members, report it, ask for temporary replacement and reevaluation. I guess we should all take it as a matter of precaution, something normal, not as embarrasment (as you can probably imagine). I am writing this in assumption that such personality changes can be observed, but I am layman on that subject

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Airlines should have changed their protocols for pilots leaving the cockpit after MH-370 disappeared.

 

Reports from that incident claim the pilot left the cockpit and was locked out. If that is the case and we may never know unless the plane is found and flight recorders are intact. In my opinion changes should have been implemented long before this flight took off.

 

It's a sad story and so are many other examples that have been posted up in this section of previous suicidal pilots. A locking switch can not be the only option if 1 pilot is prevented from obtaining access to the cockpit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

911 created too many safe guards that protect the cockpit.

Another lesson learned in aviation safety that could not have been predicted.

We can only learn after the fact.

RIP all those on board, our thoughts are with those left behind.

HP G2 Reverb, Windows 10 VR settings: IPD is 64.5mm, High image quality, G2 reset to 60Hz refresh rate as standard. OpenXR user, Open XR tool kit disabled. Open XR was a massive upgrade for me.

DCS: Pixel Density 1.0, Forced IPD at 55 (perceived world size), 0 X MSAA, 0 X SSAA. My real IPD is 64.5mm. Prescription VROptition lenses installed. VR Driver system: I9-9900KS 5Ghz CPU. XI Hero motherboard and RTX 3090 graphics card, 64 gigs Ram, No OC at the mo. MT user  (2 - 5 fps gain). DCS run at 60Hz.

Vaicom user. Thrustmaster warthog user. MFG pedals with damper upgrade.... and what an upgrade! Total controls Apache MPDs set to virtual Reality height with brail enhancements to ensure 100% button activation in VR.. Simshaker Jet Pro vibration seat.. Uses data from DCS not sound.... you know when you are dropping into VRS with this bad boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO there is now a deadlock situation in place.

 

Post 9/11 it was decided that under no circumstances shall any person be allowed entry to the cockpit from the cabin unless expressly permitted by the cockpit crew; the dead man override as seen in the Airbus video being an exception where cabin crew can override the system after a lengthy waiting period as long as the cockpit crew does not counteract it.

 

Now we're faced with an inside job scenario where we want people from the cabin to be able to enter the cockpit against the expressed will of the cockpit crew.

 

What's the way out of it? If there was an override from the cabin that the cockpit crew cannot stop, terrorists could exploit it to force entry into the cockpit.

If there's no such override (current situation), the cockpit crew can crash the plane and no one can stop them.

 

Personally, I'd rather place my trust in the cockpit crew and keep the current system in place. If a pilot wants to bring down the plane, his chances of doing so are pretty good anyway because of all the inside knowledge.

 

The only way out, as I see it, would be to have the plane take control away from the pilots if it detects a dangerous situation. And that (a plane forcefully overriding all pilot input) is not something I want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way out, as I see it, would be to have the plane take control away from the pilots if it detects a dangerous situation. And that (a plane forcefully overriding all pilot input) is not something I want.
Another possible solution is to give air traffic control a way to remotely unlock the cockpit door in a case like this. It is less likely for terrorists to take control of both the ATC and the airplane. If that is considered too risky then the system could be designed to require external confirmation from a second facility. If the terrorists still break through a system like that, then I doubt anything would stop them.
Edited by VincentLaw

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another possible solution is to give air traffic control a way to remotely unlock the cockpit door in a case like this. It is less likely for terrorists to take control of both the ATC and the airplane. If that is considered too risky then the system could be designed to require external confirmation from a second facility. If the terrorists still break through a system like that, then I doubt anything would stop them.

 

In which case exactly?

 

Who would call ATC and request a door unlock override? And on which radio?

 

How is the door remotely unlocked, which safeguards can be put into place to prevent an attacker from hacking the system and gaining access without proper ATC authorization?

 

If all ATCs can do this, how would you prevent a conspiracy between an attacker on board and an ATC on the ground from overriding the system against the crew's will (a conspiracy between two people doesn't sound that far fetched IMO)?

 

Edit: Sorry, I missed the part about the second facility you put in place to defend against this two-person conspiracy scenario. Of course now we have a lengthy 3-party communication process which takes time - and time may be the one thing we're short on.../Edit

 

I see more questions than answers here -- which is probably true for most systems we could come up with.

 

Like I said, we're now trying to find a defense against an inside job. I don't see how this could ever be achieved without introducing new and dangerous attack vectors, but I'm interested to see what authorities and manufacturers come up with to defend against the very people they rely upon in the first place.


Edited by Yurgon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In which case exactly?

 

Who would call ATC and request a door unlock override? And on which radio?

 

How is the door remotely unlocked, which safeguards can be put into place to prevent an attacker from hacking the system and gaining access without proper ATC authorization?

 

If all ATCs can do this, how would you prevent a conspiracy between an attacker on board and an ATC on the ground from overriding the system against the crew's will (a conspiracy between two people doesn't sound that far fetched IMO)?

 

I see more questions than answers here -- which is probably true for most systems we could come up with.

 

Like I said, we're now trying to find a defense against an inside job. I don't see how this could ever be achieved without introducing new and dangerous attack vectors, but I'm interested to see what authorities and manufacturers come up with to defend against the very people they rely upon in the first place.

Such a system could perhaps implemented by something like this:

- entering a special emergency code at the door panel

- this either causes an automatic request sent to the ATC or

- it routes the intercom automaticaly to the radios which then allows you to talk to the ATC in person

 

But I agree, the real dilemma is that no technical solution will solve the problem of having to distrust your own people ... I mean, if we can't trust our own pilots, why would we trust some random ATC guy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically the problem is that you can't trust everyone, but you can trust most people most of the time. You just don't know who you can trust. The less control any single individual can have over a situation, the less likely an event like this is going to happen in the future. We have to accept the possibility that the terrorist might be a member of the crew.

 

In this case, the ATC declared an emergency prior to the crash. If they had the ability to remotely open the cockpit door or operate the aircraft, the crash could have been averted. of course there are lots of potential problems with that too (some of which could be resolved by requiring simultaneous verification from multiple separate ground stations), but it is a solution worth considering.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a stewardess ?

do you think she will have any chances against a man/pilot while she locked up with a decided "bad guy" ?

it's a joke imho

 

Not necessarily. Many of these suicidal pilots appear to have tried to compartmentalize their behavior. Its obviously an internalized thing. The idea of crashing a plane into the ground is, in a twisted way, far less overt than say beating a flight attendant unconscious so that you can carry out your plan. They're basically cowards, they do it alone in the cockpit, silently. Now with a flight attendant there the obvious opportunity when someone goes to the john is removed.

 

Psychology for this type of abnormal individual is not easily predictable. No doubt there could be those who would never do it if they can't just be alone.

 

You can actually see this kind of mentality in trends in suicide. Many people are simply unwilling to do it a certain way. Guns are too messy and hanging is too painful. Fear of heights, so its all about pills. Nice, easy, drift away. Its not as easy as just saying "well someone wants to die so they'll find a way". The statistics say otherwise.

 

People who do this kind of thing are messed up so normal logic doesn't apply, if such normal logic ever applied to begin with.

Warning: Nothing I say is automatically correct, even if I think it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's way too early for this kind of discussion. Too early for us to get enjoyment out of discussing hypothetical mass murder in others' time of mourning. If pilot suicide were a factual conclusion, and not a CNN-fueled-hypothesis, then this discussion might be appropriate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I for once was referring to the official statement from the French aviation authorities and what they rule out. Not everybody has to rely on CNN...

Talking about insensibility and not thinking of the mourning people, we can't possibly top off Mr. Karl-Georg Wellmann (Member of the Bundestag)...

Just google "Wellmann CDU airplane" and if you only get german results, try google translate.

At least they put him off the list of speakers for yesterday, as he was scheduled after the memoration service (a minute of silence in parliament), as after his statement, even our government felt it inappropriate to have him talk immediately after.

If you think about the "It must be a fault of the cheapy crappy airline at the end and he advise everybody, not to fly "discount" airlines again." In weird way he blamed the parents of the pupils lost, that they were too cheap to buy a proper secure flight! :fuming:

What a d...k!


Edited by shagrat
By

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

things are stink

 

Yes, you're right. It's obviously yet another false flag operation by the evil forces which control the world.

 

As if the tragedy wasn't bad enough, there's nothing like these kind of posts to make it feel even worse.

 

Is there a block option on the forums? I can't seem to find it anywhere.


Edited by Dudikoff

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

As if the tragedy wasn't bad enough, there's nothing like these kind of posts to make it feel even worse.

 

Is there a block option on the forums? I can't seem to find it anywhere.

 

 

There is a block option....it's called "don't read the posts"

 

Edit: Actually the people posting in this section have more respect for the loss than some of the theories people posted in the MH370 thread

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=121800&highlight=MH370

 

I think it's only mature to talk about what has happened. If you are offended, don't read the thread. I am sure the moderators have monitored the thread and if it was out of order it would have been locked or removed yesterday.


Edited by Winfield_Gold
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Such a system could perhaps implemented by something like this:

- entering a special emergency code at the door panel

- this either causes an automatic request sent to the ATC or

- it routes the intercom automaticaly to the radios which then allows you to talk to the ATC in person

Nope.

Simple counter-action for such a system would be for the rogue person inside the cockpit to pull the radios C/Bs. And no you can't have (from a safety PoV) electrics systems that a crew cannot switch off (think: fire).

Plus such a remote command 'open the door' would by nature be hackable, not matter how heavily you encrypt it.

Finally, a confirmation process would take time, and that's the sort of thing you may well don't have.

 

Let's try to avert knee-jerk reaction leading to over-complicated systems and/or new obvious security loop-holes while thinking about a single event, how dramatic it may have been; shall we?

 

Many of these suicidal pilots appear to have tried to compartmentalize their behavior. Its obviously an internalized thing. The idea of crashing a plane into the ground is, in a twisted way, far less overt than say beating a flight attendant unconscious so that you can carry out your plan. They're basically cowards, they do it alone in the cockpit, silently. Now with a flight attendant there the obvious opportunity when someone goes to the john is removed.

Exactly!

It's not possible to protect entirely a system from a determined inside (rogue) job. The important point here is determined:

Had a second crew member (even a frail feminine hostess) been present, then it's likely that no rogue action would have been attempted at all. This measure is ~zero cost, and would prevent attempts from most.

That leaves uncovered only the super-villain scenario, which is quite more rare than having a "standard" depressed guy not thinking quite well at a point of time.

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...