Germanwings A320 crash in France

Join this forum to discuss the latest news that happened in the world of commercial aviation.

Moderator: Latest news team

Post Reply
Flanker2
Posts: 1611
Joined: 05 Dec 2012, 23:15

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by Flanker2 » 28 Mar 2015, 17:28

Just think about structural limitations in direct law of the rudder or the pitch elevator. Do you know why a 737 artificial feeling system of the elevator is so strong in manual flight at FL3.something ? Because if you put a full down input abruptly followed by a full up input - repeat if necessary -, you'll lose part of critical item of your magic plane in a finger clap. You want me to talk about the rudder, the flaps ?
Actually at high altitude, hich mach number flight, the IAS is lower due to lower density.
For example, a fighter jet loses maneuvrability as it goes higher in the air.
So one could argue that there is a higher risk at lower altitude high speed flights, see for instance the AA A300 crash.
If anything, a full pull on the elevators at cruise speed and altitude will cause a stall.

This being said, like you and EASA, I believe that a 2 person crew still adds a layer of safety.
if you are trained in martial arts, this takes 0.5 to 2 seconds: hit in the troath, break neck.
Basic procedure for anybody who has done something in that field.
Tricks: "Oh Sean, can you look here , I dropped something ?"
So Sean looks down , is hit in the neck and than twisted his neck.
so utterly basic. Distraction, execution.
Then the risk is always present. If you consider that level of risk, then you don't have to wait for the other pilot to go to the can.

Agree with RTM.

What should be in place is a no-blame, no-fear work environment where pilots and other staff can report unfit without being afraid of the consequences.

How many times have I seen pilots flying when sick. Too many! Specially amongst young pilots (afraid of losing their job if reporting sick too often) and 'company men' (don't want to see a cancelled flight).
They're not doing their passengers any favour!

Depression is another kind of sickness. That Germanwings FO was probably too afraid of losing his license if he had reported his sickness.
In an ideal world yes. But in the reality, it's a bit naive.
Many airlines have this so-called no-blame policy. The reality is that managers stay managers, and these no-blame policies are there to protect them (umbrella) more than to protect safety.
As you see in this case, the LH managers have their umbrella's wide open and all blame falls on the F/O.
The reality is that once you report a mental illness or a disease like say AIDS or TB, your career is over. You are treated like garbage by management, and even by your a**-kissing colleagues. You will never fly an aircraft again.

To change this, you have to change the fundamental workings and mentality of a company. Instead of using bullies as managers, you put managers with excellent people skills who are the employees' friends first, their bosses second. This way, employees can go with their problems to their managers with their full trust, and they can talk about it and find the most optimal solution together.

But is this realistic? How many companies (can) operate like this?
In companies where there is a compromise between safety and money, money is always priority number one. Until something happens and the umbrella's go wide-open at management level, leaving all blame on the little guy.

So in an ideal world yes, but in our reality, it's impossible to implement.

Crosswind
Posts: 187
Joined: 25 Nov 2008, 13:25

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by Crosswind » 28 Mar 2015, 18:20

Flanker2 wrote: Actually at high altitude, hich mach number flight, the IAS is lower due to lower density.
For example, a fighter jet loses maneuvrability as it goes higher in the air.
So one could argue that there is a higher risk at lower altitude high speed flights, see for instance the AA A300 crash.
If anything, a full pull on the elevators at cruise speed and altitude will cause a stall.
Yes, but no. The IAS still shows around 275kts at cruising mach, that means a Pdyn largely sufficient to destroy the rudder or the elevator if you play like a morron on the control wheel. No doubt (remember the AA A300 was at a lower speed than 275 when he crashed). It takes no time. You can select a flaps full in the same time and put toga.

So, so easy.

airazurxtror
Posts: 3789
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 00:00

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by airazurxtror » 29 Mar 2015, 09:46

According to information from the German judicial record, Andreas Lubitz was suffering from a strong deficiency of the sight, suceptible to worsen. A degradation likely to burden his professional future . His sight was already down about 30%.
Lubitz , who aspired to move from Germanwings to Lufthansa, would never have been able to achieve this transfer with such a handicap.

http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2015/ ... suelle.php
IF IT AIN'T BOEING, I'M NOT GOING.

regi
Posts: 5140
Joined: 02 Sep 2004, 00:00
Location: Bruges

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by regi » 29 Mar 2015, 11:29

So many impulsive reactions pop up in my mind - I don't speak for others.
It is difficult to keep a distance and not chose a direction that easely ends in extremism.

It is just so sad.

airazurxtror
Posts: 3789
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 00:00

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by airazurxtror » 29 Mar 2015, 13:01

Die letzten Worte aus dem Cockpit
Pilot schrie: „Mach die verdammte Tür auf!“

http://www.bild.de/bild-plus/news/ausla ... .bild.html
IF IT AIN'T BOEING, I'M NOT GOING.

Squelsh
Posts: 248
Joined: 05 Oct 2011, 10:31
Location: The Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by Squelsh » 29 Mar 2015, 13:48

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -9525.html
More than 48 hours after the Germanwings flight crashed in the Alps, politicians and the airlines still seem unsure who was on the plane
(..)
The passenger manifest has remained secret, and as passengers on board the flight only needed to show their passport no complete record appears to have been taken as they left Barcelona airport.

Countries who signed up to the Schengen agreement have removed internal borders, allowing travellers to "freely circulate without being subjected to border checks", according to the EU.
Germanwings, meanwhile, repeated on Wednesday that there was only one Briton among the dead.
(..)
The number of Spaniards on board also varied wildly - on Tuesday night the authorities said there were 45 onboard, but Germanwings said on Wednesday morning that there were 35.

By noon on Wednesday the figure had changed again. "Forty-nine Spanish victims have been identified" so far said Francisco Martinez, Spain's junior security minister. But he added that it was a provisional figure.

(..)
A German government source admitted that because of Europe's border protocols, under which no record of passports and ID cards is required, there is no way to know precisely the nationalities of who was on board.

He explained that the passenger list has not been released is because not all the families have been informed. This is being hampered because they are struggling to work out the nationalities of those on board.
Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk By Harriet Alexander

2:14PM GMT 26 Mar 2015


Wanted to post it on the "Automatic check-in removes a process that adds no value whatsoever", but ah well.. Welcome to Africa

User avatar
RoMax
Posts: 4425
Joined: 20 Jun 2009, 16:32

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by RoMax » 29 Mar 2015, 13:55

Squelsh wrote: Wanted to post it on the "Automatic check-in removes a process that adds no value whatsoever", but ah well.. Welcome to Africa
What does check-in change to this case? IF an ID/passport check is performed by the airline/ground handler, it is only to check if the name corresponds that of the ticket.

Squelsh
Posts: 248
Joined: 05 Oct 2011, 10:31
Location: The Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by Squelsh » 29 Mar 2015, 14:11

It does, an airline like ryanair (famous for rigorous ID checks at check-in) would have confirmed this way earlier because they are 99% sure about the nationality of the pax on board and their system in place, compared to some automated scan-barcode-process to go airside, followed by a quick glance at whatever library card during boarding. The aim of a manifest is to be correct, otherwise, drop it if you don't care about it (=check it).

Just saying, if it takes one more than 48hrs to go public with full confidence about basic 3-letter data on a manifest, hm..

User avatar
RoMax
Posts: 4425
Joined: 20 Jun 2009, 16:32

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by RoMax » 29 Mar 2015, 14:30

First of all, how does FR checks IDs when you check-in online and do not drop off baggage?

Secondly, they only do a name-check, nothing else. That still doesn't give you certainty about nationality.

tsx
Posts: 15
Joined: 23 Aug 2014, 09:33

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by tsx » 29 Mar 2015, 14:47

Squelsh wrote:It does, an airline like ryanair (famous for rigorous ID checks at check-in) would have confirmed this way earlier because they are 99% sure about the nationality of the pax on board (...)

Just saying, if it takes one more than 48hrs to go public with full confidence about basic 3-letter data on a manifest, hm..
Not so sure. Last time I flew with another company doing rigorous ID Check at boarding (Easyjet), I used another ID card (and nationality) then the one I used to book and check in.

Besides, nationality and country of residency aren't always that easy to determine, and there may be multiple.

Passenger
Posts: 6565
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by Passenger » 29 Mar 2015, 17:25

Pilot Geert Vertongen was a guest in television program De Zevende Dag on VRT.

"Airlines are being forced by media to take measure that are increasing safety. I don't believe a second person in the cockpit is a good idea - cabin crew aren't screened like pilots are - what if it's someone with whom I have never worked before?"

"One of the principles to increase aviation safety over the last decades, is that aviation experts can give advisories, based upon an analysis of all facts from an incident. For that, the experts need to have all relevant details. However, with this crash Justice is hampering the aviation experts to find out what happened."

http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/buite ... =1.2286874

Makes me think to the Türkish Airlines crash near Amsterdam. The crash site was near The Dutch Safety Board's office, so they were at the venue almost immediately and therefore managed to take the two flight recorders. They were summoned by the Dutch State Police and the government to hand them over to the State Prosecutor, but DSB-president Pieter Van Vollenhoven refused.

sean1982
Posts: 3200
Joined: 18 Mar 2003, 00:00
Contact:

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by sean1982 » 29 Mar 2015, 17:41

I don't know which airline mr vertongen works for, but in mine all ccm get the same screening as the pilots and the airline is big enough to regularly work with people that I don't know. That doesn't change the fact that trust is something that is absolutely REQUIRED for the safe operation of a flight. Maybe mr vertongen needs another CRM course.

As a sidenote, I am absolutely appaled by the lack of humanity shown by the press who are scrambling all over each other for the juicy details that are nobodies business in the first place :roll:

airazurxtror
Posts: 3789
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 00:00

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by airazurxtror » 29 Mar 2015, 18:03

RoMax wrote:First of all, how does FR checks IDs when you check-in online and do not drop off baggage?
Secondly, they only do a name-check, nothing else. That still doesn't give you certainty about nationality.
The agent at the gate checks that the name and nationality on the IC or passport are the same as on the boarding pass.
I have seen a passenger being refused boarding because his passport was not issued by the country mentioned on his boarding pass - even if he claimed to have a double nationality.
You have never taken a flight with the biggest European airline ?
IF IT AIN'T BOEING, I'M NOT GOING.

User avatar
Established02
Posts: 1595
Joined: 16 Oct 2002, 00:00

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by Established02 » 29 Mar 2015, 18:23

Andreas Lubitz .. A. L.
Patrick Sondenheimer.. P. S.
Flying from Barcelona, crashes in Barcelonnette ... in the ALPS.

fcw
Posts: 610
Joined: 01 Nov 2006, 23:20

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by fcw » 30 Mar 2015, 10:32

sean1982 wrote:I don't know which airline mr vertongen works for, but in mine all ccm get the same screening as the pilots and the airline is big enough to regularly work with people that I don't know. That doesn't change the fact that trust is something that is absolutely REQUIRED for the safe operation of a flight. Maybe mr vertongen needs another CRM course.
Mr Vertongen has a point. You put someone behind the remaining pilot with next to that person an axe. Does that make the flight any safer than now? I doubt it, you are just replacing one risk by another.

Regarding your CRM remark: Mr Vertongen (a chief pilot for Alitalia by the way) is, by far, the most CRM-minded pilot I ever flew with! He is highly regarded in both Italian and Belgian aviation, if one day you have the opportunity to speak to him for 5 minutes, you will realise which non-sense you just wrote.

Inquirer
Posts: 2039
Joined: 14 Feb 2012, 14:30

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by Inquirer » 30 Mar 2015, 11:19

Hi fcw,

I fully agree with you on this matter and it's indeed something which has been said a few times already over the past few days: it's just replacing one risk by another if you give it a good thought.

If you are the cabin crew member yourself, of course you KNOW for sure you are safe yourself and so having the supervision over the remaining pilot is thus added safety to you, because you can't really know for sure about the other, can you? So from that point of view, it's safer indeed.
If you are the remaining pilot however, you KNOW for sure you are safe yourself, and so having somebody supervise you is thus added risk somehow, because you can't really know for sure about the other, can you? So from that point of view, it's less safe indeed.
And if you are neither of the 2 (so all of the passengers), you KNOW nothing for sure and now have another human risk added to all the others, so it's not really safer either, just a way to add peace of mind knowing one particular scenario has become less likely in future, whereby another scenario has just been made possible. But that one isn't on the front cover of the papers right now, so we collectively tend to brush it aside, just as we all did until a week ago the other scenario.

Maybe aviation security managers need an introduction to game theory to see they are doing exactly the wrong thing here, if one doesnt KNOW at least one element for sure, like is the case for everybody except the remaining pilot and the supervising cabin crew member.

Flanker2
Posts: 1611
Joined: 05 Dec 2012, 23:15

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by Flanker2 » 30 Mar 2015, 13:26

@Inquirer: Would this FO have done this on this particular flight if the captain had never left to go to the can?
I doubt it very strongly.

Similarily, if a FA had entered the flight deck in lieue of the captain, he would not have disabled her and executed his plan.

The opportunity presented itself when he was left alone in the cockpit, as this was the moment that he decided to execute the plan. This was a condition that had to be filled for him to execute it with determination.

Letting an F/A into the cockpit doesn't increase the risk level significantly, as he/she replaces a pilot that could be insane himself. The calculated risk remains the same. In addition, a F/A would have less situational awareness to execute such a plan. Also, a F/A doesn't need to enter the cockpit to crash an aircraft...

Inquirer
Posts: 2039
Joined: 14 Feb 2012, 14:30

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by Inquirer » 30 Mar 2015, 13:52

I don't think anybody will know for sure what played in the head of that person that day.

In this specific scenario, somebody in the cockpit might indeed have been able to refrain or restrain the copilot from doing what he seems to have done, but the fact remains that by systematically letting somebody replace a pilot whenever he's going out so as to supervise the remaining pilot, one also effectively gives somebody new a one-to-one chance to take control of the aircraft, so you make other scenarios possible which previously weren't possible.
THAT is somehow a NEW extra risk added, one which you can't deny, just down play, similar to how pilot suicide was downplayed until recently, yet a cabin crew member is a potential risk too, if a pilot is to be considered a risk.

Try to imagine a suicidal crew member being like a winning lottery ticket, with his presence in the cockpit being the price drawing: when you grant access to 3 persons ISO the usual 2, you effectively have a situation where you've bought 3 lottery tickets ISO just 2.
When are you more likely to win the lottery: when you have just 2 tickets, or when you have 3?
Only in case your KNOW your extra ticket is not going to win anyway (like when you are the cabin crew member yourself), does the chance not increase: in all other cases, it does!
And that is exactly the error made here: the assumption that the supervisor is always the good one. What if he's actually the bad one? It's what a lot of not completely stupid people are saying here.

sn-remember
Posts: 843
Joined: 13 Sep 2004, 00:00
Location: Jodoigne/Geldenaken
Contact:

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by sn-remember » 30 Mar 2015, 16:09

@Inquirer
You may call me stupid or naïve but I believe a female FA momentarily present in the cockpit should be fine.
Indeed, female population in general are less criminally involved than male's. Just look at the prison's populations ratio sex-wise.
Moreover, it's always better to have a human presence nearby should anything "go wrong" with the remaining pilot in charge, either mentally or physically.
But it's just my feeling of course ;)

Lysexpat
Posts: 154
Joined: 31 May 2013, 11:44

Re: Germanwings A320 crash in France

Post by Lysexpat » 30 Mar 2015, 16:24

Possibly SnR, but how will that young female react when a terrorist threathens to kill someone in front of the camera if he is not given access to the cockpit? Will she lock the door and switch of the cameras as pilots are trained to do or will she open the door?
What happened last week shows a weakness in the cockpitdoor procedure. It is clear that something needs to change, but jumping to conclusions and changing procedures overnight could create other problems which could be worse than the one we are trying to solve.

Post Reply