A320 German-wings accident in Southern France

[Mattg]

An air marshal doesn't know how to fly a plane. There could be a million reasons why a pilot would have to touch the controls whilst the other one is out and a marshal would never be trained enough to understand the decision pilots take years to learn about. Again, tilt the aircraft down in one quick movement, throw the marshal off balance and the pilot can achieve his result.

And let's not rule out that a flight attendant could also be a bit rouge, and commit a similar crime. In fact any human in the flight deck can cause the aircraft to crash with enough will power. What is to stop an air marshal pulling the trigger at the flying pilot? There is always going to be a risk with any form of transport, or life in general.

This is certainly a very rare and tragic event but I don't think the industry needs to implement some knee jerk reaction policy.

Exactly. Who's to say that we can 100% trust air marshalls? They're people too, as are the pilots. If anything, the pilots should be the most trustworthy people on board IMHO.

 

[Mattg]

A rogue pilot may not be concerned about cabin crew, but an officer with a sidearm is a different story. Combine that with a "hands off controls while one pilot on deck" rule and you may have a solution.

What would happen if there was a catastrophic mechanical malfunction requiring immediate action while one pilot is out of the coughpit?

It doesn't look like there is an easy fix here. We can put in all the safety systems in the world but ultimately if a pilot (or someone else with access to the flight deck) wants to do this, I don't think there is one 100% full-proof way to prevent them from doing so without compromising safety in other ways.

 

[michaele]

A couple of points:

I don't see what an Air Marshall could have done in this situation - they still would have been in the cabin, not flight deck.

I think having a 2 person rule in the flight deck (a FA if necessary) should a pilot need to go to the bathroom is a sensible idea - I don't see any real reasons against it.

Reviewing the flight deck access mechanism (in conjunction with the above) is important - at least to discuss alternatives and come to the conclusion whether the current system is the most appropriate mix of safety and access.

Terribly sad for all involved. My heartfelt condolences to the families and friends.

 

[Himeno]

What would happen if there was a catastrophic mechanical malfunction requiring immediate action while one pilot is out of the coughpit?

If such happened here, the French investigators would still blame the pilot. As has already been noted, France is more interest in assigning blame and sending it to the courts then in finding out what happened, how it happened and fixing it.

 

[casanovawa]

Yes you'll never make life completely safe, yes 2 people on the flight deck at any time sounds like a decent idea, and for Pete's sake, if your only flying a 2-3 hour flight like many domestics in the US and short European flights, go to the toilet before you board so as a pilot you don't ever have to be out of the coughpit leaving everyone's lives in the other pilot's hands!!

 

[MEL_Traveller]

This is certainly a very rare and tragic event but I don't think the industry needs to implement some knee jerk reaction policy.

It's not necessarily knee jerk... it is standard procedure to have two people in the coughpit on US aircraft. Sure there are reasons why a second person may not prevent something... but if it prevents just one, that's probably good enough. Aside from that, it probably provides some reassurance to passengers.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

If such happened here, the French investigators would still blame the pilot. As has already been noted, France is more interest in assigning blame and sending it to the courts then in finding out what happened, how it happened and fixing it.

The assigning of blame is not necessarily against the pilot, and only the pilot. Yes the French system is different from ours, and operates under different legal and public pressures than ours. But that's not to say the pilot is automatically blamed. As far as I can tell, no criminal charges were ever brought against the pilots of AF4590.

I appreciate there is a balance between the desire to learn from accidents rather than assign blame. But equally, consider if the potential for criminal liability actually prevented an accident in the first place? What if the thought of gaol time stopped a pilot from their third attempted landing, in bad weather, after two previous go-rounds? Would you rather 'learn' from a crash on the third attempt, or have nothing to learn at all because the pilot decided to divert instead?

 

[Mattg]

I just drove past Qantas HQ in Mascot; the flags were at half-mast.

 

[NM]

Maybe its time to go back to the days of a Flight Engineer on the flight deck. Perhaps a roll for the low-hour "cadet" pilots rather than giving them three strips before they learn to shave.

But one of the primary reasons for removing the flight engineer and going to two-crew operations was to drive down the operating cost so that airlines can offer cheaper fares, which are demanded by the passengers. How many people would be willing to pay higher fares to fly on an airline that has a 3-crew policy? I suspect very few people would actually be willing to pay if given the choice between paying say $10 more per sector or taking an airline with a minimum cost policy.

 

[whatmeworry]

Maybe its time to go back to the days of a Flight Engineer on the flight deck. Perhaps a roll for the low-hour "cadet" pilots rather than giving them three strips before they learn to shave.

But one of the primary reasons for removing the flight engineer and going to two-crew operations was to drive down the operating cost so that airlines can offer cheaper fares, which are demanded by the passengers. How many people would be willing to pay higher fares to fly on an airline that has a 3-crew policy? I suspect very few people would actually be willing to pay if given the choice between paying say $10 more per sector or taking an airline with a minimum cost policy.

One could also say, some Airlines preferred having that FA selling overpriced beer in the cabin rather then being the second body in the coughpit.

 

[ExcuseMyFrench]

If such happened here, the French investigators would still blame the pilot. As has already been noted, France is more interest in assigning blame and sending it to the courts then in finding out what happened, how it happened and fixing it.

Excuse me? What do you think the investigators are trying to do except figure out what happened, why it happened and how it happened?
I don't think you have a great understanding of the french judiciary system.

 

[UP4014]

But would someone who is going to purposely crash a plane with 150 onboard hesitate before physically ensuring another person in the coughpit couldn't stop them? I honestly don't know.

A third person may not be able to stop them, but certainly raise the alarm for immediate assistance.

Matt

 

[JMFK]

You would have been correct up until 9/11. After that, the doors were re-engineered to make the coughpit virtually impregnable. (Hence the override button so the pilot can even stop someone with the code from getting in).

Yes, I remember, and they certainly do look more tough/secure/impregnable...I guess the cynic in me just thought there was perhaps a degree of the appearance being more of a deterrent than strictly functional.

I would of thought the fight or flight response in most human beings would of caused people to try virtually anything to get in there if they knew they were going down. That said, it must be impregnable if even the Captain couldn't get in there! Will we ever know what really happened?

 

[turtlemichael]

Yes ... they must be seen to be doing something ...

That I think is unfortunately true. All the suggestions here (three pilots, second crew member in the coughpit etc) might have some marginal effect. But the root cause of the problem, as far as we can so far tell, is mental illness. Many people are murdered and suicide every day because of it. This tragedy is sadly just a more dramatic illustration. While the problem of mental illness appears immense, a good start would be to actually devote some serious resources to its identification and treatment as we do with other illnesses.

 

[Mogul]

Yes you'll never make life completely safe, yes 2 people on the flight deck at any time sounds like a decent idea, and for Pete's sake, if your only flying a 2-3 hour flight like many domestics in the US and short European flights, go to the toilet before you board so as a pilot you don't ever have to be out of the coughpit leaving everyone's lives in the other pilot's hands!!

Same with pax, imagine how many more JQ could squeeze in with no toilets.

 

[JohnK]

We never heard of a well paid surgeon committing suicide... WTF?!?

Irrational thinking? I cannot comprehend how someone contemplating suicide would risk the lives of innocent bystanders.

 

[UP4014]

I just drove past Qantas HQ in Mascot; the flags were at half-mast.

For that or Malcolm Fraser, the Harbour Bridge flags are at half mast as well.

 

[CaptJCool]

Irrational thinking that "I would become world famous" if I did this ..... The pursuit of fame drives insane behaviour.

a tech question - what angle pitch would the jet have been at descending? I assume it wasn't flAt? How easy would it have been to stand outside the door and access it?
i hAc thought About a door opening out or in or even building in in inbuilt sliding door

or the need for 2 approvals in the coughpit to do something like what happened
oR PUT a WC INSIDE THE coughPIT DOOR
OR
https://www.grc.com/sqrl/sqrl.htm use this kind of unque coding to authorise attempts in the coughpit
if it only took 8 minutes to descend 30000 feet or more, the passcode lockout time was too long. Compared to the time to godown.
KNOW YOUR TERRAIN - it's a Gallipoli story.....
so yes, demnding 2 people At all times in the coughpit is a SHORT TERM TACTICAL SOLUTION
BUT it's missing the wood for the trees.

 

[drron]

There are reports now from people who knew the co-pilot that his training was interrupted due to burn out plus depression.
Because Germany has strict medical privacy laws this was not revealed to Lufthansa.

 

[Ansett]

It seems the airline was aware of his medical situation based on the following report.

Claims killer Alps pilot Lubitz had just been dumped before Germanwings crash | Daily Mail Online