A320 German-wings accident in Southern France

[amaroo]

Really? How easy will that be to rectify? A lot of people think airliners are completely automated anyways (a complete falsehood)


When there were those hugely publicised incidents a few years ago (QF32, Hudson river, BA38 and our own jb in QF 30) I never heard of pilots being accused as being the weakest link then.


A lot of responses to this incident seem to be focusing on issues of two pilots in the flight deck, door access etc..
It reminds me of those stories of factories in China that have a high suicide rate. The owners of these companies could do things like improve pay, improve conditions, increase time off to make a worker's life more bearable. Instead they install nets around the building to catch the workers as they fall so they can be put straight back to work on the factory floor.


How about we start to look at issues that pilots have been trying to raise for years (high cost of training and debt, safety and work life balance issues) that may put undue pressure on individual pilots?


This type of incident has happened before, I've never heard of knee jerk reactions being implemented then

Reads like justification - poor form IMHO

 

[MEL_Traveller]

This type of incident has happened before, I've never heard of knee jerk reactions being implemented then

i'm not sure if there is a good reason why short-term ('knee jerk' if you will) mitigations can't be put in place until such time as all the options are fully discussed and tested.

having two people on the flight deck at all times is fairly easy to implement. it might not be the best solution, it might not tackle underlying causes... but as a sort term measure it might just prevent one similar incident from occurring. it might dissuade just one pilot who would otherwise be left alone doing something they shouldn't.

 

[jb747]

There is no simple way of avoiding this. Someone with a bit more skill than a low hour cadet could make an aircraft unflyable in seconds, no matter who else was in the coughpit. There is no space for a make believe flight engineer in any of the small jets, nor is there any job for him to do.

Door design and behaviour is where I'd be directing my attention.

Pilots go through exactly the same security inspections that passengers do, as well as undergoing regular police security assessments. The most dangerous thing that any pilot has is knowledge, and that's not something you can (or would want to) confiscate at the gate.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

having two people on the flight deck at all times is fairly easy to implement. it might not be the best solution, it might not tackle underlying causes... but as a sort term measure it might just prevent one similar incident from occurring. it might dissuade just one pilot who would otherwise be left alone doing something they shouldn't.

Most airlines already have a minimum 2 persons in coughpit rule. I think as an outcome from this incident we'll find this becomes mandated worldwide.

 

[anat0l]

This is playing out a very sad story in all of Europe, even in jurisdictions which were not directly affected.

The only consolation - if we can even call it that - compared to previous air accidents of late is that people have more definitive answers, much faster than previous incidents / investigations.

Most of the sentiment around here now (not necessarily put out in the media) is the demonisation of the co-pilot. Already there have been suggestions that his previous psychological history may have lead to an incident like this. His relatives will be questioned.

Whether this incident will badly affect Germanwings (or any other LH Wings operation), Lufthansa or the Lufthansa Group widely is a source of debate.

Another large question weighing on people's minds is whether an incident like this may be indicative of a greater systemic problem that could lead to a similar incident, or is this simply one individual's actions and an isolated incident?

 

[Mrmaxwell]

As always the airlines will learn from this and design a process to ensure there is little chance of this happening again. Two person rule will be the easiest to implement right away, along with medium and long term adjustments to the door mechanism and other processes. I think JB's recommendation of three pilots is even better - two against one just in case.

Most of us on here fly on a regular basis so let's move on confident in our crew and remember that air travel is still the safest way to travel.

 

[whatmeworry]

Geez this incident is getting depressing.

The last eight minutes of the recovered coughpit flight recorder revealed the man's steady, measured breathing as he ignored queries from flight control, an altitude alarm from the plane's dashboard, and finally the desperate shouts of the captain outside.
At the very end of the recording, the screams of passengers can be heard, just before the plane hits the mountain.

 

[Aussie_flyer]

As always the airlines will learn from this and design a process to ensure there is little chance of this happening again. Two person rule will be the easiest to implement right away, along with medium and long term adjustments to the door mechanism and other processes. I think JB's recommendation of three pilots is even better - two against one just in case.

Most of us on here fly on a regular basis so let's move on confident in our crew and remember that air travel is still the safest way to travel.

No changes were implemented after the 2013 african crash of the E190 in identical circumstances..... well no changes we know of and nothing that prevented this disaster.

 

[milehighclub]

Still doesn't explain why the coughpit door was locked from the inside once the co-pilot left the coughpit as has been reported - if this is indeed is what happened. It has also been reported that once the cabin door is locked from the coughpit on the A320 it cannot be opened for a period of 20 minutes as both latch and security keypad are overridden. Either way I feel a redesign and process-rethink coming along.

No amount of redesign could prevent a pilot from crashing an aircraft. Even if you had a procedure that took 2 seconds to unlock the door, it only takes 1 second to get the aircraft tilting nose down. Even if you had no door, the pilot could have done exactly that while the other was in the toilet.

The chance of an attack on the flight deck is higher than a suicide pilot. There is always going to be a risk with air travel and protecting the flight deck from a terrorist is the greater focus. Without a third pilot on the flight deck I honestly don't believe anything else could have prevented this. Even having a flight attendant on the flight deck as JB mentioned wouldn't prevent it. And although I like to think that I have enough knowledge that I personally could stop that, there is also nothing to stop a pilot punching me in the face or knocking me (or even a pilot) out with any number of objects on the flight deck. A 2nd person only acts as a deterrent, but won't ever completely remove the risk if someone is determined to crash that plane.

 

[Revolio]

So will the future just boil down to the added expense of a 3-pilot rule?

 

[Denali]

This mornings update makes this event sadder. My only consolation is hopefully most of the passengers where clueless to what was happening.

 

[anat0l]

A 2nd person only acts as a deterrent, but won't ever completely remove the risk if someone is determined to crash that plane.

There is no argument that a second person will completely remove the risk. Zero risk attenuation is impossible unless the sources of the risk are eliminated (e.g. fire all pilots and make all planes piloted by robots - then you have new risks...)

What is being argued is whether the "second person" always in the coughpit will minimise the degree of risk large enough that it is worth doing if it will mean this event may have a very, very small chance of ever happening again. So far, most say that it is an effortless requirement (minimum 3 pilots might be asking for something) that should be effected, i.e. a trivial investment that, even if it doesn't actually pay off well*, didn't require a lot and thus the risk reduction : implementation effort ratio was fairly even or still greater than unity.

* God save us that another of these incidents will not happen in the near future!

 

[Mattg]

This mornings update makes this event sadder. My only consolation is hopefully most of the passengers where clueless to what was happening.

As much as I hate to say this, I'm not sure we can jump to the conclusion that the passengers were clueless if they could see and hear the captain trying to kick down the coughpit door.

Do they ever release the CVR transcript/audio publicly? I would be interested to hear it.

 

[QF WP]

Jb747, the gibberish has been explained. Q-Coffin is the point where the aircraft has climbed to an altitude where the speed differential between the onset of low speed stall buffet and the onset of high speed Mach buffet approaches zero. AKA Coffin Corner

Is it still gibberish

 

[Plutonus]

There is no argument that a second person will completely remove the risk. Zero risk attenuation is impossible unless the sources of the risk are eliminated (e.g. fire all pilots and make all planes piloted by robots - then you have new risks...)

What is being argued is whether the "second person" always in the coughpit will minimise the degree of risk large enough that it is worth doing if it will mean this event may have a very, very small chance of ever happening again. So far, most say that it is an effortless requirement (minimum 3 pilots might be asking for something) that should be effected, i.e. a trivial investment that, even if it doesn't actually pay off well*, didn't require a lot and thus the risk reduction : implementation effort ratio was fairly even or still greater than unity.

* God save us that another of these incidents will not happen in the near future!

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.

 

[medhead]

Given that this is a cadet pilot and a LCC we're talking about here let me throw out a crazy wild idea. Instead of wasting money on a third person, try paying your pilots a decent salary. While you're at it don't treat their training as a profit centre.

Scathing ... cynicism!

9/11 resulted in severe, harsh and immediate action for billions of the travelling public. [-]Pilots[/-] Random individual people have now been implicated in the mass murder of hundreds of innocents over a very short period, with the likelihood of copycat repeats being high.

Fixed this for you, as well. Pilots as a group haven't been implicated in anything. talk about jumping to false conclusions.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

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.

Just thinking about this... if there was a mandate to always have a second person in the coughpit while one of the pilots left for whatever reason, the purpose of the second person is at least two-fold.

Firstly - they give a sense of presence. No longer is the rogue pilot cut off from the rest of the plane, by themselves, isolated from the 'human factor'. That might change the thinking from 'it's just me taking the plane down' to 'I have real people on board that I'm going to take down'.

Secondly - another person might prevent use of a door lock override by being able to manually open the door if need be, and shout for help. The cabin crew replacement could be standing by the door for the two minutes it takes the other pilot to use the WC. A rogue pilot is going to have a hard time incapacitating a person standing behind them - they'd have to leave their seat.

Finally, I suppose it gives passengers and crew a sense of reassurance. One of the shocking elements of this crash is the utter hopelessness in not being able to do anything... not even try to do anything... because of a simple door lock that prevented access.

Sure we might not be able to completely mitigate the risk. Sure the 'second person' rule might not be perfect. But at least (as a temporary start) it puts back some 'hope' that we might have a chance to take control in a similar situation.

 

[amaroo]

No changes were implemented after the 2013 african crash of the E190 in identical circumstances..... well no changes we know of and nothing that prevented this disaster.

Probably lack of blonde hair/blue eyes. Bet your last dollar that changes will follow from this mass murder...

 

[Denali]

As much as I hate to say this, I'm not sure we can jump to the conclusion that the passengers were clueless if they could see and hear the captain trying to kick down the coughpit door.

Do they ever release the CVR transcript/audio publicly? I would be interested to hear it.

Must admit, I was thinking those at the front were in the know that something was very wrong but Im hoping the majority were clueless.

I know a 3rd person in the coughpit during a pilot break isn't the 100% answer but it might sway a pilot that was borderline about their actions.

Ultimately, this is so tragic and pointless.

 

[whatmeworry]

Airlines to change their safety policies.
Airlines across the world to change safety policies - BBC News