Germanwings Tragedy - Is it now all about the money?

Discussion in 'Conspiracies' started by Quantum Quack, Mar 29, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    What? Have I written something wrong?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    Gotta love this comment... no security problems with the door...eh?

    You got a nut job in the cock pit and there is absolutely nothing any one can do about it...plane destroyed... no problem... you are kidding!
    He could have flown the plane any where, into anything and not a damn thing any one could do about it. (except shoot it down) No problem... sure
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2015
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    You're kidding me, right?

    You aren't intelligent enough to try and pull these stupid games off.

    Who set the auto pilot to actually crash in the mountain?

    Auto pilots don't set themselves.

    And this is where you are wrong again. We know the co pilot was conscious because he had to have been conscious to have kept the door locked. If he had been unconscious, the pilot would have been able to gain access to the cockpit after 5 minutes.

    The captain was unable to save the plane and the passengers because the co-pilot kept flicking the door to remain on "lock". That is not a security feature as much as a co-pilot who had kidnapped a plane and its passengers and crew so that he could fly it into a mountain.

    So you are blaming everyone and everything else except the co-pilot who ensured the plane could not be saved..

    I'm sorry, is this you not making excuses for a mass murderer again?

    Trust me, when there is an inquest into this mass murder, no one is going to be trying to blame the auto-pilot of mass murder. The only person who is to blame here is the co-pilot.

    And who keyed in the directions to the auto-pilot to crash into a mountain after the captain left the cockpit? The co-pilot. Ergo, he is the only one responsible for the mass murder he committed.

    Wrong. There are manual controls in an A320 cockpit, including two joysticks, one on either side of the cockpit. One next to the captain's seat and another next to the co-captain's seat. Both the captain and co-captain have a central control module in front of them and pedals, to actually fly the plane when they need to.

    You are making a fool out of yourself to blame everything and everyone but the co-pilot.

    And if the lock had not been in place, he could have found other ways of preventing the captain from controlling the plane, including possibly killing him. After all, he was desperate enough to crash that plane.

    The door works as it was intended to work. After 5 minutes, the flight crew with the code should have been able to access it. They cannot plan or design a door to fit into every single scenario imaginable.

    It is not the door that was the issue.

    The sole issue on that flight and the only thing responsible for the deaths of the passengers and the crew was the co-pilot. No one else. He deliberately flew that plane into a mountain.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    for starters:
    wrong!
    The A320 is a fly by wire aircraft. One of the first.

    "Fly-by-wire (FBW) is a system that replaces the conventional manual flight controls of an aircraft with an electronic interface. The movements of flight controls are converted to electronic signals transmitted by wires (hence the fly-by-wire term), and flight control computers determine how to move the actuators at each control surface to provide the ordered response. The fly-by-wire system also allows automatic signals sent by the aircraft's computers to perform functions without the pilot's input, as in systems that automatically help stabilize the aircraft, or prevent unsafe operation of the aircraft outside of its performance envelope"
    wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fly-by-wire

    The flight computer ( auto pilot ) is an Intel 80286. 6 CPU's in 3 pairs
    The door lock is also managed by flight computers.
    The time delay can be between 5 and 20 minutes depending on what has been set in the CPU. ( How this delay is set I do not know at this stage )

    Researching your subject may be of some benefit.
    the rest I'll get to later
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2015
  8. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    True! And during 9/11, hijackers didn't fly planes into the World Trade Center. The plane's hydraulic systems did. So the terrorists are not to blame for those 3000 deaths! The Boeing engineers are.

    And when Anders Breivik killed 77 people in Norway, including 69 unarmed kids, it wasn't Breivik who killed them. It was his gun. How unfair to blaim Breivik for what his gun did!
    Incorrect, of course.
    Also incorrect.
    Also incorrect.
    Also incorrect.
    Also incorrect.
    Given that even what you state as fact is wrong, it's probably safe to ignore your assumptions.
    Indeed. Have you ever even flown a plane?
     
  9. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    do your research...
     
  10. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    What evidence is there that the co-pilot toggled the door lock again after 5 minutes? (Other than stupidly presuming that "he must have")
     
  11. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    I have.

    What about you? Have you ever flown an airplane? Designed avionics for aircraft? Been involved in flight testing? Dealt with in-flight emergencies? Done anything except google conspiracy websites?
     
  12. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    no you haven't
    The Intel CPU's have been installed, I believe since 1988
    Do you even know what a "fly by wire " airplane means?
    Perhaps you could share your understanding with the other members of this forum?
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2015
  13. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    I take it you did not click on the link I provided or even your own link.

    Pilots in A320's have a sidestick/joystick that they use to actually fly the plane, especially on take offs and landing. Your own link discusses this.

    Perhaps you should do your own research.

    And you are still trying to make excuses and you are still ignoring the fact that the co-pilot deliberately entered the new flight path into the auto-pilot so that the plane would crash into a mountain.

    You realise he's a pilot, right?

    Once again, he's a pilot. I would say with 100% certainty that he has more of a clue about this than you do.
     
  14. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    What do you think was the motive behind the co-pilots actions
     
  15. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    And the joystick information is channeled though the CPU which actually does the work.
    The joystick is no more than one used to play a video game
     
  16. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    and you take his word for it? on the internet!
     
  17. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    If he was a pilot he would know what "Fly by wire" means and he doesn't...so....
     
  18. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    At first I was pretty well convinced that it appears that the co-pilot entered the new flight path altitude however now that I have learned what I have learned about the flight control interface it is possible (however unlikely) that the change could have been generated by the CPU.
    So now I am not so sure...
     
  19. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    The CPU also manages the automatic cabin pressure venting upon reduction of altitude and I have suspicions that this automatic feature was not functioning when the plane hit the mountain. If proven as such by the forensic analysis of the debris then the CPU function becomes suspect.
     
  20. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    OK, so you haven't flown an airplane, designed avionics, worked on flight tests, or dealt with in-flight emergencies. You're an Internet Expert. With that in mind:
    Yes. However, the flight control computer is not the same as the autopilot. They are two separate functions within the aircraft. Again, get some time in the right seat and you will understand the difference.
    A little history:
    Early on in aviation history all aircraft were controlled by mechanical linkages. The DC-3, the first really successful airliner, used cables from the yoke to the control surfaces. The first successful jet airliner, the 707, also had mechanical linkages to back up the hydraulically-boosted system.

    However by the time the 707 came out it was clear that the days of cables and pushrods were limited. During a hydraulic failure, it took all the strength of both pilots to fly the aircraft; it was clearly not sustainable or expandable. Hence, when Boeing's 727 came out, the control cables were gone. Now the pilots flew by hydraulics. During a complete hydraulics failure the aircraft became virtually uncontrollable. ("Virtually" since aircraft are dynamically stable and can still be maneuvered to a very limited degree by differential engine thrust.) However, this was considered an acceptable risk, and was further mitigated by multiple redundant backup systems.

    So the 727 was a "fly by pipe" design. All control inputs went through a hydraulic line, and the hydraulic system transferred the motion of the yoke to the motion of the control surfaces. No hydraulic system = no control.

    By the time the 777 rolled out, Boeing had made yet another change. Rather than a direct link between the yoke and the hydraulic system, there was now a computer that translated the movements of the yoke to the control surfaces, via hydraulic systems. 99.9% of the time a motion of the yoke resulted directly in the motion of a control surface, just as had happened in the 727. However since a computer was now involved, Boeing could implement something called "flight envelope protection" - a system that made it very difficult to overstress the aircraft. For example, if the aircraft was about to stall, the system would push the yoke forward to lower the nose and prevent the stall. If the aircraft was about to overspeed, the system would raise the nose to decrease the speed.

    Since wires are lighter and cheaper than pipes, this also reduced cost of the aircraft. And since the computer could drive different control systems differently depending on flight phase (takeoff, landing, cruise etc) fuel economy could be improved, takeoff/landing distances could be shortened and cruise speed increased. Some risks were increased - software has inherent reliability problems, and now electrical power loss could render the aircraft uncontrollable. However, by using multiple redundant systems and electrical/hydraulic generation systems, the risk was deemed acceptable.

    The advantages above are why most large commercial aircraft are moving to fly by wire.
     
    Bells likes this.
  21. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    Any way... What do you think was the co-pilots motive?
     
  22. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    do you intend to quote your source or are you going to claim the above as your own work?
    and I might add it fails to deal with the issue at hand...and in fact supports what I have been saying.
     
  23. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    this is worth remembering
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page