Germanwings Tragedy - Is it now all about the money?

[Quantum Quack]

This might be relevant.. then again maybe not:
Limited research:

"Can a plane be landed without any pilots at the controls?

No. A system called autoland has been available to airlines since the 1960s but you have to tell it what to do next, where to go - up, down, left, right - you have to direct it. If there is someone on the flight deck to do that, the plane does not need to be flown - but it cannot be done from the ground. Also, planes cannot taxi and reach terminals by themselves.

If both pilots died, you would just have to hope that there was someone else on hand with some experience of flying an aeroplane."
src: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8109327.stm
2009
Perhaps the Airbus A320 has installed better systems since then.

With a fully locked door the plane is effectively pilotless if the pilot in the cockpit is significantly disabled somehow and at 38000 ft ...with out a pilot...

 

[Bells]

Other keys:

He, the captain, was not reported as attempting to access the intercom nor the key pad. ( as far as I have read)

Why wouldn't he use the keypad? That is how pilots normally gain entry to the cockpit..

Was there any reports of the captain trying to talk to the co-pilot via the intercom? (What did he say?)

Considering the co-pilot ignored even flight controllers attempts to talk to him, probably in relation to the fact that the plane was losing altitude at such a fast rate, one can assume he ignored the chimes of the intercom and did not toggle it to respond. Just as he ignored the knocks, bangs, pounding and the screams of the captain to open the door.

Or that he attempted to use his code to enter the cockpit?

Once again, why wouldn't have used the code to open the door?

I don't think so...

Ah the conspiracy theory..

Why would the Captain NOT use the intercom at least to try to persuade the co-pilot?

You mean an intercom the co-pilot would have to toggle to respond?

Does the fact that he ignored the pilot pounding on the door, the flight controllers trying to talk to the cockpit via radio give you any indication that he would have toggled or picked up the intercom to respond to the captain?

There should be heaps of voice data indicating the Captains frustration at not being able to talk to the co-pilot via the intercom or through the door, but apparently inexplicably there is none. Why?

I would imagine his using an object to try to break the door down should be indicative enough of his frustration and his "open the god damn door" being screamed at the co-pilot should also indicate that the captain was in fact very frustrated at not being able to get back into the cockpit.

It's not about conspiracy it's about critical thought and assessment free of sensationalism and spurious reporting.

Is that why you are making things up about what was going on in the cockpit without any evidence to back your claims up?

Is that why you are once again ignoring the fact that the copilot directly and deliberately changed the autopilot to fly downwards and towards the alps he has flown over before?

Bells , Is the above considered as trolling by you? why?
Have I raised valid questions or not?... just curious...

I should have made myself clearer..

If you contacted the German media and claimed to be the pilots ex gay lover, then that would make you an obvious troll who cared nothing for the families of the victims and what they are clearly going through.

But may indicate he was unconscious. Then we have to ask about the change to flight path and when exactly in the sequence of events on board this occurred.

Please explain how and why an unconscious man is able to change the information in the auto-pilot as he clearly did?

Did he change the settings? All we know is that the settings were indeed changed.

Considering they were not changed until after the captain went to the bathroom, who else do you think changed it?

Did he change the settings after the Captain knocked gently on the cockpit door or before?

No idea. It could have been just before or just after or when the captain knocked on the door. What we do know is that it was a deliberate act.

You see, if he changed the settings before the Captain inexplicably knocked on the door the captain and all on board would have known that the plane was in descent mode. The captain would know that this was contrary to flight plan. He would not knock gently as he would infer an emergency was occurring. If he had been locked out against procedure he would also infer something serious was up.

Probably did not realise that quickly. The plane did not descend nose down. The passengers were not aware of what was going on with the plane and that it was going downwards until the last few minutes of it crashing into a mountain. The captain would certainly have realised something was wrong and probably why he was pounding and trying to break the door down and screaming at the copilot through the door.

One of the keys to this puzzle for me, is why the Captain is BB recorded as knocking on the door? ( gently )

Probably because that is what people do.. He was only in the bathroom for very short while, possibly a couple of minutes.

Probably knocked on the door gently and when no response, started to knock louder, start to pound and then break the door down and start screaming while trying to break down the door.. and this corresponds with the audio recording.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Why wouldn't he use the keypad? That is how pilots normally gain entry to the cockpit..


Considering the co-pilot ignored even flight controllers attempts to talk to him, probably in relation to the fact that the plane was losing altitude at such a fast rate, one can assume he ignored the chimes of the intercom and did not toggle it to respond. Just as he ignored the knocks, bangs, pounding and the screams of the captain to open the door.


Once again, why wouldn't have used the code to open the door?


Ah the conspiracy theory..


You mean an intercom the co-pilot would have to toggle to respond?

Does the fact that he ignored the pilot pounding on the door, the flight controllers trying to talk to the cockpit via radio give you any indication that he would have toggled or picked up the intercom to respond to the captain?


I would imagine his using an object to try to break the door down should be indicative enough of his frustration and his "open the god damn door" being screamed at the co-pilot should also indicate that the captain was in fact very frustrated at not being able to get back into the cockpit.


Is that why you are making things up about what was going on in the cockpit without any evidence to back your claims up?

Is that why you are once again ignoring the fact that the copilot directly and deliberately changed the autopilot to fly downwards and towards the alps he has flown over before?


I should have made myself clearer..

If you contacted the German media and claimed to be the pilots ex gay lover, then that would make you an obvious troll who cared nothing for the families of the victims and what they are clearly going through.


Please explain how and why an unconscious man is able to change the information in the auto-pilot as he clearly did?


Considering they were not changed until after the captain went to the bathroom, who else do you think changed it?


No idea. It could have been just before or just after or when the captain knocked on the door. What we do know is that it was a deliberate act.


Probably did not realise that quickly. The plane did not descend nose down. The passengers were not aware of what was going on with the plane and that it was going downwards until the last few minutes of it crashing into a mountain. The captain would certainly have realised something was wrong and probably why he was pounding and trying to break the door down and screaming at the copilot through the door.


Probably because that is what people do.. He was only in the bathroom for very short while, possibly a couple of minutes.

Probably knocked on the door gently and when no response, started to knock louder, start to pound and then break the door down and start screaming while trying to break down the door.. and this corresponds with the audio recording.

Am on mobile.
Does anyone have credible links to black box audio content?

 

[Bells]

The investigators haven't released it yet..

Honestly, what? You think they are going to release it while the investigation is still ongoing?

 

[Quantum Quack]

The investigators haven't released it yet..

Honestly, what? You think they are going to release it while the investigation is still ongoing?

What have they released ?

 

[Bells]

What have they released ?

That the audio recording in the cockpit showed that the copilot locked the pilot out of the cockpit and changed the settings on the auto pilot.

Did you not watch the press conferences by the investigators and the airline who detailed all of this? You can follow all of it as it happened and even details what questions were asked by which networks and news providers and the responses by the authorities and the airline here: http://www.theguardian.com/world/li...tigation-press-conference-live-updates-4u9525


And if you want, you can click on the Lufthansa Press Conference tab on the left of the page and it takes you right to where the press conference began and you can scroll up as the live updates, with the questions and answers were given. This was of course in direct response to the French Prosecutor who released the information that the co-pilot was the one who did it.

 

[Quantum Quack]

That the audio recording in the cockpit showed that the copilot locked the pilot out of the cockpit and changed the settings on the auto pilot.

Did you not watch the press conferences by the investigators and the airline who detailed all of this? You can follow all of it as it happened and even details what questions were asked by which networks and news providers and the responses by the authorities and the airline here: http://www.theguardian.com/world/li...tigation-press-conference-live-updates-4u9525


And if you want, you can click on the Lufthansa Press Conference tab on the left of the page and it takes you right to where the press conference began and you can scroll up as the live updates, with the questions and answers were given. This was of course in direct response to the French Prosecutor who released the information that the co-pilot was the one who did it.

thanks for the links.

 

[Quantum Quack]

That the audio recording in the cockpit showed that the copilot locked the pilot out of the cockpit and changed the settings on the auto pilot.

Did you not watch the press conferences by the investigators and the airline who detailed all of this? You can follow all of it as it happened and even details what questions were asked by which networks and news providers and the responses by the authorities and the airline here: http://www.theguardian.com/world/li...tigation-press-conference-live-updates-4u9525


And if you want, you can click on the Lufthansa Press Conference tab on the left of the page and it takes you right to where the press conference began and you can scroll up as the live updates, with the questions and answers were given. This was of course in direct response to the French Prosecutor who released the information that the co-pilot was the one who did it.

A question ... Why would the Captain believe the co-pilot was alive?
Why is "refusal to open the door" suggested? Was their evidence on the recorded BB that suggested that the co-pilot offered ANY response to the Captains attempt to gain access?

Explainer:
According to the Prosecutor the door appears to have been fully locked prior to the Captain attempting to enter the cockpit. (Return from toilet)

To then claim the co-pilot deliberately refused to open the door (as distinct from actively locking the door) suggests that the co-pilot offered some sort of response to the captain. However this idea is countered by the fact that there appeared to be no activity but "normal" breathing.
The co-pilot offered no response to anything as far as I can tell. (through out the entire situation)
So I wonder why the prosecutor would consider that the co-pilot culpably refused to open the door?

 

[Quantum Quack]

Just thinking...for what it's worth,
My naive recommendation would that all aircraft, live stream their BB data to a secure location via satellite or other means on a continuous basis as well as record.
The lack of the flight data BB is a huge problem for investigators. IMO data that will be needed given the total destruction of the plane.
I do hope they find it ( or what is left of it )

 

[Bells]

A question ... Why would the Captain believe the co-pilot was alive?
Why is "refusal to open the door" suggested? Was their evidence on the recorded BB that suggested that the co-pilot offered ANY response to the Captains attempt to gain access?

Explainer:
According to the Prosecutor the door appears to have been fully locked prior to the Captain attempting to enter the cockpit. (Return from toilet)

To then claim the co-pilot deliberately refused to open the door (as distinct from actively locking the door) suggests that the co-pilot offered some sort of response to the captain. However this idea is countered by the fact that there appeared to be no activity but "normal" breathing.
The co-pilot offered no response to anything as far as I can tell. (through out the entire situation)
So I wonder why the prosecutor would consider that the co-pilot culpably refused to open the door?

Because a plane's altitude that is set in the auto-pilot does not change on its own.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Because a plane's altitude that is set in the auto-pilot does not change on its own.

yes this appears to be the key to the prosecutors position...
Watching CH9 news tonight (Melbourne, Australia) indicated the following sequence:

1. the copilot encourages the captain to leave the cockpit and make use of the toilet.
2. Whilst the captain is using the toilet the planes flight path was altered ( from the cockpit)
3. Upon returning to the cockpit door the captain could not gain access.
4. Captain knocks and eventually attempts to break in. Yelling "Open the bloody door (*?)"

Apparently no attempt was made to use the intercom nor key pad.. ( although this may have been omitted from the news for the sake of brevity.)
Am researching A320 emergency systems....

 

[Quantum Quack]

SRC: http://qz.com/370386/this-video-sho...ocked-out-of-the-cockpit-of-germanwings-9525/
25/03/2015
"The cockpit door automatically locks, and in most situations, anyone outside the cockpit needs to have permission from the pilots inside to enter, the video explains. Pilots in the cockpit need to move a switch to the “unlock” position to open the door.

In the case of “crew incapacitation,” there is an emergency access procedure: someone outside the cockpit must punch an emergency code into the door access panel, then can enter 30 seconds later if there is “no action from the crew.” The video seems to imply that someone inside the cockpit could override that emergency action, but that is not entirely clear."

When questioned about this lack of clarity:
“We are aware of the media reports, and we have no information from the authorities that confirms this report and we are seeking more information. We will not take part in speculation on the causes of the crash.”

To me this indicates that the captain would immediately attempt to enter the over ride code and attempt to contact the co-pilot using the intercom. Possibly the intercom was disabled by the co-pilot. If the captain had used the intercom it would have been recorded on the BB recordings, either as an unanswered Buzz ( I would imagine) or actual voice.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Pages 37-38 of the A320 operating manual make interesting and relevant reading.
http://nicmosis.as.arizona.edu:8000...l_PDF_N_FCOM_RJA_TF_N_EU__20130329_DSC_25.pdf

snip...
A318/A319/A320/A321
FLIGHT CREW
OPERATING MANUAL
AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS
EQUIPMENT
COCKPIT DOOR SECURITY SYSTEM -
COCKPIT DOOR LOCKING SYSTEM (CDLS)

15 FEB 13
(1) Locked/Unlocked Door Indicator
GREEN light ON: The door has been unlocked either by a flight crew action, or
automatically (during 5 s) when no flight crew action is performed
during the delay following an emergency access request. The
door can be pushed open.

GREEN light flashes: An emergency request to enter the cockpit has been made; the
buzzer will sound continuously in the cockpit, but no action has
yet been taken by the flight crew.
RED light ON: The flight crew has denied access, and the door remains locked.

WHITE light ON: The light comes on each time the cabin crew presses a key on
the keypad.

Also apparently according to the manual:

Locked position: Once the button has been moved to this position, the door is locked ;
emergency access, the buzzer, and the keypad are inhibited for a
preselected time (5 to 20 min).

News reports indicated a 5 minute inhibition of the key pad was involved(*?)

However if this was the case the Captain would have had emergency access after 5 minutes (3 minutes to spare) which was obviously not the case.

 

[Bells]

yes this appears to be the key to the prosecutors position...
Watching CH9 news tonight (Melbourne, Australia) indicated the following sequence:

1. the copilot encourages the captain to leave the cockpit and make use of the toilet.
2. Whilst the captain is using the toilet the planes flight path was altered ( from the cockpit)
3. Upon returning to the cockpit door the captain could not gain access.
4. Captain knocks and eventually attempts to break in. Yelling "Open the bloody door (*?)"

Apparently no attempt was made to use the intercom nor key pad.. ( although this may have been omitted from the news for the sake of brevity.)
Am researching A320 emergency systems....

And you were curious as to why this was in Conspiracies...

You have no idea if that is the case or not with the captain. So perhaps you should refrain from making such bizarre assumptions.

Why wouldn't he have used the keypad to enter the cockpit? That is how they and other flight staff enter the cockpit.

As for the door lock.. Yes, they explained each and yes, the report did mention the 5 minute lock mechanism. But they also said that if the person in the cockpit set the mechanism on "lock", then that would have virtually disabled the keypad mode of entry. Which would probably explain why the knocking became louder, and he was pounding and screaming at the door.

 

[Quantum Quack]

And you were curious as to why this was in Conspiracies...

You have no idea if that is the case or not with the captain. So perhaps you should refrain from making such bizarre assumptions.

what? Didn't you watch the news on TV..

 

[Quantum Quack]

As for the door lock.. Yes, they explained each and yes, the report did mention the 5 minute lock mechanism. But they also said that if the person in the cockpit set the mechanism on "lock", then that would have virtually disabled the keypad mode of entry

read the manual and you will find that the fully locked state is only for a limited time. 5-20 minutes. Reports said 5 minutes.
Perhaps reread post #53 (towards the bottom in red)

 

[Quantum Quack]

Why wouldn't he have used the keypad to enter the cockpit? That is how they and other flight staff enter the cockpit.

because the key pad would be indicating RED and therefore useless...so I found out in the operating manual.

 

[Bells]

because the key pad would be indicating RED and therefore useless...so I found out in the operating manual.

Which would have meant that even if he put in the emergency code, it takes a while before they are able to enter that into the keypad and have the door open.

So even after 5 minutes, from when the captain arrived at the door after going to the bathroom, there may not have been enough time to initiate the emergency procedures to enter the cockpit. Also, the person in the cockpit can simply just relock the door.
And once again, you ignore the fact that the copilot set the autopilot to ensure the plane crashed into a mountain.

 

[Yazata]

read the manual and you will find that the fully locked state is only for a limited time. 5-20 minutes. Reports said 5 minutes.

The timer on the fully locked state can be renewed by toggling the switch to 'lock' once again.

If the door lockout was set at five minutes, and if the descent into the mountains took longer than that (I've heard eight minutes) then the co-pilot must have been conscious and alert in the cockpit in order to renew the lockout.

That contradicts the incapacitation theory.

If the door lockout timer was set at a longer period than it took to descend into the mountains, then the point is moot.

 

[Yazata]

This might be relevant.. then again maybe not:
Limited research:

"Can a plane be landed without any pilots at the controls?

No. A system called autoland has been available to airlines since the 1960s but you have to tell it what to do next, where to go - up, down, left, right - you have to direct it. If there is someone on the flight deck to do that, the plane does not need to be flown - but it cannot be done from the ground. Also, planes cannot taxi and reach terminals by themselves.

If both pilots died, you would just have to hope that there was someone else on hand with some experience of flying an aeroplane."
src: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8109327.stm

I believe that civilian aircraft can almost fly themselves. Reportedly, necessary human input is so minimal that an untrained layperson can be talked through the inputs to the autopilot and autoland system. (The Mythbusters tested this in a simulator and found it plausible.)

And fully autonomous military aircraft already exist that can take off, fly a mission and land, all on their own. Autonomous aircraft have even managed tricky carrier landings:

http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=75298

The Global Hawk unmanned reconaissance aircraft can run through its systems checks, taxi to a runway, interact with air traffic control, take off, fly to station, remain on station gathering intelligence, return to base, land and taxi. Human intervention is largely confined to ground servicing, giving it orders, monitoring its progress and sometimes altering its mission parameters midflight.

http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/RQ4Block10GlobalHawk/Documents/HALE_Factsheet.pdf

So the technology certainly exists to create civilian airliners with autonomous capabilities, where the ground can order flight computers to seize control of the aircraft from whoever is in the cockpit, whether that's a terrorist or a crazed co-pilot, and direct the plane to land itself at the nearest suitable airport.

There would be no end of practical difficulties though. Much of this technology is classified and/or too unreliable for commercial use. And the ground controllers would have to have a very good idea of what's happening aboard an aircraft that's behaving strangely, before it seizes control away from pilots who might be battling an emergency.

But the day is probably coming, in a few decades perhaps, when airliners don't have pilots at all. Right now, the flying public wouldn't accept it. Perhap when self-driving automobiles become routine the public will start to trust being hauled around by robots.