Germanwings Flight 9525 Crash - New Info, Pilot Locked Out of Cabin

[Newton_14]

Very Disturbing (http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/25/europe/germanwings-crash-main/index.html) news tonight on this latest airline crash. The Times is reporting that the voice recorder revealed one pilot left the cabin for a short few minutes and when he returned, he was locked out. He knocked, with increased urgency, to the point where it sounded like he was trying to smash the door in to no avail, per the report.

This is a very disturbing twist to me, and I find it odd the France officials and others investigating the crash did not reveal this as soon as they finished listening to the recorder, and will not confirm it now that it is out. I suppose it possible that the pilot remaining in the cabin had a heart attack or some other medical event where he became unresponsive, but the cynic in me believes something nefarious went on.

Would the pilot or one of the flight attendants not have a key to get into the cabin to prevent something like this? I know a lot of rules and regulations changed after 9/11 concerning the cabin of airplanes to make it impossible for a terrorist to gain access, but did those include not allowing any flight attendant to have a key to the cabin? Would it be normal for a Pilot to leave the cabin for a restroom break or coffee or something and not take the key to the cabin with him? Any pilots on DBR that could enlighten us on those questions?

Question to the DBR doctors: Given that the plane was obliterated due to flying into the side of a mountain at almost 400 mph, would the pilots bodies be in such a condition whereby an autopsy would be impossible or no? What kind of condition would the bodies be in after having gone through an impact of that magnitude?


This crash just got a whole lot more interesting in terms of what exactly happened. Godspeed to the families and loved ones of those who perished.

[sue71, esq]

What I read is that post 9/11, the US doesn't allow only one pilot alone in the cockpit. If one pilot leaves, a flight attendant must be in the cockpit with the other pilot until the one that left returns.

http://news.yahoo.com/black-box-1st-clues-alpine-jet-crash-killed-064937383.html


Since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, airlines in the U.S. don't leave one pilot alone in the cockpit. The standard operating procedure is that if one of the pilots leaves — for example to use the bathroom — a flight attendant takes their spot in the cockpit. It was not immediately clear if European airlines have adopted the same practice.

[Udaman]

When the crash was first described, something just seemed wrong. I'm a nervous flyier to begin with but I have a great friend who flies for AA and he always calms me down by telling me how safe things are and how they learn from each accident to make it even safer. So I called him right after the crash was reported. He was very odd about it. Told me that as a pilot it didn't make sense. If there was a massive decompression then either the plane would have stayed at cruising altitude until it ran out if fuel or if the autopilot was turned off with no new inputs it would have sunk to the ground quickly and erratically. This was a controlled descent.

So I called him last night. He said he (and other pilots) is 100% certain it was a deliberate crashing. Said that a) a plane doesn't descend like that unless it's on autopilot. Meaning whoever was at the controls intentionally alteted the flight path into the computer causing it to descend and b) if a pilot gets locked out there's a keypad they can enter that unlocks the door. It's designed to use in case a pilot becomes incapacitated. It makes a beep in the cockpit and then after a period the door opens. But it can be overruled by someone in the cockpit. So whoever was in there must have done that. Plus if the plane is on autopilot (which it was at cruising altitude) if a pilot died and slumped over onto the stick it wouldn't disengage the autopilot. Doesn't work that way.

Sure looks like a deliberate act by someone. Just horrible. It also means that most of the people in that plane spent the last few minutes listening as the person locked out (and others) tried to smash open the doors. Awful.

Lastly my pilot friend said that unless the voice recorder specifically plays a person admitting he is crashing the plane that the airline will always try to argue it was something else. The reason is all about money. They will want some of the legal costs and settlements paid for by the plane manufacturer.

[Newton_14]

When the crash was first described, something just seemed wrong. I'm a nervous flyier to begin with but I have a great friend who flies for AA and he always calms me down by telling me how safe things are and how they learn from each accident to make it even safer. So I called him right after the crash was reported. He was very odd about it. Told me that as a pilot it didn't make sense. If there was a massive decompression then either the plane would have stayed at cruising altitude until it ran out if fuel or if the autopilot was turned off with no new inputs it would have sunk to the ground quickly and erratically. This was a controlled descent.

So I called him last night. He said he (and other pilots) is 100% certain it was a deliberate crashing. Said that a) a plane doesn't descend like that unless it's on autopilot. Meaning whoever was at the controls intentionally alteted the flight path into the computer causing it to descend and b) if a pilot gets locked out there's a keypad they can enter that unlocks the door. It's designed to use in case a pilot becomes incapacitated. It makes a beep in the cockpit and then after a period the door opens. But it can be overruled by someone in the cockpit. So whoever was in there must have done that. Plus if the plane is on autopilot (which it was at cruising altitude) if a pilot died and slumped over onto the stick it wouldn't disengage the autopilot. Doesn't work that way.

Sure looks like a deliberate act by someone. Just horrible. It also means that most of the people in that plane spent the last few minutes listening as the person locked out (and others) tried to smash open the doors. Awful.

Lastly my pilot friend said that unless the voice recorder specifically plays a person admitting he is crashing the plane that the airline will always try to argue it was something else. The reason is all about money. They will want some of the legal costs and settlements paid for by the plane manufacturer.

Great post, thanks, and your friend was spot on here. This morning, the France BEA (agency investigating) have come fully clean. They are saying the descent was deliberate, and was manual, not auto-pilot, and the co-pilot deliberately crashed the plane. They said there is no way around that fact based on the evidence. Sadly, they also said that near the very end, the passengers finally figured out what was happening, and you could hear the screams on the voice recorder. Just a sad, sad deal, and senseless loss of many lives. They also reported that the co-pilot could clearly be heard breathing, and the breathing sounder normal. Incredulous.

So the investigation now turns to, why?

[Reisen]

So, interestingly, this is now the 4th incident (that we know of, it has been suspected in others like MH370) in the past 18 years where a pilot carried out a mass killing.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32063587

Ignoring everything else (hard, I know), you have to wonder if there is a technological solution to incidents like this. ie. an emergency button somewhere else in the plane that might not grant access to the cabin, but would put the plane on autopilot, then land it automatically.

We're obviously not there yet, but probably could be pretty quickly if necessary.

[InSpades]

So, interestingly, this is now the 4th incident (that we know of, it has been suspected in others like MH370) in the past 18 years where a pilot carried out a mass killing.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32063587

Ignoring everything else (hard, I know), you have to wonder if there is a technological solution to incidents like this. ie. an emergency button somewhere else in the plane that might not grant access to the cabin, but would put the plane on autopilot, then land it automatically.

We're obviously not there yet, but probably could be pretty quickly if necessary.

Such a tragedy. Accidents happen... intentionally killing a plane full of people and yourself is just beyond comprehension.

I'm sure a technological solution will be looked into... obviously a difficult situation as you wouldn't want to prevent a pilot from using his best judgement. At the same time... preventing them from crashing into a mountain seems like a huge step in the right direction.

[Udaman]

Beyond comprehension is right.

But.....really four or five incidents is a remarkably small number when you consider the thousands of flights each day.

My pilot friend said this "Look - if I wanted to crash a plane there's nothing you can do about it. I just wait until 15 seconds after take off and turn into a deep bank dive. You can't stop it. What you do is screen pilots, make sure they are well rested. Make sure they have medical and psychological care and look for any signs of mental or medical strain." Fact is 99.999% of pilots are professionals who want nothing more than to get their passengers safely from one spot to another. They love to fly. They care.

This was an awful exception and you can tweak the system to have an override code only the pilot knows or co-pilot. But to make it full proof isn't possible just due to the nature of flying.

[Reisen]

Beyond comprehension is right.

But.....really four or five incidents is a remarkably small number when you consider the thousands of flights each day.

My pilot friend said this "Look - if I wanted to crash a plane there's nothing you can do about it. I just wait until 15 seconds after take off and turn into a deep bank dive. You can't stop it. What you do is screen pilots, make sure they are well rested. Make sure they have medical and psychological care and look for any signs of mental or medical strain." Fact is 99.999% of pilots are professionals who want nothing more than to get their passengers safely from one spot to another. They love to fly. They care.

This was an awful exception and you can tweak the system to have an override code only the pilot knows or co-pilot. But to make it full proof isn't possible just due to the nature of flying.

This would be conventional wisdom, but one has to wonder the role technology could play.

As an example, my MiL's new car has a lane-correct feature, which will steer the car if you start to drift out of your lane.

Is it out of the question that, some day in our lifetime, planes could have some kind of feature that would prohibit them from being flown into the ground except at certain times, locations, and angles that the computer recognizes as a landing?

There are all kinds of issues, including the ability of the pilot to fly around a plane that's not where it's supposed to be, etc. But as a futurist, I'm tempted to think those kinds of issues could be addressed / overcome.

I realize this is a big leap from even self-driving cars, but we're already doing so many cool things in unmanned flight. There might not be a cost effective way to completely prevent someone from flying a plane into the ground, a mountain, or a skyscraper, but we might be able to make it much more difficult (similar to how we do with getting a weapon onboard today).