Breaking: Germanwings Pilot Was Locked Out of Cockpit Before Crash in France

originally posted by: msallo
a reply to: Boeing777

I would not fly on a plane captained by a Mohammad.

Sorry.

Was this the name of the Pilot?

I would normally say 'I agree with you' about not flying if the guys name was 'MO' but if there are converts out there who havn't changed their name to some Arabic sounding one, well.. you would never know who is flying the plane.

a reply to: msallo

And how exactly would you do that? Just walk out the moment the pilot reads out the names on the PA and waste your money?

The report I've just read on the BBC states that Lufthansa doesn't have a procedure to ensure there are always two people in the cockpit. To make this even worse they "suggest" that one is allowed to leave the cockpit for the "minimum of time", but as this is not defined it's basically worthless to state that.

This is a failure in SOP from their perspective. There should never be such vague statements in procedures for things like this, and this lack of definition will be a focus of the case in months/years to come.

It also states that the door can be locked from the control panel. The pilot doesn't have to get up to lock or unlock it, it can be done from the seat.

It's looking more and more likely (in my opinion) that one of them left the cockpit, no cabin crew took their place, the second locked the door from the control panel for security, and then had a medical emergency rendering them incapacitated. There is no mention in the leaked report about secondary options to get into the cabin.

I'm just not buying the terrorism suggestion, for several reasons.

First, if the pilot or copilot was supposedly a terrorist, did they wait for months before their colleague needed to go to the toilet? Terrorists make their opportunity, they don't lie in wait for months until their colleague needs a wee.

If a terrorist got into the cockpit while the second stepped out for a break/toilet, why can nothing be heard to show this? There's no indication of any commotion before the pilot desperately tries to get back into the cockpit.

Finally, why would a terrorist planning to cause as much death and destruction as possible allow the plane to simply dive down into a mountain? There are plenty of targets, so why not just carry on and take a nosedive into a town or city?

None of this says terrorism to me, it's all suggesting that it was an accident, but it was brought about by the completely idiotic operating procedures by Lufthansa and the crew.

There should be two people in that cockpit at all times, there should be clear rules on how long one of the pilots is permitted to be out of the cockpit, there should be a method to open that door in the event of an emergency. If there was a method and it wasn't used, it shows that either the company failed in basic training, or the crew failed to follow procedure.

originally posted by: muse7
So a pilot breaks protocol by leaving the cockpit without letting a flight attendant know, then on top of that the co pilot has a medical emergency.

two extreme coincidences.

Kind of agreeing with the CNN guy in thinking that this looks more and more nefarious

Maybe he was poisoned!

The Pilot came back from the toilet just so whatever is caught on flight recorder would throw everything off.

In reference to the names of the pilots -

French Alps Crash - We Still Do Not Know Who Was On Board

More than 24 hours after one of the worst aviation disasters in French history, no one seems sure who exactly was on board.

The authorities initially announced that the crash had claimed the lives of 150 people, 144 passengers, four crew and two pilots. But the nationalities of those on board are unknown.

The passenger manifest has remained secret, and as passengers on board the flight only needed to show their passport - no record appears to have been taken as they left Barcelona airport.

Pilots names, and the names of the passengers, haven't been released.
No one seems to know exactly who was on board.
I find this to be disturbing.

I really don't like reading about 'plane crashes' or terrorist' acts when I'm due to fly abroad in May.

Scray thoughts in mind transcend from above.

a reply to: FlyersFan

This isn't exactly true though, is it.
The UK knows of two citizens, both names have been released to the press.
The US had two citizens on board, both names released.
The Lufthansa colleagues know who was working on that flight.
The German students at the school know who was on the flight.

Just because they haven't released a list of names for the press to paw over doesn't make this any more suspicious. When has there ever been a full list of names released to the press after an event like this? I can't recall that ever happening before.

originally posted by: Rocker2013
This isn't exactly true though, is it.

Sure it is. We know some of the names. But there was no full master list.

Just because they haven't released a list of names for the press to paw over doesn't make this any more suspicious.

I didn't say it was suspicious. I said it was disturbing. The article says that was no record kept of who was on that flight. That seems reckless to me. Especially in this day and age of terrorism via airplane.

When has there ever been a full list of names released to the press after an event like this? I can't recall that ever happening before.

That's easy. 9/11.
All four flights had passenger manifests released to the public.

I can easily google up passenger manifests for downed flights.
A recent one for example ...

South China Morning Post - Air Asia Flight 8501 Manifest
Jakarta Post - AirAsia 8501 Manifest
Profile of Crew and Passengers of AirAsia 8501

Heck, even Huffington Post ran the names and stories of people who were supposed to be on the flight but missed it.


The flight we are discussing now had no master passenger manifest list. That's what the information coming out says. I find it reckless for an airline not to know who is on their airplanes.

It's pretty clear that 67 germans died on this crash. The names are not released for the general public and to the media, just for the people who need to know them. It's an ongoing investigation there are enough rumors floating around, so there is no need to make the names of those involved publically known right now.

All I know is that its suddenly became a lot riskier to fly than it was which was constantly very very safe figures wise.

What are the reasons for this?

Air craft reliability?

Unlikely as the same checks and build models have continued to be used with a very high standard of safety checking going on.

Piloting standards dropping?

Again, very unlikely as the same high levels of training and examination still must be passed.

Pilot personal health?

A possibility, we have seen numbers of pilots caught over the limit and trying to fly, this means that the use of drugs cannot be ruled out and the possibility that all this impacts of the quality of health of the pilot, I presume they are still tasked with maintaining a healthy status and are checked randomly so it makes that a low chance.

Terrorism?

Now this has the most likelihood of being an issue, the fact is that attacks on planes have been seen to be on the rise, would be terrorists have been trying various ways to bring down planes as its simply one of the ways to inflict mass terror everywhere and also a way to maximise the number of people killed.

It begs the question of if terrorism was the reason would the powers allow it to be known considering the impact globally it would have on the economy, one would hope that the price of life would be put first but sadly these days the TPTB worship MONEY / POWER and the affect of disrupting global flight revenue and of course all the very expensive knock on effects on everyone's economy by making the simple act of flying terrifying really could be a devastating blow.

so, why has flying suddenly become less safe with standards still high?

Pilots have been named as Captain Patrick S and First Officer Andreas Günter Lubitz.

Bild has named the captain as Patrick S. He was the father of two children. He flew for over ten years for Lufthansa and Germanwings and had completed more than 6,000 flight hours on the Airbus 320.

The paper names the First Officer as Andreas L. He was "young". He was from Montabaur, in Rhineland-Palatinate. He had 630 flight hours. He joined Germanwings in September 2013 straight from the Lufthansa Flight Training School in Bremen.

Statement from the First Officer's flying club:

Andreas died as First Officer on the tragic flight. Andreas became a member of the association as a teenager, he wanted to realise his dream of flying. He began as a gliding student and made it to become a pilots on an Airbus 320.

He was able to fulfill his dream, the dream he has now so dearly paid for with his life. The members of the LSC Westerwald mourn Andreas and the other 149 victims of the disaster on March 24, 2015.

Our deepest sympathy goes out to the families. We will not forget Andrew. The members of the Luftsportclub Westerwald.

Sources:

The Telegraph

Daily Mail

Bild [German Newspaper]

Luftsportclub Westerwald

Flying hasn't become less safe.

Anyway. What I care about at the moment because everything else is speculation is how did the CVR get destroyed like that? It's gotta be the second time I've heard of that in all these years of aviation. The other time was 9/11. Tinfoil hat time?

originally posted by: Mclaneinc
so, why has flying suddenly become less safe with standards still high?

I think there's probably a combination of things.

Standards do drop in times of economic crisis, this happens in every industry and flight is no different. It might not be things considered to be top priority, but there will be things an airline cuts back on, which might have unexpected and unintended consequences.

And, as we can see from the leaked report about this case, not all airlines operate to an internationally set standard. A lot of companies require that there always be two in the cockpit, Lufthansa doesn't.

We also have the rise of low-cost airlines. How do they keep costs low? Is it by cutting back on things international standards don't yet "require"? It might be a legal requirement that the engines are checked after every flight, but it might not be internationally required that the landing gear is checked after every flight... There are a million and one things which could go wrong with any aircraft, and clearly not everything is checked after every flight.

Terrorism is of course always going to be a worry, but of all the incidents we have seen over the last few years they've all seemingly had various causes.

Lets not forget that the number of flights is also increasing. As the number goes up the chances of something going wrong increases. We gradually discover problems and then fix those problems in the hope of preventing it from happening again. We can't really predict what problems a plane might have, even if we could create a list of a million possible scenarios it's not possible to fix all of that even if the money to do it could be found.

a reply to: kidcraig

Not really. the plane travelled 700-800 km/h and crashed into massive rock.
It's more a wonder that both recorders didn't get pulverized like most of the plane...

originally posted by: Talliostro
a reply to: kidcraig

Not really. the plane travelled 700-800 km/h and crashed into massive rock.
It's more a wonder that both recorders didn't get pulverized like most of the plane...

They're designed for just that. Exactly that. One thing is for sure. After this investigation they're going to need to redesign the CVR/CDR

Breaking here in Spain.

French government are now looking at the hipótesis that it was a suicide run or "voluntary act" by the pilot or co-pilot.

LIVE on Sky News now. Looks like the co-pilot refused to let the Captain back into cockpit, and he SET the plane to descend, according to CVR. Alarms could be heard going off on CVR and co-pilot could be heard still breathing

a reply to: neoholographic

Was one of the pilots a Muslim?

Sorry, had to ask.

Oh god. Can we speculate now? We KNEW we were right. Just had to give the crew the benefit of the doubt.

a reply to: nelloh62

originally posted by: Rocker2013
The report I've just read on the BBC states that Lufthansa doesn't have a procedure to ensure there are always two people in the cockpit. To make this even worse they "suggest" that one is allowed to leave the cockpit for the "minimum of time", but as this is not defined it's basically worthless to state that.

This is a failure in SOP from their perspective. There should never be such vague statements in procedures for things like this, and this lack of definition will be a focus of the case in months/years to come.

It also states that the door can be locked from the control panel. The pilot doesn't have to get up to lock or unlock it, it can be done from the seat.

It's looking more and more likely (in my opinion) that one of them left the cockpit, no cabin crew took their place, the second locked the door from the control panel for security, and then had a medical emergency rendering them incapacitated. There is no mention in the leaked report about secondary options to get into the cabin.

I'm just not buying the terrorism suggestion, for several reasons.

First, if the pilot or copilot was supposedly a terrorist, did they wait for months before their colleague needed to go to the toilet? Terrorists make their opportunity, they don't lie in wait for months until their colleague needs a wee.

If a terrorist got into the cockpit while the second stepped out for a break/toilet, why can nothing be heard to show this? There's no indication of any commotion before the pilot desperately tries to get back into the cockpit.

Finally, why would a terrorist planning to cause as much death and destruction as possible allow the plane to simply dive down into a mountain? There are plenty of targets, so why not just carry on and take a nosedive into a town or city?

None of this says terrorism to me, it's all suggesting that it was an accident, but it was brought about by the completely idiotic operating procedures by Lufthansa and the crew.

There should be two people in that cockpit at all times, there should be clear rules on how long one of the pilots is permitted to be out of the cockpit, there should be a method to open that door in the event of an emergency. If there was a method and it wasn't used, it shows that either the company failed in basic training, or the crew failed to follow procedure.

But it takes a deliberate action to prevent a pilot or co-pilot from re-gaining access? There is a code for re-entry. I'm getting this from the same sources as everyone else. Had there been a medical emergency with the door locked, the pilot locked out could still gain access. This very access was prevented.