If Germany (and Europe) had the requirement for a flight attendant to be inside the cockpit if one of the pilots has to go to the restroom, then maybe this would not have happened. That's the rule here in the USA. Of course, the remaining pilot could take out the flight attendant.

 

Respectfully, how does anyone who does not believe the co-pilot caused the crash when they have evidence that he entered into the FMC a flight level of less than 100 and flightaware then saw the aircraft descending? I think the evidence is very clear the co-pilot brought the aircraft down. The only thing left is to find out why to put this thing to rest. It's a shame one person has the capability of destroying so many innocent lives. Fortunately, it's likely that there are not anymore pilots like him anymore.

 

Best regards,

Some countries and airlines are already reacting, putting in place regulations requiring multiple crew members in the cockpit at all times.  See for example: http://www.bnn.ca/News/2015/3/26/Air-Canada-changing-cockpit-policy-after-Germanwings-crash.aspx

 

Scott

 

The difficulty is, most airliners have only 2 pilots on board.   I watched a KLM 777 sector from AMS-SXM yesterday with a flight time of 8 hours;  just two pilots aboard. How can anyone be expected not to need to use the toilet in that time?

Of course, the remaining pilot could take out the flight attendant.

 

That's the problem with using a 'non-flying' crew member.  If they're not trained pilots, the flight attendant wouldn't necessarily know if the sole pilot in the cockpit was making unusual or suspicious commands to the aircraft.

I think the evidence is very clear the co-pilot brought the aircraft down. The only thing left is to find out why to put this thing to rest.

Exactly. The first officer obviously did commence a desent. But the reason for this is not known.

 

Disorientation due to medical problems can't be excluded. And next phase of the flight would have been the descent phase. Maybe he was not of sound mind and passed out while or shortly after he selected a lower altitude...

 

 

The difficulty is, most airliners have only 2 pilots on board. I watched a KLM 777 sector from AMS-SXM yesterday with a flight time of 8 hours; just two pilots aboard. How can anyone be expected not to need to use the toilet in that time?

 

No system is ever going to cover every eventuality, but having at least one other crew-member with at least some level of training in the cockpit at all times seems prudent, especially given the door configuration.  I wonder if anyone with knowledge of flight attendant training in the US could speak to the issue of how they're trained for the limited time when their presence is required in the cockpit.  I can't imagine that at least some training isn't involved.  I know that on domestic flights, I rarely see either 1st or 2nd officers leave the cockpit, but as you note, long haul makes it an inevitability.

 

Scott

 

 

That's the problem with using a 'non-flying' crew member.  If they're not trained pilots, the flight attendant wouldn't necessarily know if the sole pilot in the cockpit was making unusual or suspicious commands to the aircraft.

 

You can train a person enough to know when something is not right. I bet you could have put a bunch of Airbus Extended simmers in the cabin and they would question why the FL change.

Disorientation due to medical problems can't be excluded. And next phase of the flight would have been the descent phase. Maybe he was not of sound mind and passed out while or shortly after he selected a lower altitude...

No, that can be excluded. He had sufficient presence of mind to re-set the lock on the cockpit door after the first 5 minute lockout expired...

 

...which of course prevented the pilot from entering the code in the very brief 30 second window of opportunity, assuming he had the presence of mind to realize he even had that opportunity!

If Germany (and Europe) had the requirement for a flight attendant to be inside the cockpit if one of the pilots has to go to the restroom, then maybe this would not have happened. That's the rule here in the USA. Of course, the remaining pilot could take out the flight attendant.

 

 

Indeed, having another person in the cockpit could certainly make hijack quite a bit more difficult, something that could increase the bar for a mentally unstable person. Of course someone who's determined enough will find a way to crash the aircraft anyway, but at least some cases could be definitely prevented through this procedure. 

 

Now at least Easyjet and Norwegian have announced they'll start following this procedure, some other European airlines such as Finnair already followed it.

 

I suspect this will become the new standard in all of Europe.

I suspect this will become the new standard in all of Europe.

I would be shocked if it is not implemented. I think if it happens, there also needs to be a rule that the remaining pilot remain in his seat belt to prevent that pilot from overtaking the flight attendant while the other pilot is gone. Not sure if that is a requirement here in the US when the flight attendant goes into the cockpit.

 

Best regards,

Even calling another flight attendant into the flight deck while the other pilot relieves him/her self still isn't 100%. Also putting a toilet accessible by the flight deck wouldn't be 100% either.  I recall Federal Express Flight 705 where one crew member put up an extremely violent fight to attempt to take control of the aircraft, EgyptAir Flight 990 is another one that comes to mind. Thankfully these things are extremely rare compared to the number of flights per year, I still feel safe flying.

Disorientation due to medical problems can't be excluded.

I just cannot agree with this. Too much evidence to rule against the co-pilot. I'm thinking he might have entered the information into the fmc to descend to less than 100 feet and once he did this, there was no way he was going to allow the pilot back or bring the aircraft on course as his career as an airline pilot would have been finished once he allowed the pilot back.

 

Hopefully this will never happen again (but it may have already happened in the Malaysian 777 loss and that won't be confirmed until we find the black box and voice recorders).

 

Best regards,

I recall Federal Express Flight 705 where one crew member put up an extremely violent fight to attempt to take control of the aircraft, EgyptAir Flight 990 is another one that comes to mind.

Yes, but the crew member was not successful even though he put up a violent fight. This co-pilot would not have been successful too if there had been a flight attendant in the cockpit as there probably would have been a fight to remove him.

 

Best regards,

Taking out the flight attendant, or lack of knowledge of same, is a consideration... However, having someone to talk to is the key. IF this is a suicide,  then none of us can even begin to understand the unbelievable pain he must have been in to nose down a loaded airliner. Maybe just having someone there to talk to at that moment could have changed this story completely.

 

 

Sympathy for the innocent without question... but I think Sympathy for the co-pilot is not a wasted jester.  

 

 

Yes, but the crew member was not successful even though he put up a violent fight. This co-pilot would not have been successful too if there had been a flight attendant in the cockpit as there probably would have been a fight to remove him.

 

Yes those guys were heros that day, this is why I still feel safe flying, after any accident their is always extra vigilance and statistically it is the safest form of travel. Things could happen because nothing is 100% but these events are extremely rare.

 

I have 10 flights upcoming so I am not worried.

Whenever I've taken a flight in Europe, normally with Ryanair or Easyjet, when the pilot or FO goes to the toilet, a cabin crew member will go into the cockpit. I've never seen a case where this doesn't happen, and thought it was a requirement to do so.

As w/ most aviation safety/security, most policies are designed to try and prevent but more importantly to make it more difficult for events to take place. Nothing is fool proof, at least up to this date. The die was cast many years ago and Pandora's box is open.

As w/ so much which wrong these days and I see plenty wrong here, this pilot's qualifications and the airlines policy for hiring. In no way is this to imply this could have been prevented, but it is a trend which is becoming more and more the norm. 

Pilots have always been placed high on the social scale of professions. Maybe it is time for the industry to step back and look at what is flying the trusting public. I don't think a 27 year old w/ the flying time he had, the medical issues should be anywhere near a complex jet let alone a passenger jet.

Forget all this how it works stuff, that's not the real issue, the issue is how does a pilot who takes leave for mental problems get back into a jet (so has been reported), hence I go back to my earlier comment. The flying public has a right to have only the best and most experienced flying them around. Pilots are a dime a dozen, and it is high time that airlines stop hiring inexperience. :angry:

?This has a video explaining the emergency door open procedure

 

 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11491587/Airbus-A320-crashes-in-French-Alps-with-148-people-on-board-live.html