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,

Hi all (these sad days...),

 

In most threads rgding not leaving someone alone in the cockpit, there seem to be a presupmtion that the sane pilot is off and the sick/bad one is in control. Then some third staff could prevent any suicidal acts from the pilot, and all could be taken care of in due course. Given that it all takes place during cruise. But what if a suicidal (co-)pilot decides to overtake the a/c on final and smack it into the ground by sheer force to the stick. Could that happen? (Has it happened?) And can it be prevented by the other pilot?

 

(Mind you - all these posts may give the impression that suicidal pilots is what one may expect nowadays. Which of course is pure BS.)

So I wonder what the co-pilots parents or gf are thinking right now.

So I wonder what the co-pilots parents or gf are thinking right now.

How would you feel, if your a parent then you can answer your own question.

I think we should get back to the old days and not lock the cockpit. There is zero probability that all passengers may have bad intentions but there is a 100% probability that they will fight the bad guys nowadays. It doesn't matter what weapons they may have it's not possible anymore for 4 or 5 terrorists to fight against more than 100 passengers. I know I wouldn't let them have their way without a fight and so would many others. The simplest of the solutions.

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.

 

With Ryanair this was common practice, but Easyjet only changed its rules today and Lufthansa is still not considering these changes as announced in interviews today.

With Ryanair this was common practice, but Easyjet only changed its rules today and Lufthansa is still not considering these changes as announced in interviews today.

If this co-pilot turns out to be the nut case we think he is, I am not sure there will be a Lufthansa left to change the rules. It is being reported that he took off 8 months from training because he was a nut and then ended up in that cockpit alone?? The lawyers will be milking this until there is not a penny left in the bank of Lufthansa's.

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.

We have to be very careful. There is almost no evidene at all but only claims by a French state prosecutor only 48 hours after the crash. A state prosecutor is neither an airline pilot, neither an investigator, nor an aviation expert. It's not the first time when Airbus is involved that a French state prosecutor makes utterances too early which suggests absolute innocence of Airbus Industries but pilot "error". No DFDR has been analyzed yet. The entire accident investigation is still in its infancy.

 

What we know is nothing more than the airplane entered a linear descent and that the altitude of the auto pilot had been set to 96 feet obviously (not necessarily via the FMS but via the FCU altitude selection followed by selecting expedite mode). We don't even know if there was only the co-pilot in the cockpit. We have only been told so, by a French state prosecutor. What exactly happened in the cockpit is absolutely unlcear and unknown right now. And to blame a dead pilot only 48 hours after the crash, without having any DFDR data and not even a preliminary report, might be very convenient for Airbus but not for the bereaved. What we have seen yesterday actually is irresponsible, and the media and 98% of the people immediately accepts those claims by a French state prosecutor as facts. There are no facts yet.

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!

I haven't seen any transcripts, data, evidence of this flight suggesting that there was actually a) only one pilot in the cockpit and that b ) the pilot in the cockpit had sufficient presence of mind to re-set the lock of the cockpit door. I have heard media and Lufhansa officials repeating unproven "the co-pilot did it"-claims by a French state prosecutor.

 

I am very careful with this entire event right now. I don't want to blindly accept and trust statements by a lawyer. Where is the DFDR and what about the data contained in it? What about proper and detailed accident investigation first?

There is zero probability that all passengers may have bad intentions but there is a 100% probability that they will fight the bad guys nowadays.

This is only partially true. You are definitely right that there is zero probability that ALL passengers may have bad intentions but there could enough of those with bad intentions - say a few armed in sharp plastic knives, whatever, that could create serious problems, plus you don't want some kind of war between bad and good passengers. The risk in my opinion is still that bad apples will be among passengers, not pilots. Therefore I think 'never a single pilot in the cockpit' is a sensible way to go.

So some nutter is going to burst into the control room and spray everyone from an automatic. No difference there then!

Exactly. They will have to coop or kill a room full of people, the pilot aboard the plane, and people at the ATC facility as well to gain control. Can't just wait for someone to take a potty break anymore.

 

 

We have to be very careful. There is almost no evidene at all but only claims by a French state prosecutor only 48 hours after the crash. A state prosecutor is neither an airline pilot, neither an investigator, nor an aviation expert. It's not the first time when Airbus is involved that a French state prosecutor makes utterances too early which suggests absolute innocence of Airbus Industries but pilot "error". No DFDR has been analyzed yet. The entire accident investigation is still in its infancy.

 

The only thing I can say to that, is that you are in willful denial! The evidence is clear in this case. The pilot left the cockpit for whatever reason. Immediately the copilot locked him out and begun a dive. From the transponder data, they can tell he dialed 100 ft into the MCP. There was no sign of distress in his breathing, making a medical issue unlikely. The descent was 8 plus minutes. The locking mechanism would have reset after 5 minutes, so he would have had to press the locking button again to keep the Captain out. People are convicted of murder everyday on much less evidence than this.

Were they able to recover the pilots body, or was it vaporized ? I wonder if an autopsy could reveal any drugs like anti depressants in his system

Listening  on the radio  and  the reports came out  that the Co pilot had  a mental breakdown  and  was stood  down for  a period of  time, and  was cleared to fly again  after  seeing a psychologist.

The only thing I can say to that, is that you are in willful denial! The evidence is clear in this case. The pilot left the cockpit for whatever reason. Immediately the copilot locked him out and begun a dive. From the transponder data, they can tell he dialed 100 ft into the MCP. There was no sign of distress in his breathing, making a medical issue unlikely. The descent was 8 plus minutes. The locking mechanism would have reset after 5 minutes, so he would have had to press the locking button again to keep the Captain out. People are convicted of murder everyday on much less evidence than this.

We don't know when the locking mechanism would have reset. The 5 to 20 minutes just is a general timespan which differs by airline. And the airline specific timespans won't be published for obvious reasons.

 

Also, we don't know if the pilot was fully in his right senses when he dialed 100 feet on the FCU (it's actually called FCU on the Airbus rather than MCP like on Boeing aircraft). Your breath can sound normally while you are incapacitated. And I doubt the French state prosecutor is a medical expert and aviation expert altogether, already able to tell what happened after 48 hours. In Germany some aviation experts say it's an unusual behaviour during investigations, but not the first time whenever Airbus (or Air France) is involved...

 

People are convicted of murder everyday on much less evidence than this.

What people are convinced of and do believe is not what I am interested in. People are also convinced that 9/11 or the Apollo program was a scam and that flight MH 370 landed safely somewehe and that the people on board just disappeared into dust. But I personally prefer evidences and facts.

 

The airplane flew from Dusseldorf to Barcelona that morning as scheduled. No abnormalities. It took off from Barcelona again to fly back to Dusseldorf. The descent took place too early. That's what we know. Pilots go to the toilet often. It's not something special. And that the other pilot decides to suddenly out of nothing take the opportunity for deliberately crashing the airplane is not unlikely, but also not a rather likely scenario.

 

I prefer to wait for more investigation and especially the DFDR data before I make conclusions or jump to the conclusions of any state prosecutor from Marseille who makes Airbus happy for now.

Listening  on the radio  and  the reports came out  that the Co pilot had  a mental breakdown  and  was stood  down for  a period of  time, and  was cleared to fly again  after  seeing a psychologist.

That is media speculation for now. What is known is that during his pilot training back in 2008 he had a break of 6 months which is not very unusual. He returned to training and passed all tests and checks, the entire training, and worked as a flight attendant for Germanwings to bridge the waiting period before he got his place in the cockpit as a first officer (not unusual for Lufthansa/Germanwings). His work is described as flawless and exemplary. No abnormalities there. Some people claim he was "a freak". But that's not unusual for people who are deeply interested in aviation. I am called a freak as well since most of my lifetime consists of aviation stuff.

?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

 

 

If the video above is any indication...a toddler could have bashed that door in.

"cleared after seeing a psychologist",well that tells me every thing,allowing this bloke with a history of mental illness to fly passenger jets don't seem to have been a sensible idea to me,I would not like to be in this doctors shoes right know,what a bloody awful tragedy so sad!

peter