March 31, 201511 yr I would be divesting myself of Lufthansa stock right now....while Lufty still has money reserves..... Can one blame a company that is 100% compliant to current regulations? I mean, Lubitz passed the medicals and got his license, Lufthansa didn't need to keep screening him according to the current regulation.
March 31, 201511 yr Can one blame a company that is 100% compliant to current regulations? I mean, Lubitz passed the medicals and got his license, Lufthansa didn't need to keep screening him according to the current regulation. Stock holders won't see it that way, and neither will the families of the victims. AJ Pongress
March 31, 201511 yr Stock holders won't see it that way, and neither will the families of the victims. That may very well be the case, but I still wonder who's responsible, a company that technically didn't brake any rules, or regulators who suppressed the mandatory psychological tests four years ago.
March 31, 201511 yr That may very well be the case, but I still wonder who's responsible, a company that technically didn't brake any rules, or regulators who suppressed the mandatory psychological tests four years ago. If the families sue it will be against the most visible entity, which is Lufthansa. Whether or not they win is another thing. Maybe they can get a smart lawyer who will advise them to go after the regulators, if you can even do that. AJ Pongress
March 31, 201511 yr CNN is reporting, based on two European publications, that investigators found intact video from a cellphone recording the last seconds of the flight. Reportedly loud bangs can be heard, maybe from the pilot trying to bash the door down, amidst utter chaos among the passengers. Horrifying stuff.
March 31, 201511 yr Can one blame a company that is 100% compliant to current regulations?I mean, Lubitz passed the medicals and got his license, Lufthansa didn't need to keep screening him according to the current regulation. True. Its not possible for any company to be 100% compliable. Stock holders won't see it that way, and neither will the families of the victims. That's true as well. If a person has taken a decision to talk there own life, well then this person has come to terms with it and will no longer look anger or even depressed. They will appear calm and relaxed. In some cases rules, regulations and screening will work but in others it wont. I would think the only regulation that will prevent this from happening in the future will be a 3 person cockpit crew
March 31, 201511 yr A 3 person crew will cause a whole host of problems. Firstly, the 3rd person itself is an added risk. The attempted Fedex suicide crash was caused by the third person in the cockpit. Is the third person to be more 'trusted' than the assigned pilots? And if that pilot is going to be vetted more thoroughly, then why can't that vetting be applied to the rest of the crew? Secondly, many many pilots, at least in the US, 'commute' to work from another city, often sitting in that 3rd cockpit seat riding to work. If that is eliminated as a commute option, being taken by this assigned observer, there will be a wholesale upset of the industry, as pilots either quit left and right if they do not want to uproot their families, or airlines will incur huge moving expenses for their employees, or incur constant expenses to 'positive space' their commuting pilots to work. If airlines just eliminate the jumpseat for commuters and tell their employees to just suck it up and move your own butts and family into base or just commute at your own risk knowing there is no jumpseat option, I am sure the instances of pilots suffering from depression and anxiety disorders will go up by order of magnitudes. At this point, if Lufthansa already knew of his disorders while at the Academy before he had passed training and was hired, then there is little left to discuss except how much Lufthansa owes the victims. They had no obligation to hire him. Why did they hire him? Who were his parents? Did someone pull strings? It seems to me the the only reform needed is that of Lufthansa's management.
March 31, 201511 yr A 3 person crew will cause a whole host of problems. Firstly, the 3rd person itself is an added risk. The attempted Fedex suicide crash was caused by the third person in the cockpit. Is the third person to be more 'trusted' than the assigned pilots? And if that pilot is going to be vetted more thoroughly, then why can't that vetting be applied to the rest of the crew? Secondly, many many pilots, at least in the US, 'commute' to work from another city, often sitting in that 3rd cockpit seat riding to work. If that is eliminated as a commute option, being taken by this assigned observer, there will be a wholesale upset of the industry, as pilots either quit left and right if they do not want to uproot their families, or airlines will incur huge moving expenses for their employees, or incur constant expenses to 'positive space' their commuting pilots to work. If airlines just eliminate the jumpseat for commuters and tell their employees to just suck it up and move your own butts and family into base or just commute at your own risk knowing there is no jumpseat option, I am sure the instances of pilots suffering from depression and anxiety disorders will go up by order of magnitudes. At this point, if Lufthansa already knew of his disorders while at the Academy before he had passed training and was hired, then there is little left to discuss except how much Lufthansa owes the victims. They had no obligation to hire him. Why did they hire him? Who were his parents? Did someone pull strings? It seems to me the the only reform needed is that of Lufthansa's management. You mean a pilot diagnosed with depression should never be allowed to have his licence back once treated and recovered?
March 31, 201511 yr Did he just have depression? Or were there other diagnoses as well? Either way, the question raised was not one of licensing. It was one of why would an airline hire somebody that had severe mental problems. iwebber already asserted that being in an ab initio is not a sure thing to the dream job. So how did this not wash him out?
March 31, 201511 yr Did he just have depression? Or were there other diagnoses as well? Either way, the question raised was not one of licensing. It was one of why would an airline hire somebody that had severe mental problems. iwebber already asserted that being in an ab initio is not a sure thing to the dream job. So how did this not wash him out? According to the news, Lufthansa was informed that Lubitz had a "serious depressive episode", nothing else.
March 31, 201511 yr If he was going to skip all the years and hours of flight instructing, cargo flying and regional airline flying and go straight to an Airbus, then I hope they would have considered his time at their academy part of the vetting process. And if so, why did they not investigate this further? I'm pretty sure the kinds of drugs they gave him at that time, according to the news here, should have raised some serious comcerns about his fitness if they had learned of it. Lufthansa had every right and obligation to ask more questions. Afterall, they were the ones handing out the dream job all these kids wanted.
March 31, 201511 yr And if so, why did they not investigate this further? Lufthansa had every right and obligation to ask more questions Well, that's my point. They didn't have to investigate further or ask any more questions because of the regulation changes 4 years ago that put an end to the mandatory yearly psychological tests
April 1, 201511 yr He wasn't even their employee. They didn't have to hire him. They didn't even have to ask anything. Just not hire the guy. Not that hard. What is wrong with them?
April 1, 201511 yr He wasn't even their employee. They didn't have to hire him. They didn't even have to ask anything. Just not hire the guy. Not that hard. What is wrong with them? Lufthansa was paying for his training. I hope that didn't play a role in the decision to keep him spite of his mental episode. I guess they simply didn't think it was that serious. They maybe thought if he had a relapse, they would pick it up in the regular physical test. I don't know
April 1, 201511 yr About the 'third crew member option'. Does this 'member' have to have any flight experience, while either the Captain or First leaves the cockpit for restroom considerations? Probably not. What about putting an Air Marshall (make this a regulation, as part of a mandated Cabin Crew) onto every flight that leaves the ground...and THEY would be the one called upon (he/she would be armed!) to babysit the cockpit, and keep the seat warm for the flight crew member powdering his/her nose... If they made that mandated...it would end all passenger fears, this horrible tragedy has created.... Sorry, but a stewardess, or male flight attendant as the 'seat warmer', does NOT cut it for me, to any longer feel secure that this won't be copy-catted by some other airborne nut case....for Lubitz could have easily, physically over-powered a flight attendant, could have maintained a locked flight deck door, and still been able to carry out his act of mass, cold-blooded murder. I truly want an agent (male, female, female, male...the agent's sex doesn't matter...) but ARMED and trained to use that side-arm...sitting in the empty seat... Only that,... personally...now...will make me feel safe, that this will never be repeated again...aboard any carrier...The America's, or Europe based. The Air Marshall, would be responsible, for not only the passenger cabin's peace and security,......but now, the very flight deck, itself!!! 'The Lubitz Tragedy'.......would never happen again....never again. Ses
Create an account or sign in to comment