---------------------------------

 

I'm weeping for the innocents, and THEIR PAIN...the ones that were waiting at the gate for their loved one's safe and joyful arrival.  I'm weeping for the ones that lost their lives....

 

....not Lubitz, and his issues....

 

...screw his pain....for that pain has left an eternal legacy....of pain.

 

I respect your view, of course, but please: don't use appeal to emotion. Nobody is disrespecting the victims or the mourning of their families here.

This is not the point. We're only trying to understand what happened in Lubitz' mind and if such a tragedy could be predicted and avoided.

 

There are lots of mass murders out there, people killing themselvers along with their own families (including kids). Very often they have no criminal o insanity record. So I tend to say no, it was unpredictable, but obviously anyone is entitled to disagree.

 

 

Quote from a previous posting:

 

This quote has nothing to do with what I wrote, so I'm not sure why you're attaching it in response to my posting.  Based on the information that I've seen I have virtually no question that he intentionally flew the plane into the side of a mountain - a horrific act of murder/suicide.  But there is no credible, verifiable evidence that I've seen to this point that speaks to whether or not it was a premeditated act.  The decision to do what he did may well have come at the moment the pilot left the cockpit, or at the moment described from the CVR when his responses became terse; or it may have been made years ago.  We really don't know.  Any suggestion that anyone knew his mindset before the flight began is pure speculation based on very sketchy information.

 

Scott

His "life issues" were very serious, likely worse than what the average human-being will ever have to deal with.

And that is exactly why he should not have ever been put anywhere near the controls of an A320.

It means he should not have been at the controls of that aircraft. It means that he should have his medical suspended. It means that Lufthansa should not have hired him since their due diligence told them he is more likely to do something crazy than your average person.

 

So what's your point? 

 

You seem to be backing off of the, "I knew this was coming", and now stating something more along the lines of, "he was at risk of doing this, steps should have been taken".

 

I don't disagree with that much.

 

What I do disagree with is the notion that Lufthansa shouldn't have hired him. If Lubitz could have proved himself to be mentally stable and fit, and received various evaluations (psychiatric, neuro-psychological, etc) that deemed him to be mentally stable, I see no reason that he should have had that opportunity. The FAA has a similar system in place. But this is another topic for another time.

 

To call him "crazy" is misguided. He was human, just like the rest of us. 

And that is exactly why he should not have ever been put anywhere near the controls of an A320.

 

I agree, he should have not been piloting that plane, at least not in his current state. If he had received proper treatment and had recovered from his illness, there's no reason that he should be denied that opportunity, in my opinion. 

There are plenty of other pilot applicants out there that do not have to prove themselves mentally stable by dint of doctor reports that they could have hired. They did not have to hire him and all the risks he entailed. A job at an airline is not an entitlement.

There are plenty of other pilot applicants out there that do not have to prove themselves mentally stable by dint of doctor reports that they could have hired. They did not have to hire him and all the risks he entailed. A job at an airline is not an entitlement.

 

When did I state that anyone is entitled to a job at an airline? 

Kevin,

one simple question: how do you explain that also other pilots than Patrick Sondenheimer flew daily with Lubitz in GWI, considered him fit and even left him alone in the cockpit (their own words, not mine)? Would they do that if they had any reasonable suspect? Would his ex-girlfriend or his friends meet someone who's 'at risk' of committing a mass murder?
Yes or no?

When you disagreed that Lufthansa should not have hired him. Things like being mentally disturbed, blind, or deaf should exclude you from such a job. To still argue that to have something seriously disqualifying for a certain task, yet still should be given that task, implies that it is an entitlement.

 

Just because you're psychotic does not mean you're dumb. He was certainly smart enough to pass the checkrides and put up enough of a front in his day to day interactions to fool people. Plenty of examples out there of psychotic muderers that are smart enough to get away and never get caught.

 

 

Just because you're psychotic does not mean you're dumb. He was certainly smart enough to pass the checkrides and put up enough of a front in his day to day interactions to fool people.

... which raises then the question if it was actually possible to prevent this tragedy based on the information available BEFORE March 24, not after.

It means he should not have been at the controls of that aircraft. It means that he should have his medical suspended. It means that Lufthansa should not have hired him since their due diligence told them he is more likely to do something crazy than your average person.

Kevin, I so totally, absolutely agree with your stance.  I don't think Lufty will be left financially and operationally standing, after being processed through the court system of every nationality that was aboard that plane.  You can bet that the Chief Pilots of every other air service, and the board members of same...are HUSTLING, to make sure that this scenario doesn't play out upon their service, post-Lubitz.  Yes..there is no absolute 'prediction-of-actions' model...but there were CLEAR WARNINGS...that this man, should not have been in ANY cockpit...and certainly, not in the one that is in front of my cabin seat....  Those clear and well-ahead-of-event warnings...is what is going (through the courts eventually) to crucify Lufty.  They knew...and blew it off, as they WANTED him to field that flight operation...wanted him on that flight deck....and for that, the airline will go down....

Yes..there is no absolute 'prediction-of-actions' model...but there were CLEAR WARNINGS...that this man, should not have been in ANY cockpit...and certainly, not in the one that is in front of my cabin seat....  Those clear and well-ahead-of-event warnings...is what is going (through the courts eventually) to crucify Lufty.  They knew...and blew it off, as they WANTED him to field that flight operation...wanted him on that flight deck....and for that, the airline will go down....

 

Life is full of "clear warnings" which are only detected a posteriori.

Have a nice day, guys.

 

... which raises then the question if it was actually possible to prevent this tragedy based on the information available BEFORE March 24, not after.

Yes. They should not have hired him when they found out he had a history of mental illness. It would have prevented this tragedy.

Really he could have easily crashed the aircraft even if the other pilot had never left the cockpit. A sudden nose down input on approach / after takeoff, perhaps combined with engine shutdown, would have brought the aircraft down just as surely. 

 

That, my friends, is the crux of the matter. Air Marshal or no Air Marshal.

Kevin,

depression is not mental illness. Again, about 20-30% of the world population suffers from this disease and some of them are under medical treatment. Some of them are even pilots.

It is also unclear how well documented are his "suicidal tendencies". Nothing I read so far confirm such statements. It is very hard in such a situation to tell what was clearly documented and what is speculation or addition by the media.

Stop ignoring the reports that he had bipolar disorder and psychosis.