NoNameYet

I think it is very unlikely that he took "a handful" of valium, got a noticeable effect and crashed the airliner all within 8 minutes once the pilot left the cockpit.

Not really but than most older Boeings (707, 737-100 to 500, 747-100 to 300). The noise level on the A320 flight deck is about 74 dB ambient and 85 dB with a headset. On the 757 you have 72 dB ambient and 81 to 87 dB with headset. On the 767 you have 71 dB ambient and 84 db with headset. The breathing is recorded via the headset channels rather than via the area microphone (and I doubt the area microphone can capture any normal quiet breathing sound). But: why did he breath normally (allegedly) while his adrenaline level was rising? It is very unlikely that he stayed absolutely calm while the airplane was descending into the mountainous area.

I'm sure removing all seats in the cabin and install handrails on the roof of the cabin for standing capacity is something that can be done at Ryanair as well...

That's exatly what I was thinking of already. And I'm not even a real world aviator. Almost everyone who is visiting a 737 flight deck for the first time is actually surprised how small it is. You have to be relatively flexible for getting in the seat and take care not to ram your head somehwere. There might be a jump seat installed. But then the cockpit is cramped even more. The A320 has a little more room in the cockpit. But it's also relatively small. The 4-eyes-rule might be useful on wide-body airliners. But it's just another measure out of helplessness because something happened that can not be prevented by 100%. Even a second person in the cockpit does not prevent such a disaster in all circumstances at 100%.

British media is reporting from French media which is reporting from German BILD. And BILD is a tabloid and not a "newspaper" for below average educated people who love to watch tits and read bullsh... stories already at a kiosk in the morning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BILD BILD quoted an alleged ex-girlfriend of Andreas L. She allegedly claimed that he implied "his crime" (remember he is not yet guilty) already in 2014. And as said, BILD reports A LOT of nonsense. The girlfriend of Andreas L. is unknown yet (i.e. not publicly known). Just like it is unknown yet if they really split up, when they split up, and if it was the "reason" for the alleged "suidide" (as claimed by a French state prosecutor after only 48 hours respectively after only a few hours after they got nothing more than a CVR recording). Also, media published a wrong photo of Andreas L. The wrong guy now is in trouble. His girlfriend also is in trouble because every nonentity reporter now believes she is the girlfriend of Andreas L. Meanwhile the hosptial in which Andreas L. was treated recently has denied that he was in treatment due to depression. So don't just jump on everyhing the press reports. Especially when someone in GB reports from someone in France which reports from someone somewhere about a German pilot. I actually expected that people in this forum are smart enough to wait for investigation and not blindly eat any news headline from everywhere in the world. Media just is going nuts at the moment to get as many clicks as possible. I can't even count how much nonsense articles I read during the last 3 days regarding aviation only in German media. Lots of "experts" and lots of nonsense. Even psychologists having their great 5 minutes in the media analyzing someone they didn't even know. I'm getting sick of this shi...

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... 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. 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.

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. 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?

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...

Maybe. Maybe not. Unconsciousness might not take place immediately. You might do stupid things halfway through without being aware of it. Even if it just takes seconds. Changing the altitude on the FCU of the Airbus only requires a little movement of the knob for example. They say it was quiet in the cockpit. They say that the other pilot and members of the cabin crew were kicking on the door. They also say that passengers were silent. If the pilot and cabin crew members are kicking on the cockpit door and try to get in, passengers would start worrying for sure or even panicking at least in the first rows (which should be audible on the CVR recordings). Epecially these days. And why didn't they use the emergency code for unlocking the machnism? Maybe the co-pilot was unconscious for some reason and didn't know what he was doing shortly before. I think it's too early for taking the current official statements too seriously. It didn't even happen 3 days ago and everybody behaves like now we all know all facts already. In fact we don't know anything. We haven't seen any data, any fact, any preliminary report. Nothing. And I refuse to declare a 28 year old aviation enthusiast guilty, who made his dream become true and knew what life is all about. My thoughts are with his family. Let them alone for now!

Well... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JetBlue_Airways_Flight_191 One can't increase safety to a 100%. With every new safety measure you will get a new danger spot. The lockable and solid cockpit doors were meant to prevent stupid people from entering the cockpit to do stupid things. Now the doors turn out to be a perfect accomplice for suicide by pilot. I'm not even convinced yet it was pilot suicide. Officials assume it was pilot suicide only 2 days after the crash. Not even DFDR data has been analysed. For now I don't believe anything but that a plane just crashed with steady rate of decsent and without contact to ATC.

Additionally to your explanation, I think this is a good demonstration of hypoxia and its frightening results... Another one:

Sorry for digging out this old thread. I was going to start a thread about Thomas Salme, but I discovered there is a thread already, although more than 4 years old. Anyway, I came across the story of Thomas Salme last week. And I was amazed. While I always thought it might be possible to enter a cockpit of an airliner with fake papers and a uniform, I didn't think it would be possible to actually fly an airliner without actual pilot training. So how did Thomas Salme manage to do so? Well, he called a simulator center, explained that he is a commercial pilot but currently unemployed, and asked if he could use a simulator for training. That's where he got to know someone from the simulator center and so he got access several times or more specifically 15 to 20 times @ 2-3 hours each time over one and a half year. That's 30 to 60 hours of simulator training only. While his theoretical knowledge came from reading manuals and professional literature, just what some hardcore simulator enthusiasts do (including myself). Then he "simply" applied for the Italian airline Air One. They put him on a 4 hours simulator test flight, which he passed. That was his entry to the real cockpit for 13 years, also flying for Corendon Airlines and Jet2 airlines, while he got official documents each time he passed check flights. But the most amazing part actually is his fake licence: he simply printed it on normal paper, and even cut it out by hand, just with scissors... This is Thomas Salme, when he was flying as a PIC: Surprisingly he was just charged with a financial penalty of 2000 Euro / 2300 USD and was banned from flying for 12 months only. I think this was because technically he actually was a pilot, but just without any licence and without ever visiting a pilot school. He accumulated 10.00 hours, passed all tests during his 13 years as a pilot and never caused an incident. Quite the opposite: he even had a bird strike during an approach and landed with one engine only. Well, training in a simulator is one thing. Some enthusiasts would be able to fly a simulator or even a real 737 or A320 (in fact I also would, which I figured out while flying in a 737-300 simulator, after flying on PC for more than one decade while the addons became more and more professional as we all know). But to fake a licence, apply for a real airline, fly a real airplane and to lie to all the people including your family, is a completely different matter. This man had nerves of steel I think. And to live with such a lie, while the whole fake life could "take wings" any time, certainly isn't easy. That's why he said he actually felt a huge relief when they arrested him in Amsterdam in 2010. But today real pilots are still amazed by his story. He was on German television recently, flying in an Airbus simulator on the left seat just for show, while a real pilot was sitting on the right seat. He still managed to fly the simulator perfectly, including a flight beneath the Golden Gate Bridge. Afterwards the pilot asked him if there actually were passengers onboard when he landed a real plane for the very first time. Salme said "yes of course". The pilot just laughed disbelievingly, and said he was glad that there weren't any passengers on his first landing But after all Thomas Salme made his dream become true, and flew for 13 years, accumulating 10.000 hours.That's quite a career for someone who had no licence (accept an invalid PPL). I claim that with a "properly" faked licence, he would have flown until retirement. Especially since licences are now being replaced by the new EASA licences in Europe as far as I know. That leads to the question: how many fake pilots one would find out there? Anyway, I think it's an amazing story. He is my favourite impostor (beside Gert Postel, a German postman who became consultant of a specialty hospital for psychiatry in 1995). What do you think? Today Thomas is a photographer and lives in Italy with his two children by the way.

Microsoft Security Essentials - free, fast, and no annoying advertising pop ups.

Seems that PMDG is right. There seems to be no market demand for a -300(non-ER). Seriously, I personally trust PMDG, because I think they're rather kompetent, ambitious, enthusiastic and honest developers which one can see by their products i.e. especially the NGX and the 777. I still don't own and fly their 777. I still fly the NGX and I will fly it for years to come. But I will study the 777 manuals and learn to fly their 777 later this year. And I don't really care if there is a -300(non-ER) available or not. If I want to fly a long haul jet, non-stop from Germany to Hong Kong for an epic Kai Tak landing, the 777-300ER just makes sense to me B) Just my two cents. PS: I would prefer a new 747 instead.

Today is the 6th anniversary of US Airways Flight 1549, which landed in the Hudson, saving all 155 passengers and the crew (5). I personally don't really care about anniversaries. But as an aviation enthusiast I always remember this accident ever since. I call it, like many people, a miracle in aviation history. Until January 15, 2009 I always thought it would not be possible to land an airliner on water, undamaged (kinda), and get all passengers out safely before sinking. And it even happened in winter. It was just the right captain at the right time on the right place with the right weather conditions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_1549 Interview with Captain Chesley Sullenberger: Interview with the entire Crew: Reunion: Documentary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZwsVdfZ7Bg