Plane crash in Alps ### MOD NOTE 1st POST

K4t

RobertKK wrote: »

Interesting article, seems he broke up with girlfriend the day before and told her the world would know his name.
Also other theories.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/germanwings-plane-crash-the-facebook-images-that-hid-thesecrets-of-andreas-lubitz-10140230.html

Yeah that article suggests he had serious psychological issues separate from his depression. In fact he may even have been misdiagnosed as depressed. This is all speculation now anyway.

One eyed Jack

K4t wrote: »

Don't know the specifics of that case, but I would strongly speculate that she was still in some way mentally ill - even if not clinically depressed. If not, they were essentially saying that it is impossible to fully recover from mental illness, and that a history of mental illness equates to being in some way mentally ill for the rest of one's life, which is ridiculous thinking, insane even.

I'm guessing you missed the irony of perpetuating stigma about ill mental health there, understandably inadvertently of course, but it just goes to show you yourself aren't immune from perpetuating ill informed stigmas. I know what you meant obviously, but it just goes to show how casual attitudes to mental health issues are generally perceived.

In that particular case, yep, she had put down on her application that she had a history of ill mental health, but that she had recovered. The airline wasn't prepared to take the risk of putting her in situations where her mental health could possibly be compromised. It's an understandable decision despite how unfair it actually seems to be on the individual. The airline has to think about much more than the welfare of one individual.

The only thing this case should change concerning depression, is a strive for better treatment and prevention methods of mental illness. Reducing and eliminating the stigma is the way forward, not perpetuating it as so many in the media and here are doing, whether inadvertently or not.

Absolutely agree with that, which is why it's better off IMO that it's out in the open, so that myths and ill informed opinions can be discussed and people educated and made aware that the actions of one individual or a handful of individuals really aren't representative of the majority of people with mental health issues.

K4t

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I'm guessing you missed the irony of perpetuating stigma about ill mental health there, understandably inadvertently of course, but it just goes to show you yourself aren't immune from perpetuating ill informed stigmas. I know what you meant obviously, but it just goes to show how casual attitudes to mental health issues are generally perceived.

Not missed! One can make jokes relating to mental illness without perpetuating the stigma surrounding it. Mental health issues should be viewed casually for the most part, in that a person should not feel ashamed or embarrassed by openly admitting they are depressed or anxious or stressed etc. Obviously the treatment should be professional and treated as important as a physical ailment. This all leads in to the idea of prevention (and suicide prevention) which is one of the most important areas of psychiatry, especially in Ireland, and into the future.

In that particular case, yep, she had put down on her application that she had a history of ill mental health, but that she had recovered. The airline wasn't prepared to take the risk of putting her in situations where her mental health could possibly be compromised. It's an understandable decision despite how unfair it actually seems to be on the individual. The airline has to think about much more than the welfare of one individual.

Unfair? It's discrimination if she was obliged to reveal her complete medical history.

One eyed Jack

K4t wrote: »

Not missed! One can make jokes relating to mental illness without perpetuating the stigma surrounding it. Mental health issues should be viewed casually for the most part, in that a person should not feel ashamed or embarrassed by openly admitting they are depressed or anxious or stressed etc. Obviously the treatment should be professional and treated as important as a physical ailment. This all leads in to the idea of prevention (and suicide prevention) which is one of the most important areas of psychiatry, especially in Ireland, and into the future.

Could go very off topic there and I was really trying not to. I just wouldn't lump all mental health issues into the one basket like that. In the same way as I always maintain how different people can be affected differently and to different degrees, I think it's important too to know the differences between one particular mental health issue and another and so on. I know you're saying "for the most part", but that again is down to individual standards.

Unfair? It's discrimination if she was obliged to reveal her complete medical history.

In Ireland and the UK yes, not so much in Dubai. I think it was Emirates airline she was applying for a position as an air hostess -


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/26/lost-dream-job-emirates-depression-mental-health

FalconGirl

If anything, I'm utterly astounded on peoples thoughts of depression. No wonder there is still a stigma surrounding the issue and people keep opt to keep themselves in the dark and suffer in silence. There is a real lack of understanding amongst many.Go educate yourselves.

One eyed Jack

FalconGirl wrote: »

If anything, I'm utterly astounded on peoples thoughts of depression. No wonder there is still a stigma surrounding the issue and people keep opt to keep themselves in the dark and suffer in silence. There is a real lack of understanding amongst many.Go educate yourselves.

I'm never astounded by the arrogance of people who come out with such ill-informed blanket statements as though they they themselves are experts on an issue and nobody else could possibly have any understanding like they do, so instead of offering to educate anyone, they expect the onus should be on everyone else to educate themselves about an issue in order to understand that person.

I don't think those sort of arrogant pronouncements encourage anyone to want to listen to someone, let alone go to the trouble of educating themselves on an issue that doesn't affect them, unless they are actually encouraged to do so, rather than ordered to do so.

wbt

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I'm never astounded by the arrogance of people who come out with such ill-informed blanket statements as though they they themselves are experts on an issue and nobody else could possibly have any understanding like they do, so instead of offering to educate anyone, they expect the onus should be on everyone else to educate themselves about an issue in order to understand that person.

I don't think those sort of arrogant pronouncements encourage anyone to want to listen to someone, let alone go to the trouble of educating themselves on an issue that doesn't affect them, unless they are actually encouraged to do so, rather than ordered to do so.

YOUR post is arrogant! Why should you expect someone else to take the time to educate you? You're a functioning adult with internet access. Someone has pointed out that you're prejudiced, it's up to you to do something about it.

Imagine if the pilot had been black, and people were saying that black people shouldn't be able to become pilots or have responsible jobs, because clearly they're not capable. Would you need to be told why that viewpoint is ignorant and ridiculous?

Committing mass murder is not a symptom of depression. Perpetuating the stigma that people who suffer from depression are crazed dangerous lunatics will only serve to stop people getting help, because they're afraid to have it on their medical records.

One eyed Jack

wbt wrote: »

YOUR post is arrogant! Why should you expect someone else to take the time to educate you? You're a functioning adult with internet access. Someone has pointed out that you're prejudiced, it's up to you to do something about it.

I hadn't realised FalconGirl was directly referring to my posts, she seemed to be speaking more in general terms than addressing anyone specifically. Why should I expect anyone else who wants me to understand them to educate me? Well it's in their best interests to educate me on their perspective if they want me to understand them specifically. I'm already quite well educated on mental health issues and I'm also quite familiar with the difficulties experienced by people who experience these issues. I just don't happen to share your perspective (not sure about FalconGirl as she didn't offer any perspective, only instructions).

Imagine if the pilot had been black, and people were saying that black people shouldn't be able to become pilots or have responsible jobs, because clearly they're not capable. Would you need to be told why that viewpoint is ignorant and ridiculous?

No. Let's not imagine anything. I'd rather we stick to the facts rather than offer up silly scenarios to suit our arguments.

Committing mass murder is not a symptom of depression. Perpetuating the stigma that people who suffer from depression are crazed dangerous lunatics will only serve to stop people getting help, because they're afraid to have it on their medical records.

I never suggested it was a symptom of depression. I suggested that depression was a plausible explanation for his motivation. The only people that are perpetuating stigmas here are anyone that wants to shut down the discussion by telling everyone else go educate themselves (an instruction based on the assumption that they haven't done so already, an assumption based on nothing more than the fact that another person's opinion based on their experience, doesn't jig with that person's opinion based on their experience).

If a person is concerned about their mental health adversely affecting their employment prospects, then they are only again thinking of themselves and that is the essence of arrogant and selfish behaviour as a direct cause of their issues with their mental health. They themselves are responsible for perpetuating the stigma, rather than placing that responsibility on anyone else.

billyhead

One thing I don't understand is why were the French prosecutors so quick to jump to a conclusion as to what exactly happened without all the technical details been investigated. The prosecutors didn't even get a chance to listen to the voice box and came out pointing the blame at the 2nd pilot as been depressed and on a suicide mission. I suppose its the easiest and most plausible answer as to what happened since he ain't going to come back from life and defend himself. Same with the girlfriend with her comments about making his name remembered. Its easy to say this when hes dead. Was this comment recorded?

I cant imagine what the co pilots family are going through.

wbt

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I hadn't realised FalconGirl was directly referring to my posts, she seemed to be speaking more in general terms than addressing anyone specifically. Why should I expect anyone else who wants me to understand them to educate me? Well it's in their best interests to educate me on their perspective if they want me to understand them specifically. I'm already quite well educated on mental health issues and I'm also quite familiar with the difficulties experienced by people who experience these issues. I just don't happen to share your perspective (not sure about FalconGirl as she didn't offer any perspective, only instructions).





No. Let's not imagine anything. I'd rather we stick to the facts rather than offer up silly scenarios to suit our arguments.





I never suggested it was a symptom of depression. I suggested that depression was a plausible explanation for his motivation. The only people that are perpetuating stigmas here are anyone that wants to shut down the discussion by telling everyone else go educate themselves (an instruction based on the assumption that they haven't done so already, an assumption based on nothing more than the fact that another person's opinion based on their experience, doesn't jig with that person's opinion based on their experience).

If a person is concerned about their mental health adversely affecting their employment prospects, then they are only again thinking of themselves and that is the essence of arrogant and selfish behaviour as a direct cause of their issues with their mental health. They themselves are responsible for perpetuating the stigma, rather than placing that responsibility on anyone else.

The point is that depression is no more a plausible explanation for killing 149 other people than being black, Jewish or gay. It's estimated that 1 in 4 people suffer from mental illness at some point. Of course people are concerned about their mental health adversely affecting their employment prospects - there are people out there who think like you.

Frito

I think psychotic depression is possible, but I'm not sure how probable it is. K4t mentioned earlier this is speculation, do we even know Lubitz had a depressive disorder? It appears he had been treated for something in 2009 but it may not have been depression.

---

edit
Just read the link quoted in k4t's post earlier and the report is he was treated for a severe depressive episode.

One eyed Jack

wbt wrote: »

The point is that depression is no more a plausible explanation for killing 149 other people than being black, Jewish or gay.

If those were plausible motivating factors, then I'm sure they would be considered too. I'm sure I don't need to inform you how many people who weren't black, Jewish or gay, killed those who were, and we acknowledge that the fact those plausible motivational factors. Mental health should have no special privilege where it should be ignored as a plausible explanation if you truly want people to gain a greater understanding of mental health issues. Up until very recently in history, being gay was considered a mental health issue, but now due to greater understanding in society, it isn't. The same understanding of mental health issues such as schizophrenia for example can only come about through greater understanding of schizophrenia. Depression is no different.

It's estimated that 1 in 4 people suffer from mental illness at some point. Of course people are concerned about their mental health adversely affecting their employment prospects - there are people out there who think like you.

Well aware of the statistics thanks, and that's why it's a good thing there are people like me out there who wouldn't assume that because someone is experiencing or has experienced mental health issues or difficulties that this would be automatic impediment to their employment prospects.

I also personally think it's unfortunate there are far too many people who like you think that people should be more conscious of their employment prospects than their mental health. They are the people that are actually perpetuating ignorance and stigma rather than promoting understanding, because they want to put the responsibility on everyone else rather than take any responsibility for the stigma themselves and would rather ignore the issues and shut down discussion because it makes them personally uncomfortable.

Gael23

K4t wrote: »

His parent's feelings are not more important than the facts.

I didn't say anything to that effect. They have to live for the rest of their lives with the facts on their minds, which I think if it was me would be impossible to do.

smurfjed

Wbt, what is your solution ? How should the aviation world deal with this issue?

BA had a unique situation a few years ago when they removed the airside pass of a senior first officer for money laundering. They considered his actions as a safety risk and didn't want to take the risk. The FO lost his industrial tribunal, who considered that the airline was right not to accept the risk. So i really don't see any CEO that will be brave enough to accept the risk associated with employing a pilot with a long term mental illness.

tara73

there was somebody earlier on here posting his personality and act shows more in the direction of a psychopath than a depressive person. that guy who wrote it got grilled here, don't know why because I think it is true.

everybody who knows real severe depression knows that in that phase, one wouldn't be able to get up properly every morning, even doing shifts working days or nights. manage the day to day work along with the job getting dressed in the uniform and be able to behave normally, go on a plane and do the, I guess, demanding job of a pilot with a lot of concentration and responsibility.
a severe depressed person wouldn't have the energy to do this anymore.

He might have been formally diagnosed with depression but intentionally hid a lot more what was going on.
and important is, in the mental illness sector, there's most of the times not a completely accurate or 'right' diagnosis possible as often a person has not only one symptom but more than one from different areas or even, as obviously in this case, not telling everything to the doctor for whatever reason

so it's very irresponsible and also false to label this act just with a depressed person and the result that comes with it: the ordinary joe now linking all people with depression to potential mass murders and that's not the case like so many others here pointed out.

from my point of view, this guy and his act is very close to a person running amok, just not that he's killing directly with a gun but he uses his power to kill them and is making himself known to the world with it.

ceadaoin.

Maybe he did suffer from depression at some point but there has to have been more going on for him to do this. I'm not even sure better screening could have stopped this happening. If someone really is a psychopath they'll have no trouble lying and fooling people. He clearly was hiding whatever it was he was being treated for and going to work against medical advice.

What he did is no different than a person who commits a mass shooting. These people want notoriety. It will probably turn out that he was angry or bitter about some perceived injustice and that was the motivating factor as is usually the case in these killings.

One eyed Jack

tara73 wrote: »

there was somebody earlier on here posting his personality and act shows more in the direction of a psychopath than a depressive person. that guy who wrote it got grilled here, don't know why because I think it is true.

everybody who knows real severe depression knows that in that phase, one wouldn't be able to get up properly every morning, even doing shifts working days or nights. manage the day to day work along with the job getting dressed in the uniform and be able to behave normally, go on a plane and do the, I guess, demanding job of a pilot with a lot of concentration and responsibility.
a severe depressed person wouldn't have the energy to do this anymore.

He might have been formally diagnosed with depression but intentionally hid a lot more what was going on.
and important is, in the mental illness sector, there's most of the times not a completely accurate or 'right' diagnosis possible as often a person has not only one symptom but more than one from different areas.

so it's very irresponsible and also false to label this act just with a depressed person and the result that comes with it: the ordinary joe now linking all people with depression to potential mass murders and that's not the case like so many others here pointed out.

from my point of view, this guy and his act is very close to a person running amok, just not that he's killing directly with a gun but he uses his power to kill them and is making himself known to the world with it.

I didn't see those earlier posts, but I think the reason that poster could have gotten a grilling is because like my own posts, his experience of mental illness and mental health issues just doesn't align with other posters experience of their own mental health issues. My wife for example has had bipolar disorder going on ten years now, and was only recently properly diagnosed two years ago and has thankfully been receiving the best of care since.

This didn't prevent her from performing the usual day-to-day routine that anyone else is doing, but she had been suffering up to then, and originally doctors had thought it was PND, but then diagnosed her with BPD, and she has come on in leaps and bounds in terms of her mental health in the last two years.

That's what ticked me off personally about FalconGirl's post, and many more people I have met who pass such judgments on other people, as if people who aren't them could have no understanding of mental illness simply because their opinion differs from theirs. I personally think it's irresponsible of anyone to label someone else ignorant for having a different perspective or opinion to them. I myself have never experienced depression thankfully, but I do experience SI from about four years of age, and when people automatically link the two, I can only suggest that's been their experience, but it hasn't been mine. I don't like to talk about my experiences because it can often feel like starting a pissing contest, when I'm actually more open to listening to and learning from other people's experiences.

Whether it's one in six ordinary joes have experienced depression in their lives, or one in four ordinary joes have experienced issues with their mental health, that's a lot more people who have an understanding of mental health and mental health issues than someone who would rather irresponsibly claim that other people have no understanding of these issues, simply because they have a different perspective from that person. I really don't think all those ordinary joes who are just like anyone else here, are going to associate the extreme actions of one man with their understanding of other ordinary joes who have experienced or are experiencing issues with their mental health.

There really isn't as much ignorance out there with regard to mental health issues as some people would like to think there is, but that's due to their own ignorance caused by their arrogant attitude towards other people who don't share their opinions, that same arrogance I referred to earlier that has them think they're an expert on mental health and everyone else is ignorant and should "go educate themselves".

Frito

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Maybe he did suffer from depression at some point but there has to have been more going on for him to do this. I'm not even sure better screening could have stopped this happening. If someone really is a psychopath they'll have no trouble lying and fooling people. He clearly was hiding whatever it was he was being treated for and going to work against medical advice.

What he did is no different than a person who commits a mass shooting. These people want notoriety. It will probably turn out that he was angry or bitter about some perceived injustice and that was the motivating factor as is usually the case in these killings.

Mass-murder is not a symptom of psychopathy either, it rather depends on the motivation behind the act. It is as speculative to label him a psychopath as it is to label him depressed.

whatismyname

smurfjed wrote: »

What is this??

dunno, as don't know who the quote's from, what context it was said in etc, but I'd make a guess at it maybe being 'self injury'.

Cold War Kid

I had only relatively mild depression (mild as in it was easy to treat, but at the time I had it, it felt a lot more than mild) four years ago yet I still wasn't in the right frame of mind for doing something with the level of responsibility and involvement and concentration and stress that operating an aircraft has. Good jeebus no! Barely enough energy to walk down the street, and nearly zero motivation and focus.

I don't find it in the least bit insulting to imply a person with depression would not be in fit health to pilot a plane; no different, in my opinion, to saying a person with a broken hand would not be in fit health to pilot a plane.

whatismyname

Haven't yet caught up on the news today, but guessing from looking through here that they've found some kind of evidence that the reason he did what he did was cos of his depression? And of course also that there was no more to it than that?

Tarzana2

Feline Groovy wrote: »

I had only relatively mild depression (mild as in it was easy to treat, but at the time I had it, it felt a lot more than mild) four years ago yet I still wasn't in the right frame of mind for doing something with the level of responsibility and involvement and concentration and stress that operating an aircraft has. Good jeebus no! Barely enough energy to walk down the street, and nearly zero motivation and focus.

I don't find it in the least bit insulting to imply a person with depression would not be in fit health to pilot a plane; no different, in my opinion, to saying a person with a broken hand would not be in fit health to pilot a plane.

Yeah, there's no harm pointing out that someone who is severely depressed should not be flying. I know when I was very depressed, I could barely look after myself, never mind the safety of 100+ people!

We don't if he was severely depressed though, and consciously crashing the plane is a different thing entirely.

Flipper22

K4t wrote: »

I imagine they would remain depressed..


People can't seem to distinguish between depression and a guy who kills 150 people, who also happens to be depressed. It's like saying a guy who shoots 150 people, who also happens to have a broken leg, should cause other people and police to be extra vigilant for people with broken legs, for fear they may shoot them in a mass murder.

It's not like that at all. While clearly the vast vast majority of people with mental illness are not homicidal maniacs, and I certainly don't agree with those who are saying people with a history of mental illness should never be allowed in responsible jobs. That's shameful.

However suggesting that a history of mental illness and an act like this are totally unconnected is ridiculous. I would have been very surprised if he had no history of mental health problems, there's clearly a connection there.

zeffabelli

Feline Groovy wrote: »

I had only relatively mild depression (mild as in it was easy to treat, but at the time I had it, it felt a lot more than mild) four years ago yet I still wasn't in the right frame of mind for doing something with the level of responsibility and involvement and concentration and stress that operating an aircraft has. Good jeebus no! Barely enough energy to walk down the street, and nearly zero motivation and focus.

I don't find it in the least bit insulting to imply a person with depression would not be in fit health to pilot a plane; no different, in my opinion, to saying a person with a broken hand would not be in fit health to pilot a plane.

Sorry but it takes a lot of concentration, motivation, focus and planning to override all the backup safety controls on that airplane.

whatismyname

Flipper22 wrote: »

It's not like that at all. While clearly the vast vast majority of people with mental illness are not homicidal maniacs, and I certainly don't agree with those who are saying people with a history of mental illness should never be allowed in responsible jobs. That's shameful.

However suggesting that a history of mental illness and an act like this are totally unconnected is ridiculous. I would have been very surprised if he had no history of mental health problems, there's clearly a connection there.

I'm not reading it that they the history of mental illness and the act are [BOLD] totally unconnected [/BOLD].

Rather that they are [BOLD]not necessarily connected[/BOLD] .

May be. May not be.

Most people with mental illness will never want to harm anyone else. But on a related note, many people without any history of mental illness do horribly horrific things.

It's entirely possible that the history of mental illness are connected, but it's also possible that they are not. To make a conclusion as many have / do that they are definitely connected does not seem to do much good at all.

Can understand however how many easily make the conclusion that they are definitely related, but without evidence, it still remains that it may or may not be the case

darkpagandeath

smurfjed wrote: »

I would say that all of this is totally wrong. You really do have to do some research on the A320 EGPWS prior to posting this sort of message!

I'm not going to sit here and explain how the Fly by wire system corrects pilot input.

Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning Systems (EGPWS) minimize risks and maximize reaction time by constantly and unobtrusively monitoring terrain and obstacles in proximity of the aircraft.

Maybe instead of just saying "Your wrong" maybe actually give a reason, If there was actually one. if people want more of an expert explination of the control systems and surfaces on this plane. Maybe head over to the Aviation forum where there can be found many many wannabe pilots who can explain it more eloquently.

The plane was crashed via auto pilot, Safety systems on this plan auto correct any dangerous maneuvers imputed via the stick.

tara73

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Running_amok

had a bit of a research of the phenomen of people running amok and found this quite interesting (for all people who get on the keyboard now giving out about wikipedia not being accurate bla bla, this is AH, and it's a general discussion, not stating this wikipedia info as untouchable facts but I find wikipedia most of the times going in the right direction)

seems to be that the depression thing is right as also the psychopathical part.there's written that the sole act of the amok run is is now (quote): increasingly viewed as psychopathological behavior.
and further down it's mentioned that(quote):
An episode of amok may be triggered by a period of depression or highly aggressive behavior.

as said, it's very hard to definetely define that guys states he was in, as his record of illness lasts obviously over many years and probably changed during this time.

but I've noticed the medias now are more using the term he's had mental health issues and not only in big black letters he was treated for depression, which is good.

smurfjed

The plane was crashed via auto pilot, Safety systems on this plan auto correct any dangerous maneuvers imputed via the stick.

I did actually repost your message in the Aviation Forum, you have a very limited understanding of what the FBW and EGPWS systems are designed to do, they will not take control of the aircraft and fly it away from a mountain, by saying that they do, you are actually surmising that the FO was totally capable of flying the aircraft throughout the whole episode, and right now, we don't know that for a fact.

sjb25

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I'm not going to sit here and explain how the Fly by wire system corrects pilot input.



Maybe instead of just saying "Your wrong" maybe actually give a reason, If there was actually one. if people want more of an expert explination of the control systems and surfaces on this plane. Maybe head over to the Aviation forum where there can be found many many wannabe pilots who can explain it more eloquently.

The plane was crashed via auto pilot, Safety systems on this plan auto correct any dangerous maneuvers imputed via the stick.

You do realise smurfjed is an ACTUAL pilot I think he knows full well how it works along with the many ACTUAL pilots and aircraft engineers etc on the aviation forum not just wannabes (like me ) think they know more than you and you are wrong the aircraft will tell you you are about to hit something it's up to a pilot to control the aircraft after that it doesn't do it by itself

darkpagandeath

smurfjed wrote: »

I did actually repost your message in the Aviation Forum, you have a very limited understanding of what the FBW and EGPWS systems are designed to do, they will not take control of the aircraft and fly it away from a mountain, by saying that they do, you are actually surmising that the FO was totally capable of flying the aircraft throughout the whole episode, and right now, we don't know that for a fact.

Who said anything about it flying the plane away from a mountain. I guess I will have to bow to the expert knowledge of people in the other forum. Whose only experience of flying is in Microsoft fight simulator 10. I simply said with modern flight avionics and systems, traditional flight input in the way people think to crash a plane is very hard. Safety features kick in. People do understand planes are flown on auto pilot now right ? I would be considered very unusual for a pilot to disengage the auto pilot system mid flight and fly the plane. But meh.

sjb25

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Who said anything about it flying the plane away from a mountain. I guess I will have to bow to the expert knowledge of people in the other forum. Whose only experience of flying is in Microsoft fight simulator 10. I simply said with modern flight avionics and systems, traditional flight input in the way people think to crash a plane is very hard. Safety features kick in. People do understand planes are flown on auto pilot now right ? I would be considered very unusual for a pilot to disengage the auto pilot system mid flight and fly the plane. But meh.

He didn't disengage it he set it to 100 and let it drop...... Things would have kicked it yes alarms etc but he would have had to react to them and pilots very much fly the aircraft especially in emergencys

sjb25

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Who said anything about it flying the plane away from a mountain. I guess I will have to bow to the expert knowledge of people in the other forum. Whose only experience of flying is in Microsoft fight simulator 10. I simply said with modern flight avionics and systems, traditional flight input in the way people think to crash a plane is very hard. Safety features kick in. People do understand planes are flown on auto pilot now right ? I would be considered very unusual for a pilot to disengage the auto pilot system mid flight and fly the plane. But meh.

Oh and I think smurfjed has done more than Microsoft sim by the way what flight experience have you?

darkpagandeath

sjb25 wrote: »

He didn't disengage it he set it to 100 and let it drop...... Things would have kicked it yes alarms etc but he would have had to react to them and pilots very much fly the aircraft especially in emergencys

In conjunction with Flight envelope protection yes. It appears in this case no one disengaged the auto pilot.

imurdaddy

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Who said anything about it flying the plane away from a mountain. I guess I will have to bow to the expert knowledge of people in the other forum. Whose only experience of flying is in Microsoft fight simulator 10. I simply said with modern flight avionics and systems, traditional flight input in the way people think to crash a plane is very hard. Safety features kick in. People do understand planes are flown on auto pilot now right ? I would be considered very unusual for a pilot to disengage the auto pilot system mid flight and fly the plane. But meh.

With autopilot off which is the press of a button any commercial pilot could put any aircraft in a unrecoverable postion in seconds, warnings will be actively alerting the crew to danger but there is no inflatable autopilot like the airplane movie.

darkpagandeath

imurdaddy wrote: »

With autopilot off which is the press of a button any commercial pilot could put any aircraft in a unrecoverable postion in seconds, warnings will be actively alerting the crew to danger but there is no inflatable autopilot like the airplane movie.

Really ?

whatismyname

I see the latest news is that he'd apparently been recently treated for an eye condition.

Cue the speculation, and the links and decisions being made on that one now.

smurfjed

"Who said anything about it flying the plane away from a mountain"..... Actually, I would say that you did...

The plane did not plunge it was guided down via programming of the auto pilot, This plan has a system that makes crashing it on purpose via pilot input via the stick impossible. He had to program a decent that would not trigger the collision detection for example before it was to late and the system was unable to recover. Hence the slow decent.

We have already learned from the Mode S Transponder information that they altitude preselector was changed from 38,000 to 100 feet, after that, a few other mode selections and the aircraft will follow your desired path to that altitude. The following is taken from the B777 FCOM.

Look-ahead Obstacles and Peaks Terrain Alerting System

Look-ahead obstacles and peaks terrain alerts are provided by monitoring obstacle
and terrain proximity using a world-wide terrain data base and an obstacle data
base. The obstacle data base is not yet world wide. Terrain data is not designed to
be an independent navigation aid.
Proximate obstacle and terrain data may be displayed on the ND. If there is a
potential obstacle or terrain hazard, look-ahead alerts are provided based on
estimated time to impact.
Estimated time to impact is based on airplane position, altitude, present track,
vertical path, and ground speed. FMC VNAV and LNAV path is not considered in
the estimated time to impact.
Altitude used for look-ahead terrain mode alerts are a weighted combination of
radio altitude, barometric altitude, GPS, and previous flight path. Weighting is
reduced for an altitude source which becomes less reliable.
Note: Obstacles or terrain ahead of the airplane may exceed available climb
performance. A GPWS caution or warning does not guarantee obstacle or
terrain clearance
When the TERR switch is pushed on, the TERR symbol is displayed on the ND
and obstacle and terrain contours may be displayed. When obstacle and terrain
contours are displayed, the altitudes of the highest and lowest displayed obstacle
or terrain are displayed below the TERR symbol. The color of each altitude
corresponds to the altitude of the respective contour.
When the airplane is higher than 2,000 feet above the terrain, obstacles and terrain
peaks are displayed using solid, high density, and low density contours of green.
The highest obstacles or terrain is represented by solid green, and the lowest
obstacles or terrain displayed is represented by low density green.
When the airplane is lower than 2,000 feet above the terrain, all obstacles and
terrain within 2,000 feet of airplane barometric altitude is displayed on the
navigation display.
When a obstacle or terrain alert occurs, the respective message is displayed on the
ND. When an OBSTACLE alert occurs while a TERRAIN alert message is
displayed, the OBSTACLE alert message replaces the TERRAIN alert message.
Both messages will not be displayed at the same time.
The terrain display is correlated to GPS position, or to ADIRU position if GPS
position is intermittently unavailable.
Terrain and weather radar cannot be simultaneously displayed on the ND. When
one pilot selects terrain and the other pilot selects weather radar, each display
updates on alternating sweeps.
TERRAIN,
TERRAIN,
PULL UP
Red PULL UP on
both PFDs
Master WARNING
lights
Red TERRAIN
message on both
NDs
Solid red terrain on
ND
20 to 30 seconds from projected impact with
terrain.
Pushing the GND PROX TERR OVRD
switch to OVRD inhibits the alert.

I have found the PMDG flight simulator to be great, but i much prefer the simulators built by Thales

The whole point of this is to show that the FO didn't need to be conscious when they crashed.

folamh

A grim point but not a single intact body has been recovered from the site yet, only some body parts. I guess this means there will probably be no postmortem toxicology of Lubitz's body to see if he was medicated.

Wurzelbert

folamh wrote: »

A grim point but not a single intact body has been recovered from the site yet, only some body parts. I guess this means there will probably be no postmortem toxicology of Lubitz's body to see if he was medicated.

seems safe to assume that he was…given the sick notes and amounts of prescription drugs found at his flat…

whatismyname

Wurzelbert wrote: »

seems safe to assume that he was…given the sick notes and amounts of prescription drugs found at his flat…

possibly safe to presume, but hopefully an investigations conclusions won't be based on assumptions though.

Wurzelbert

whatismyname wrote: »

possibly safe to presume, but hopefully an investigations conclusions won't be based on assumptions though.

on what else? with no body to autopsy…? joining the dots may be all we can do…

Mountainsandh

folamh wrote: »

A grim point but not a single intact body has been recovered from the site yet, only some body parts. I guess this means there will probably be no postmortem toxicology of Lubitz's body to see if he was medicated.

I wonder... could they not do a toxicology assessment on a body part ? Surely the tissues and even tiny bits of blood collected might yield some result.

I presume his family had to provide DNA samples like all other families.

According to a French news site (lci.fr), reporting on a German news site, with no confirmed source for this, the sick notes were written by a neurologist and psychiatrist.

La nature de la maladie n'a pas été précisée mais, selon le quotidien allemand Süddeutsche Zeitung, qui ne cite pas de source, les arrêts seraient signés d'un "neurologue et psychiatre".

http://lci.tf1.fr/france/faits-divers/crash-de-l-a320-andreas-lubitz-un-homme-ambitieux-mais-frustre-8586300.html

whatismyname

Wurzelbert wrote: »

on what else? with no body to autopsy…? joining the dots may be all we can do…

yes, hopefully there'll be some little things that take the form of evidence, but where we don't, that's all they'll ever be though, assumptions.

Wurzelbert

Mountainsandh wrote: »

I wonder... could they not do a toxicology assessment on a body part ? Surely the tissues and even tiny bits of blood collected might yield some result.

I presume his family had to provide DNA samples like all other families.

[...]

if they find a body part this can be identified (beyond doubt) as his...

Mountainsandh

http://lci.tf1.fr/france/faits-divers/crash-de-l-a320-la-personnalite-du-copilote-est-une-piste-serieuse-8586279.html

Jean-Pierre Michel is one of 3 of the police officials sent to Germany for the investigation on the pilot, he is cautioning on drawing conclusions too hastily, and still not excluding the possibility of an involuntary mistake, or technical problem for example.

He also reminds us that the 2nd flight recorder has not yet been found, and seems to imply that there is still hope in that regard. I suppose they are sifting through minute debris collected on site.
Are the cards in flight recorders similar to sd cards ? Since there doesn't seem to have been an important fire event, it might be possible to recover info from a chip ejected in the explosion.

edit : I quietly dread the recovery of phone cards too.

Wurzelbert

if you read german check out this article…some interesting comments and analyses from an experienced aviation psychologist…speaks of a psychosis based on a combination of depression and narcissism…

Mountainsandh

Wurzelbert wrote: »

if they find a body part this can be identified (beyond doubt) as his...

I have no doubt about this, as this is the way they have already identified some passengers' bodies.

My question is more in relation to toxicology, and whether tissue from an arm muscle for example, might yield results.

Wurzelbert

Mountainsandh wrote: »

http://lci.tf1.fr/france/faits-divers/crash-de-l-a320-la-personnalite-du-copilote-est-une-piste-serieuse-8586279.html

Jean-Pierre Michel is one of 3 of the police officials sent to Germany for the investigation on the pilot, he is cautioning on drawing conclusions too hastily, and still not excluding the possibility of an involuntary mistake, or technical problem for example.
[...]

seems unliklely though, with the cockpit door mechanism and all…

whatismyname

Wurzelbert wrote: »

seems unliklely though, with the cockpit door mechanism and all…

seems unlikely yes, but think the whole point from the guy was to perhaps wait to see

Aidric

Just curious about something. I've seen some pics from the crash site and noticed the little red flags placed by the rescue team. Is this to indicate body parts?