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

kippy

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

The system is already developed for all intents and purposes.. Rolls Royce are using it.

That is nothing like the system required to replicate the current FDRs in real time tracking nor would I add are the requirements it is operating within.

Junkyard Tom

kneemos wrote: »

How often does any given airline lose a plane,if ever.

Ah sure what's the point in collecting data at all if there are so few losses?

kippy

kneemos wrote: »

How often does any given airline lose a plane,if ever.

This is the key bit.....and indeed when an airline loses a plane how often are the fdrs unuseable?

kippy

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

Ah sure what's the point in collecting data at all if there are so few losses?

The point is data is collected and more often than not recovered.

Junkyard Tom

kippy wrote: »

That is nothing like the system required to replicate the current FDRs in real time tracking nor would I add are the requirements it is operating within.

So it's easy to collect the data (every airliner does this already) but it's not feasible to transmit it to a receiver external to the aircraft?

kippy

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

So it's easy to collect the data (every airliner does this already) but it's not feasible to transmit it to a receiver external to the aircraft?

It is not feasible to build a system that will transmit, store and process this amount of information and build it to a requirement of 100 percent up time, then retrofit every plane on the planet with the hardware and software to do this while at the same time building up a communications, storage and processing infrastructure that can cope with the requirements while working within high tolerances.
Especially when you appreciate the amount of circumstances this might be useful.

kippy

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

the software written for use on planes and other critical hardware such as heart beat monitors are tested to hell and back.Thats not done cheaply.

Indeed, I realise this.

Junkyard Tom

kippy wrote: »

It is not feasible to build a system that will transmit, store and process this amount of information and build it to a requirement of 100 percent up time

Yet modern airliners are being fitted with wifi capability which is being transmitted from an ever increasing number of satellites, Rolls Royce are collecting real time data on the performance of their engines and ACARS already transmits to ground stations?

SpaceSasqwatch

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

Yet modern airliners are being fitted with wifi capability which is being transmitted from an ever increasing number of satellites, Rolls Royce are collecting real time data on the performance of their engines and ACARS already transmits to ground stations?

and how arcurate is the information? And how does information from the Rolls Royce engines affect the airframe and stabhility of the plane? perfectly working engines do not equate to a safe flight.

Junkyard Tom

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

and how arcurate is the information?

'Oh if it's not 100% then there's no point' isn't good logic and a non-argument really if you think about it. If everything had to be just perfect before being attempted then we wouldn't have aircraft in the first place.

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

how does information from the Rolls Royce engines affect the airframe and stabhility of the plane? perfectly working engines do not equate to a safe flight.

I'm simply highlighting that real-time monitoring of performance is already in place in airliners - how hard would it be to extend this to the FDR and the CVR?

SpaceSasqwatch

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

'Oh if it's not 100% then there's no point' isn't good logic and a non-argument really if you think about it. I

Stop talking sh1te.When you test software youre not looking for when it works , youre looking for when it fails.

Junkyard Tom

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

Stop talking sh1te.

Why the hostility?

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

When you test software youre not looking for when it works , youre looking for when it fails.

What?

old_aussie

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

According to New York Times

Germanwings Pilot Was Locked Out of Cockpit Before Crash in France

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/world/europe/germanwings-airbus-crash.html

A senior military official involved in the investigation described “very smooth, very cool” conversation between the pilots during the early part of the flight from Barcelona to Düsseldorf. Then the audio indicated that one of the pilots left the cockpit and could not re-enter.

“The guy outside is knocking lightly on the door and there is no answer,” the investigator said. “And then he hits the door stronger and no answer. There is never an answer.”

He said, “You can hear he is trying to smash the door down.”

Tombi!

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

Stop talking sh1te.When you test software youre not looking for when it works , youre looking for when it fails.

Watch it with your posting. Be more civil.

ceadaoin.

old_aussie wrote: »

A senior military official involved in the investigation described “very smooth, very cool” conversation between the pilots during the early part of the flight from Barcelona to Düsseldorf. Then the audio indicated that one of the pilots left the cockpit and could not re-enter.

“The guy outside is knocking lightly on the door and there is no answer,” the investigator said. “And then he hits the door stronger and no answer. There is never an answer.”

He said, “You can hear he is trying to smash the door down.”

Have they not released the names of the pilots yet? It's strange that some passengers have been identified but not the pilots.

Mint Sauce

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Have they not released the names of the pilots yet? It's strange that some passengers have been identified but not the pilots.

The pilots were trying to save 148 others. Maybe they do not want their families hounded by press so early into the investigation.

JONJO THE MISER

So the pilot was locked out of the cockpit, something is not right here.
Have they named the pilot in the cockpit?

JONJO THE MISER

When the plane went missing last year they named the pilots within hours.
Nearly 2 days later and we dont know the pilots names of this plane.
Something very strange going on here.

eviltwin

Is there no way of accessing the cockpit from the outside? Is it normal for a pilot to leave the cockpit mid flight? Why did it then take so long to crash?. I can't stop thinking of those poor people watching this unfold.

suicide_circus

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

When the plane went missing last year they named the pilots within hours.
Nearly 2 days later and we dont know the pilots names of this plane.
Something very strange going on here.

Lizard people?

Tugboats

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

When the plane went missing last year they named the pilots within hours.
Nearly 2 days later and we dont know the pilots names of this plane.
Something very strange going on here.

What's strange? Suicidal pilot crashes plane into a mountain so they want to protect his family from the media

pmasterson95

Tugboats wrote: »

What's strange? Suicidal pilot crashes plane into a mountain so they want to protect his family from the media

I wonder was he muslim.

Mountainsandh

Tugboats wrote: »

What's strange? Suicidal pilot crashes plane into a mountain so they want to protect his family from the media

Are they meant to assume from the first few days/hours that the pilot was suicidal ? Is there not a moral obligation to relatives of passengers too ? Does releasing the name make any difference to speculation ?

Maybe they have realized that in this case name and nationality may indeed affect speculation.

Tugboats

pmasterson95 wrote: »

I wonder was he muslim.

Hopefully not because that will mean it's Americas fault.

Mountainsandh

suicide_circus wrote: »

Lizard people?

Someone with a history of depression ?
Someone just back from illness ?
Someone with high potential of political or religious campaign ?

Bozacke

What's the protocol for when one of the pilots needs to leave the cockpit - to go to the loo or whatever? I'd assune an airhostess should wait in cockpit until the pilot returns in case the other pilot has a heart attack? Also would the pilots have keys?

SeaFields

Is the possibility of a medical emergency on behalf of the pilot still in the cockpit not being explored. You'd imagine a heart attack or something would also account for no response from inside.

pmasterson95

Tugboats wrote: »

Hopefully not because that will mean it's Americas fault.

I thought Israel was to blame for muslims?

kippy

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

'Oh if it's not 100% then there's no point' isn't good logic and a non-argument really if you think about it. If everything had to be just perfect before being attempted then we wouldn't have aircraft in the first place.



I'm simply highlighting that real-time monitoring of performance is already in place in airliners - how hard would it be to extend this to the FDR and the CVR?

Extremely hard and expensive.
theres not mych point discussing further.

LordSutch

Going forward they need cameras on the flight deck + a microphone on the other side of the flight deck door, so that cabin crew conversation can also be picked up (in the case of a problem in the cockpit)! Also, maybe there should be a coded security lock on the cockpit door that only flight crew/senior cabin crew have knowledge of?

crazygeryy

SeaFields wrote: »

Is the possibility of a medical emergency on behalf of the pilot still in the cockpit not being explored. You'd imagine a heart attack or something would also account for no response from inside.

Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't the plane be on autppilot anyway? So it would keep flying if the remaining pilot had a heart attack.it certainly wouldn't go into a dive like this one Did.

IvyTheTerrible

eviltwin wrote: »

Is there no way of accessing the cockpit from the outside? Is it normal for a pilot to leave the cockpit mid flight? Why did it then take so long to crash?. I can't stop thinking of those poor people watching this unfold.

I don't know if it's normal for a pilot to leave the cockpit, but cockpits were built to make them difficult or impossible to access from outside after September 11th (it had already been a recommendation made after previous hijackings but had not been undertaken because of cost issues).

laugh

crazygeryy wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't the plane be on autppilot anyway? So it would keep flying if the remaining pilot had a heart attack.it certainly wouldn't go into a dive like this one Did.

It was a controlled decent not a dive.

Streetwalker

Bloody Christian pilot. Religion of peace my hoop.

tigger123

laugh wrote: »

It was a controlled decent not a dive.

Was this confirmed?

How could one pilot lock another out of the cockpit (if this is what happened)? If he did leave to use the bathroom or whatever, how does the pilot in the cockpit have the facility to lock the other one out?

the_monkey

tigger123 wrote: »

Was this confirmed?

How could one pilot lock another out of the cockpit (if this is what happened)? If he did leave to use the bathroom or whatever, how does the pilot in the cockpit have the facility to lock the other one out?

Not saying this happened, but since 9/11 those cockpit doors are reinforced and can only be locked from the inside

murpho999

Why don't they have cameras in the cockpit as they already have microphones.

Video in the blackbox would show clearly if pilot did this on purpose or took ill.

Technology is out there that would not be expensive to administer but does not appear to be done.

IvyTheTerrible

tigger123 wrote: »

Was this confirmed?

How could one pilot lock another out of the cockpit (if this is what happened)? If he did leave to use the bathroom or whatever, how does the pilot in the cockpit have the facility to lock the other one out?

It's not "confirmed" as such. But in modern aircraft on autopilot, once a course is decided on, the plane won't go into a descent by itself unless it runs out of fuel. If there was a catastrophic event such as a collision or something that would make a plane go down, it would have gone down much much quicker than it did. The fact that it it stuck to it's course, and went down at a steady pace (not much faster than for landing) indicates it had to have been controlled.

tigger123

the_monkey wrote: »

Not saying this happened, but since 9/11 those cockpit doors are reinforced and can only be locked from the inside

But surely there's a failsafe in place? As in, the co-pilot leaves the cockpit, leaving only the pilot in the cockpit, and the pilot has a seizure, stroke, or heart attack. What happens in that scenario?

(my question is rhetorical btw

It just seems that if this was the case it was an accident waiting to happen.

seamus

tigger123 wrote: »

Was this confirmed?

How could one pilot lock another out of the cockpit (if this is what happened)? If he did leave to use the bathroom or whatever, how does the pilot in the cockpit have the facility to lock the other one out?

The door locks itself automatically as far as I know.

Most airlines have a protocol that a member of the cabin crew goes and sits in the cockpit so there are always two people in "control" as it were.

I'm a bit skeptical about this one, that a single investigator would make such a definitive statement to the world's media without the backing or confirmation of the entire investigative team.

If this was what happened, then the airlines are going to have to rethink the wisdom of locking the flight deck doors when you're in the air. It would bring to nearly 300 the number of people killed by locked flight deck doors, when the number of people saved by them is zero.

But surely there's a failsafe in place? As in, the co-pilot leaves the cockpit, leaving only the pilot in the cockpit, and the pilot has a seizure, stroke, or heart attack. What happens in that scenario?

Afaik there is a security code override in place, but it will be a few minutes before the override unlocks the door (like a time-lock safe). And anyone already in the cockpit can disable it.

tigger123

seamus wrote: »

The door locks itself automatically as far as I know.

Most airlines have a protocol that a member of the cabin crew goes and sits in the cockpit so there are always two people in "control" as it were.

I'm a bit skeptical about this one, that a single investigator would make such a definitive statement to the world's media without the backing or confirmation of the entire investigative team.

If this was what happened, then the airlines are going to have to rethink the wisdom of locking the flight deck doors when you're in the air. It would bring to nearly 300 the number of people killed by locked flight deck doors, when the number of people saved by them is zero.

Perhaps the two people in the cockpit lost consciousness. Such a tragedy.

whiskeyman

Really hope we find out exactly what happens here and aren't left with just some plausible scenarios

murpho999

tigger123 wrote: »

Perhaps the two people in the cockpit lost consciousness. Such a tragedy.

How would that happen?

tigger123

murpho999 wrote: »

How would that happen?

Haven't a clue. Depressurisation due to a crack in the windscreen?

the_monkey

murpho999 wrote: »

Why don't they have cameras in the cockpit as they already have microphones.

Video in the blackbox would show clearly if pilot did this on purpose or took ill.

Technology is out there that would not be expensive to administer but does not appear to be done.

Because the pilots don't like the idea of it, it's been brought up but they voted against it.

they also don't want these videos ever getting out so the scrotes of the net can just plaster them all over f'uckingidiotbook

tigger123

I remember seeing a documentary a few years ago about a pilot who tried to crash a cargo plane with a crew of 3 others in board. It was so his family could benefit from his death as it would be a workplace accident, and as such his life assurance would pay out. The other crew members managed to dissuade him of such thoughts with the aid of a hammer.

Thargor

tigger123 wrote: »

I remember seeing a documentary a few years ago about a pilot who tried to crash a cargo plane with a crew of 3 others in board. It was so his family could benefit from his death as it would be a workplace accident, and as such his life assurance would pay out. The other crew members managed to dissuade him of such thoughts with the aid of a hammer.

I remember that aswell, weren't all 4 of them messed up after it with missing fingers and broken bones etc?

tigger123

Thargor wrote: »

I remember that aswell, weren't all 4 of them messed up after it with missing fingers and broken bones etc?

Yep, they ended up putting the plane through all sorts of crazy manoeuvres as an epic battle took place in the cockpit.

Thargor

Heres another horrible one, all the passengers and crew dead except for one guy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522

At 11:49, flight attendant Andreas Prodromou entered the cockpit and sat down in the captain's seat, having remained conscious by using a portable oxygen supply.[21][22] Prodromou held a UK Commercial Pilot License,[23] but was not qualified to fly the Boeing 737. Crash investigators concluded that Prodromou's experience was insufficient for him to gain control of the aircraft under the circumstances.[22]

Tugboats

pilots named