Comments on: The Trouble with Germanwings Flight 9525

By: Peter

Peter — Thu, 25 Jun 2015 20:16:00 +0000

Germanwings has not learned anything from the crash, today (25.06.2015) there have been 2 unknown womens in the cockpit during the whole flight!!! (4U772 from Cologne to Prague)

By: J_____L

J_____L — Thu, 07 May 2015 10:07:00 +0000

In reply to Jersey_Prophet. No, it's the other way around. This whole particular case strains credulity to the breaking point.

By: Johnny Mac

Johnny Mac — Sun, 03 May 2015 21:10:00 +0000

In reply to John van den Heuvel.

Exactly. The most likely cause was a mechanical fault of the variety that has plagued the Airbus A320 model. It is no secret that the ‘fly-by-wire’ system has been known to cause these planes to nose dive at 4000ft per minute, and the officially suggested workaround is literally to disconnect the computer! http://avherald.com/h?article=47d74074

By: KRV Rao

KRV Rao — Sat, 02 May 2015 12:01:00 +0000

In reply to divingfe. Thank you for the insights. The article isn't nearly long enough! I will now start rummaging the internet for that training video you mentioned.

By: John van den Heuvel

John van den Heuvel — Fri, 01 May 2015 16:01:00 +0000

I for one will not fly any Airbus A320 or a derivative of same.

By: FS3

FS3 — Mon, 27 Apr 2015 19:53:00 +0000

Besides the fact that our only available data comes from flightradar24 – and there are MULTIPLE versions circulating – it should be clear that 4U9525 did not touch the ground in one piece. It exploded midair – either by an internal explosion – or it was shot down by the French AF, see here out of 6 parts: https://farsight3.wordpress.com/2015/04/09/4-germanwings-flug-4u9525-gab-hollande-den-abschussbefehl/

B.t.w.: Look what’s the name of the gendermarie woman that allegedly did find the 2nd flight recorder: Alice Coldefy. Her namesake Admiral Alain Coldefy is the Vice President of Political Affairs for France at the EADS Company…

By: Frank Sterling

Frank Sterling — Mon, 27 Apr 2015 19:51:00 +0000

The author is, at best, completely naive if he thinks that the IFALPA (or any other pilots’ association for that matter) has any agenda other than to further the best interests of pilots and protect their reputations individually and as a group. There is nothing wrong with that but to infer that what is essentially a trade group is an authoritative source is really poor journalism.

By: Jersey_Prophet

Jersey_Prophet — Mon, 27 Apr 2015 17:32:00 +0000

A co-pilot who locks out the pilot from the cockpit, then initiates a descent and and you think it’s a problem with the plane? No mention of an alarm in the transcript? Maybe the alarm malfunctioned. What about the pilot desperately banging on the door?

I acknowledge other incidents where the computer malfunctioned, but to try to assign responsibility away from the human in this particular case strains credulity to the breaking point.

By: arun kumar

arun kumar — Fri, 24 Apr 2015 08:58:00 +0000

While there are many possibilities for the Germanwings crash, the fact that the investigation is dedicating majority of its efforts and focus on collecting evidence that can prove Lubitz’ deliberate action indicates that the investigation is not fair. Apart from ‘No Evidence So Far’ what concrete evidence from FDR/CVR has been obtained that conclusively proves the plane had no system malfunction? For system failure, ‘No Evidence’ and ‘No Indication’ is widely accepted but for everything else, they wish to collect and provide concrete evidence. Here are my views:

http://crazymotts.blogspot.in/2015/04/untouched-possibilities-of-germanwings.html

By: divingfe

divingfe — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 20:56:00 +0000

Whether or not, the agency erred in a premature assumption, the above scenario-assuming that the FAC computers programmed themselves for a descent, or some such- also assumes that the copilot had lost consciousness/fallen asleep or…., AND that the cockpit door unlock mechanism also coincidentally malfunctioned. As sad as it is to contemplate, the simultaneous occurrence of these factors, coupled with the coincidental?? exit from the cockpit of the other pilot… leaves little room for doubt that, unfortunately, the copilot probably set the aircraft on its fatal course. Now, the air agencies announcements, may have been premature, but the conclusions are, nonetheless, backed up by the data( or lack thereof) from both recorders, as far as they go.
As far as the Air France episode, and the Air Asia accident, a most logical, and unfortunately, repetitive scenario, in swept-wing jet history, both jets almost certainly got themselves into a meeting of the buffet boundary at [high] altitude, caused by using powerful engines (especially on all “twin” jets) to “out-climb the wing”, where high speed and low speed stall speeds converge, especially aggravated by enhanced G-forces in turbulence. The use of “chasing airspeed”,, and trying to “out climb the weather” rather than maintaining a constant attitude and a known, pre-set,turbulence-power setting.
A lack of a complete and thorough understanding of the vagaries of the nowadays, very complex auto-flight systems and their various input sources, in this modern age of “push-the-correct-button,-get a banana” training, leaves the pilots in much the same circumstances as the poor passengers. This left them in an initially unrecoverable stalled condition, which can only be rectified by descent(controlled or otherwise) to a much lower altitude where the low speed and high speed stall boundaries are much more widely separated. Additionally, recoveries from such conditions have historically only occurred when at lower altitudes AND visual reference to the horizon occurs. I have just counted 50 years in aviation professionally this month, and as early-on as 1970, was teaching potential jet pilots of this [used to be called] “UPSET” condition; with the help of a wonderful FAA training film, made during the LBJ era, and, coincidentally, narrated by none other than Rod Serling of ‘Twilight Zone’ fame, whose brother, Robert, was a well known aviation author in his own right. That film, at least then, and perhaps still, was not available for public consumption, as it might have (and still?) caused undue worry on safety of jets, to the flying public.
Apart from the now, finally, concern arising,about pilots “losing touch” with their aircraft due to the complex and all-pervasive auto-flight systems (which by the way are REAL fuel-savers), a greater emphasis on comprehensive and continuing training would, of course, be advantageous, but this went by the wayside in the 70s, on the theory that the pilots don’t need to know HOW something works, they only need to know HOW to work it. That has led to the aircraft designers, and the airline companies into a situation, where the very fine reliability of the aircraft has led to complacence on all sides.
More to the point (forgive the long-winded tirade). the instances of [supposed] pilot suicide are so rare, compared to the millions of flight-hours each year… that we in the industry must pretty well leave the perception of an incipient problem up to teamwork, training, observation, and when these extremely rare unfortunate circumstances occur, to take a deep breath, console the grieving, and move on. We have become so infatuated with 9/11 security, that it has become a driving motivation of aviation, rather than a sideline, and DRAMA becomes an end in its own. There are no more (and probably much, much, less) instances of “rogues” in the pilot seats, than in any other profession, including politicians, lawyers, policemen, doctors, etc. What needs to be emphasized, in terms of saving more aviation lives, is more emphasis on detailed, comprehensive training, expensive to the airline companies, as it may be. That helps, more than anything else, to weed out the weak sisters (and I think female pilots are fine!!!) It also might help to re-consider the decision of many years ago, of getting rid of the flight engineers, in transport category aircraft, both in terms of systems operation and understanding, and as a 3rd body in the cockpit for many types of emergencies/abnormalities.
Thank you for indulging me. Regards.