A320 Airbus Crashes In The Alps.

[blueinsa]

The real stupid thing is that even with a member of the cabin crew sat in the cockpit, what does she do if the co-pilot turns both engines off and locks her in with him?

It is absolutely ludicrous that any scenario can be prevented by any means. It is also so rare that there is no point in even bothering to try find a way to prevent it because if someone wanted it to happen they would find a way.

should be an electronic system on the ground that prevents the pilots doing such a thing, and from deviating off course without express permission in cases of emergency, they should just be there to oversee, read the dials and make sure everything's cushty, in an ideal world.

Auto pilot and ground computer based flying of the plane. Pilots only on board if a risk arises. Surely this is capable with today's technology

We already fly planes of all sizes by remote control so yes, the tech is there.

 

[Blue Maverick]

But then What's to stop someone on the ground taking over and doing the same thing?

 

[chaddblue]

But then What's to stop someone on the ground taking over and doing the same thing?

Very good point...... That happened in Die Hard

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

But then What's to stop someone on the ground taking over and doing the same thing?

The ground wouldn't be flying the plane, and wouldn't be able to change its route, the plane would have control, the only thing the ground would have is the ability to say, reveal a uniquely generated code that would enable the pilots to unlock the plane, and thus divert it in case of emergency, the planes systems would feed to the ATC, the airline and manufacturer, and would immediately alarm (beyond the pilots remit) to alert the ground of problems. That way the ground could only unlock things when there's a problem, and in the event of a hack there would be failsafes to prevent any legitimate code being transmitted.

You could even cut the ground out completely and program the autopilot to automatically hand back control once certain error messages or problems occur so that the pilots can take control, I'm just thinking on the spot. Fundamentally though, with autopilots and modern tech there's no real need for a pilot to get involved when the plane is flying as normal, and it would prevent things like pilots changing the altitude to crash the plane as the plane would follow its prescribed plan and override any inputs by the pilots, unless they were cleared by approved third parties to do so.

I know the vast majority of pilots follow that anyway, but planes are such a wonderful technological marvel that they shouldn't be undermined by suicidal pilots and terrorists, we need to strengthen the technology and combine it with human intelligence and endeavour to create the safest possible plane as possible. At the moment pilots can do very simple things to down a plane, and those larger possibilities need to be curtailed, no matter how infrequently they occur.

 

[SWP's back]

A knee jerk reaction, if every airline was ended every time there was an incident caused by "pilot error" there would be no airlines left. Have a look at the worst loss of life in a plane crash and tell me if the airline for whom the pilot worked for should be closed, I would suggest that a whole country would be against your suggestion.

Knee jerk? It's Wednesday

I see that the Insurer Allianz has set aside £300,000,000 to deal with this loss based on the cost of the plane plus standard compensation. If negligence is proven against Germanwings tho' that will be a drop in the ocean. May well be the end of Allianz

I presume you're joking here.

Allianz has a market cap of $77bn and cash reserves of $15bn.

The largest compensation payment in the history of aviation is only just over $100m.

 

[scotty123]

Police searching Lubitz's computer have revealed that he was researching cockpit door locking manuels and ways how to commit suicide, it was pre-meditated murder and he's a twat, depressed or not

 

[scotty123]

Second black box found

 

[crazyg]

But then What's to stop someone on the ground taking over and doing the same thing?

Very good point...... That happened in Die Hard

Didn't they just lower the ILS by 200feet to make the plane crash.? When I first saw it, my initial thought was that there would then be a difference between the altimeter reading (set to the airport QNH) and the perceived flight path. But then, it's only a film.

Perhaps someone with greater knowledge could tell me if I'm right or not.

 

[Blue Maverick]

But then What's to stop someone on the ground taking over and doing the same thing?

Very good point...... That happened in Die Hard

Didn't they just lower the ILS by 200feet to make the plane crash.? When I first saw it, my initial thought was that there would then be a difference between the altimeter reading (set to the airport QNH) and the perceived flight path. But then, it's only a film.

Perhaps someone with greater knowledge could tell me if I'm right or not.

Yep that's what they did, back to my point about flying for the ground, I'm sure there are hackers out there who would love the challenge of getting into any automated system like that especially with cyber terrorism. Nothing is full proof you just have sometimes to rely on integrity of people and sometimes they slip through the net and this is the result.

 

[SWP's back]

Very good point...... That happened in Die Hard

Didn't they just lower the ILS by 200feet to make the plane crash.? When I first saw it, my initial thought was that there would then be a difference between the altimeter reading (set to the airport QNH) and the perceived flight path. But then, it's only a film.

Perhaps someone with greater knowledge could tell me if I'm right or not.

Yep that's what they did, back to my point about flying for the ground, I'm sure there are hackers out there who would love the challenge of getting into any automated system like that especially with cyber terrorism. Nothing is full proof you just have sometimes to rely on integrity of people and sometimes they slip through the net and this is the result.

Some are just born worriers like JMW though.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Didn't they just lower the ILS by 200feet to make the plane crash.? When I first saw it, my initial thought was that there would then be a difference between the altimeter reading (set to the airport QNH) and the perceived flight path. But then, it's only a film.

Perhaps someone with greater knowledge could tell me if I'm right or not.

Yep that's what they did, back to my point about flying for the ground, I'm sure there are hackers out there who would love the challenge of getting into any automated system like that especially with cyber terrorism. Nothing is full proof you just have sometimes to rely on integrity of people and sometimes they slip through the net and this is the result.

Some are just born worriers like JMW though.

yhp, I'd rather not die if it can be helped, besides it always fun to come up with ideas to "fix" things.

 

[SWP's back]

Yep that's what they did, back to my point about flying for the ground, I'm sure there are hackers out there who would love the challenge of getting into any automated system like that especially with cyber terrorism. Nothing is full proof you just have sometimes to rely on integrity of people and sometimes they slip through the net and this is the result.

Some are just born worriers like JMW though.

yhp, I'd rather not die if it can be helped, besides it always fun to come up with ideas to "fix" things.

Lol. To be fair I can't fault that :-)

 

[inbetween]

But then What's to stop someone on the ground taking over and doing the same thing?

The ground wouldn't be flying the plane, and wouldn't be able to change its route, the plane would have control, the only thing the ground would have is the ability to say, reveal a uniquely generated code that would enable the pilots to unlock the plane, and thus divert it in case of emergency, the planes systems would feed to the ATC, the airline and manufacturer, and would immediately alarm (beyond the pilots remit) to alert the ground of problems. That way the ground could only unlock things when there's a problem, and in the event of a hack there would be failsafes to prevent any legitimate code being transmitted.

You could even cut the ground out completely and program the autopilot to automatically hand back control once certain error messages or problems occur so that the pilots can take control, I'm just thinking on the spot. Fundamentally though, with autopilots and modern tech there's no real need for a pilot to get involved when the plane is flying as normal, and it would prevent things like pilots changing the altitude to crash the plane as the plane would follow its prescribed plan and override any inputs by the pilots, unless they were cleared by approved third parties to do so.

I know the vast majority of pilots follow that anyway, but planes are such a wonderful technological marvel that they shouldn't be undermined by suicidal pilots and terrorists, we need to strengthen the technology and combine it with human intelligence and endeavour to create the safest possible plane as possible. At the moment pilots can do very simple things to down a plane, and those larger possibilities need to be curtailed, no matter how infrequently they occur.

Operationally aircraft have to be extremely flexible and there simply has to be a human element to decisions that are far too complex for computer logic. What does a computer do in an engine failure or if the aircraft experiences a loss of electrical power where milliseconds matter for survival? Would you trust a computer in this scenario to do the right thing? A great example of human judgement is the US1549 which ended up in the Hudson after a dual engine failure, there is no way a computer could of saved those people the same a human did. In my experience in aviation, computers give up and disconnect for the humans to takeover in this type of situation. It would just create far too many unanswered problems that would certainly occur more than a suicidal pilot.

The better way to handle this is to not undermine the hundreds of thousands of pilots who fly to keep their passengers safe but to back them by putting in place better training and better procedures to detect the bad. The man who did this was not a pilot, he was a murderer and thankfully his type is extremely rare at the controls of an airliner.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

But then What's to stop someone on the ground taking over and doing the same thing?

The ground wouldn't be flying the plane, and wouldn't be able to change its route, the plane would have control, the only thing the ground would have is the ability to say, reveal a uniquely generated code that would enable the pilots to unlock the plane, and thus divert it in case of emergency, the planes systems would feed to the ATC, the airline and manufacturer, and would immediately alarm (beyond the pilots remit) to alert the ground of problems. That way the ground could only unlock things when there's a problem, and in the event of a hack there would be failsafes to prevent any legitimate code being transmitted.

You could even cut the ground out completely and program the autopilot to automatically hand back control once certain error messages or problems occur so that the pilots can take control, I'm just thinking on the spot. Fundamentally though, with autopilots and modern tech there's no real need for a pilot to get involved when the plane is flying as normal, and it would prevent things like pilots changing the altitude to crash the plane as the plane would follow its prescribed plan and override any inputs by the pilots, unless they were cleared by approved third parties to do so.

I know the vast majority of pilots follow that anyway, but planes are such a wonderful technological marvel that they shouldn't be undermined by suicidal pilots and terrorists, we need to strengthen the technology and combine it with human intelligence and endeavour to create the safest possible plane as possible. At the moment pilots can do very simple things to down a plane, and those larger possibilities need to be curtailed, no matter how infrequently they occur.

Operationally aircraft have to be extremely flexible and there simply has to be a human element to decisions that are far too complex for computer logic. What does a computer do in an engine failure or if the aircraft experiences a loss of electrical power where milliseconds matter for survival? Would you trust a computer in this scenario to do the right thing? A great example of human judgement is the US1549 which ended up in the Hudson after a dual engine failure, there is no way a computer could of saved those people the same a human did. In my experience in aviation, computers give up and disconnect for the humans to takeover in this type of situation. It would just create far too many unanswered problems that would certainly occur more than a suicidal pilot.

The better way to handle this is to not undermine the hundreds of thousands of pilots who fly to keep their passengers safe but to back them by putting in place better training and better procedures to detect the bad. The man who did this was not a pilot, he was a murderer and thankfully his type is extremely rare at the controls of an airliner.

like I said, you can either have it that the ground approves full control to the pilot, or (probably preferably in this case) program the autopilot and computers themselves to hand over control when they register, in your example, a sudden loss of power. My point is about when everything is normal, humans shouldn't be able to down the plane by switching settings and the like, they should be there to save the plane when the computers can't.

It's all theoretical concepts anyway, I'm just looking at various solutions to stopping a suicidal pilot downing a normal, functioning aircraft, as its an absolutely unacceptable thing to be allowed to happen in my opinion, there's too much at stake.

p.s. unfortunately the murderer was a pilot, hence why he was able to kill so many people, unless the training involved teaching the pilot how to hold his bladder, I don't see what human training element could have helped.

 

[worsleyweb]

Just found out one of the victims lived in a block of flat in ancoats and had a 7 month old baby. She only went home for a funeral. Tragic.

 

[PinkFinal]

Looks like another deliberate pilot crash

China air crash that killed 132 may have been deliberate, says US report

WSJ sources suggest black box recorders from Boeing 737-800 indicate intentional input from cockpit

www.theguardian.com