bueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 539 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 8211 times:
Seems as if there was some kind of cover up by the airline - they passed misleading information to the BFU to make the incident seem less serious than it was. But in any case, this was a very serious incident, handled about as good as was possible by the crew. A demonstration of one of the many reasons we have two pilots flying airliners. You could argue that the Captain shouldn't have taken the AP off but in this case it seems like it may have been more difficult for them to set up an autoland.
Nicely done, glad they're OK. Could have been really nasty - Avherald states "paramedics commented both pilots were close to faint.".
AirBerlin From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 98 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6841 times:
The timing of the discovery is highly suspect. The fact pilots involved waited to have a revaltion about events in the cockpit on that day points to VC (Pilots Union) attempting to discredit the Germanwings brand before the impeding anoucement of the new LH subsidiary. Gemanwings pilots are paid under the same contracts as maineline LH pilots and this would no longer be the case in the new subsidiary. Just my 2 cents...
aloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8358 posts, RR: 47 Reply 3, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6555 times:
The authorities (the BFU) decided shortly after the incident that it did not require an investigation. The pilot's report submitted to them by the airline on 20DEC2010 speaks of an "air emergency" due to "very strong indisposition" as well as "impairment of the senses". The BFU report goes on to state that further contact with the airline revealed that its technicians had identified the source of the smell/substance as de-icing fluid. A year later (December 2011), the BFU received further information on the incident which led to their ongoing investigation.
Quoting AirBerlin (Reply 2): The timing of the discovery is highly suspect.
Are you suggesting that the BFU is publishing this preliminary report now to support the VC in some way? The two have nothing whatsoever to do with each other.
Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
AirBerlin From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 98 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6439 times:
Quoting aloges (Reply 3): A year later (December 2011), the BFU received further information on the incident which led to their ongoing investigation.
I was suggesting the pilots chose to give these statement in December 2011, a year after the actual incedent. This was around time when it became clear that Direct Services would be spun off into a subsidiary.
aloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8358 posts, RR: 47 Reply 5, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5940 times:
Quoting AirBerlin (Reply 4): I was suggesting the pilots chose to give these statement in December 2011, a year after the actual incedent. This was around time when it became clear that Direct Services would be spun off into a subsidiary.
You are implying that, in 2010 on the day after the incident, the pilots knowingly held back the information that led to the investigation - long before the "Direct4U" plans surfaced. Not to mention that the PF was unfit to fly for six months after the incident... that is some effort to put into a bargaining chip that you don't even know you may need some day.
In other words, please stop with the conspiracy theories. Yours is even wilder than SPIEGEL Online accusing 4U of a cover-up, but they're known for their incompetence in issues related to aviation.
Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
AirBerlin From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 98 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5619 times:
I am not implying that information was withheld but that information more dramatic and hyperbolic that what actually occured was provided in December of 2011.
Direct 4U plans first became clear right around this time as I previously stated. See article:
Germanwings did not cover up any information given in 2010. The pilots themselves chose to give extra information in 2011. The motivation for doing at this specific time seems clear.
bueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 539 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4870 times:
Quoting AirBerlin (Reply 6): The pilots themselves chose to give extra information in 2011. The motivation for doing at this specific time seems clear.
aloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8358 posts, RR: 47 Reply 8, posted (7 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4858 times:
Quoting AirBerlin (Reply 6): The pilots themselves chose to give extra information in 2011.
Where did you get that information? It is not in the report.
Quoting AirBerlin (Reply 6): The motivation for doing at this specific time seems clear.
Clear to whom?
You're racing to the conclusion that (one of) the pilots submitted a "more dramatic and hyperbolic" (i.e. exaggerated) account of the incident to the BFU with the intent "to discredit the Germanwings brand". I am wondering which facts are bringing you to that conclusion, because without a factual basis, these comments are a highly disrespectful and insolent conspiracy theory.
Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 7771 posts, RR: 26 Reply 9, posted (7 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2458 times:
I think the real story is actually that BFU got the first information from CGN fire brigade about smoke in the cockpit and that was soon after revised by the pilot's report that this was "only" a smell.
The source of the smell was detected and somehow BFU did not ask the right questions to the right people in time.
It takes months to investigate and do the reports and it makes sense that about 12 months after BFU was at the stage where the pilots had been questioned again. Now, almost 2 years later, we have a preliminary report dated September 27th, which, by co-incidence, falls right into the time when LH publishes plans about "Direct4U" which is based on GWI.
Happens, but no conspiracy. You can tell a lot about German bureaucrats ("Beamte") but they completely lack this kind of humor.
Sponsor Message: 
From Germany, joined Jan 2012, 191 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 539 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 98 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
