Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 8

wilco737 · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:22 am

And we are rolling part 8 now.

Here the link to part 7 again:

Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 7 (by bnatraveler Mar 25 2015 in Civil Aviation)

wilco737

curlyheadboy · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:29 am

Question for pilots and experts: Is there a procedure for if the pilot is alone in the cockpit and feels suddenly very sick, and is descending to a lower altitude part of it? I understand the pilot should not be alone in the first place, but I still was wondering...

racko · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:33 am

Was too late in the older thread:

Quoting CXfirst (Reply 177):
Where they reporting A320 hours, or total hours?

Must be A320 hours, you surely must have more than 600 total hours if you went through flight training and were on the job for 18 months.

Quoting Istanbuler83 (Reply 184):
-if the pilot does not unlock the door. you can enter the emergency code (which is different than the regular one) and the door get automatically unlocked only after 5 MINUTES for only 30 SECONDS.

So, the question is, what is about the remaining 3 minutes?

We don't know when the Captain (do we actually know it was the captain who was locked out?) returned - might very well have been a few minutes into the descent. The descent was not necessarily alarming enough to run to the flight deck with your pants still around your ankles, so to speak.

And it has been implied by people familiar with the door mechanism that if you do not want someone to enter, they can't enter, period. The locking mechanism wasn't designed to protect the plane from people inside the cockpit but outside it.

wilco737 · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:33 am

Quoting curlyheadboy (Reply 1):
Is there a procedure for if the pilot is alone in the cockpit and feels suddenly very sick, and is descending to a lower altitude part of it?

No, but when I don't feel good and the CP is on the lavatory at the moment, I would call an FA or him right away back into the cockpit.

Quoting curlyheadboy (Reply 1):
I understand the pilot should not be alone in the first place, but I still was wondering...

Well, we have physical needs as well and we don't have a toilette in every airplane cockpit. (the BOeing 747-8 has a lavatory in the cockpit).

wilco737

BubbleFrog · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:36 am

Quoting racko (Reply 2):
We don't know when the Captain (do we actually know it was the captain who was locked out?) returned

Last time I looked, no, we didn't know. Somewhere on the Guardian ist was specifically stated that it wasn't known, but I can't find it that quickly. And of course, I might have missed something, or things have changed.

curlyheadboy · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:38 am

Quoting wilco737 (Reply 4):
Well, we have physical needs as well and we don't have a toilette in every airplane cockpit. (the BOeing 747-8 has a lavatory in the cockpit).

I know even if I'm not an aviation expert

bout I understand (correct me if I'm wrong), a flight attendant should be in the cockpit during the pilot's bio-breack

cuban8 · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:38 am

Quoting curlyheadboy (Reply 1):
Question for pilots and experts: Is there a procedure for if the pilot is alone in the cockpit and feels suddenly very sick, and is descending to a lower altitude part of it? I understand the pilot should not be alone in the first place, but I still was wondering...

There is no such procedure for pilots in case of sickness. That being said, you have always the option to put the oxygen mask on. The number one option is still to call for assistance from pilot or crew.

wilco737 · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:39 am

Quoting curlyheadboy (Reply 6):
I know even if I'm not an aviation expert bout I understand (correct me if I'm wrong), a flight attendant should be in the cockpit during the pilot's bio-breack

Nope, I just get up and to the toilette and return asap. But no FA needs to be in the cockpit during that time.

wilco737

tailskid · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:39 am

Quoting curlyheadboy (Reply 6):
correct me if I'm wrong

You're wrong.

In the US that's the rule, but not elsewhere.

racko · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:41 am

Quoting curlyheadboy (Reply 6):
I know even if I'm not an aviation expert bout I understand (correct me if I'm wrong), a flight attendant should be in the cockpit during the pilot's bio-breack

That apparently depends on the airline, some require to always have 2 people in the cockpit, some don't. LH doesn't.

seahawk · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:41 am

Quoting wilco737 (Reply 4):
Well, we have physical needs as well and we don't have a toilette in every airplane cockpit. (the BOeing 747-8 has a lavatory in the cockpit).

Especially as it looks like a good and perfectly normal time to go to the toilet for the pilot in command. They were at cruising altitude and no pilot input was needed for the next few minutes.

curlyheadboy · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:42 am

Quoting wilco737 (Reply 8):
Nope, I just get up and to the toilette and return asap. But no FA needs to be in the cockpit during that time.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 9):
You're wrong.

In the US that's the rule, but not elsewhere.

Many thanks both for clarifying... I guess if the problem was medical there might be a learning point here...

wilco737 · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:45 am

I pull out of the discussion.

I hope the best for the family and friends and respect that in not doing any speculation at all.

wilco737

aw70 · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:45 am

I don't understand why so many people here seem to be focused on foul play having occurred. All it would have taken for this to happen is for the remaining pilot in the cockpit to suffer a massive stroke or aneurysm while the other one was in the lavatory. When suffering the stroke, the pilot accidentally pressed some buttons, or pushed the stick forward.

And the remaining pilot simply took too long to get back into the cockpit.

That would be an extremely sad but not totally far-fetched chain of events.

tailskid · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:45 am

Quoting tim73 (Reply 13):

There are at least 4,000 of these type of planes in service and you find two incidents, not crashes in how many years?

Get over it.

rosterdriven · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:46 am

Quoting Istanbuler83 (Reply 184):
As a flight attendant flying A320 family aircraft pretty much everyday. The door procedure is like this:

-with entering the code at the door, you make a request to open the door. the pilot can allow or deny it with "unlock or lock".
-if the pilot does not unlock the door. you can enter the emergency code (which is different than the regular one) and the door get automatically unlocked only after 5 MINUTES for only 30 SECONDS.

So, the question is, what is about the remaining 3 minutes?

Not valid on all Airbus models, the airline can opt anything from 5 to 20 minutes. No Idea what this ship had.....

Sorry posted on obsolete part 7

tailskid · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:49 am

Quoting wilco737 (Reply 14):
I pull out of the discussion.

I don't blame you. Have a good break from all this.

KarelXWB · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:51 am

Quoting aw70 (Reply 15):
I don't understand why so many people here seem to be focused on foul play having occurred.

It's psychological, mankind tend to look for the negative things in life.

BubbleFrog · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:52 am

Quoting tim73 (Reply 13):
Now there are two similar air quality-gone-bad incidents for the same airliner and this looks like another one, only with dire consequences. Unless this is a suicide

Just identify the design fault that led to these incidents. The one fault that makes all incidents alike.

TheSonntag · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:55 am

Official statement from 4U on the New York Times report:

Es gibt Medienberichte, nach denen einer der Piloten das Cockpit verlassen haben soll und anschließend nicht mehr hineingelangt sei. Wir haben derzeit keine Informationen der zuständigen Behörden vorliegen und können diesen Bericht in der New York Times weder bestätigen noch dementieren. Wir werden uns bemühen, weitere Informationen zu bekommen und werden uns nicht an Spekulationen beteiligen. Die Ermittlung der Unfallursache obliegt den zuständigen Behörden.

Translated by me:

"There are media reports, according to which a pilot is said to have left the cockpit and later on being unable to return. We do not have any information of the authorities regarding this so far and thus we can neither confirm, nor deny this report of the New York Times. We will try to get further information, but we will not join speculations. The accident investigation is the job of the competent authorities in charge."

Edit: 07.17 local CET.

[Edited 2015-03-26 02:56:35]

ltbewr · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:56 am

I find it very disturbing that someone apparently violated investigative protocols and possibly French law by disclosing this possible allegation of 'a pilot being locked out' based apparently from information on the recovered CVR. The investigating authorities need to press criminal charges against any leaker in their group, most likely someone who told a local government official who then trying to look like a hero so to speak, who then blabbed to the press.

That the NY Times, considered to be leading and respected newspaper in the USA, published this allegation also shows a huge flaw in their editorial management, likely done to get more people to buy their paper or their subscription fee website.

Such disclosures will only cause damage to the integrity of the investigations and of the investigative authorities. These alleged disclosures could cause the investigation to be derailed, making it more difficult to determine the more likely cause. It causes more speculation harmful to the families and friends of the victims and cause less respect toward government authorities. Such disclosures, if not true, also hurt the respect in the public eye these investigators need to do their job right. There job is not to please the public, politicians, aircraft and component makers. We saw with TWA800 years ago how premature and inaccurate disclosures still cause doubt in the NTSB and in the public as to the most likely cause of that disaster.

[Edited 2015-03-26 03:27:24]

KarelXWB · Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:56 am

Quoting tim73 (Reply 13):
Then hit with huge lawsuits and recalls of millions of cars and reputation taking a big hit.

You're assuming the A320 crashed due to bad maintenance, and now comparing this possible maintenance issue from a single airline with 'millions of faulty cars'? With respect, this doesn't make any sense.

[Edited 2015-03-26 02:57:03]

pvjin · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:01 am

Quoting tim73 (Reply 19):

The problem with fumes sometimes entering cabin exists on all airlines, with possible exception of B787. It has something to do with the way how most modern airliners take their air through engines. Try google for aerotoxic swyndrome for more info.

[Edited 2015-03-26 03:04:29]

travelavnut · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:02 am

Quoting wilco737 (Reply 14):

I pull out of the discussion.

Please stay Wilco, your input is highly appreciated. I know it's difficult, but please ignore the idiots.

KarelXWB · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:02 am

Quoting racko (Reply 2):
And it has been implied by people familiar with the door mechanism that if you do not want someone to enter, they can't enter, period. The locking mechanism wasn't designed to protect the plane from people inside the cockpit but outside it.

And here's the switch in the cockpit:

speedbirdegjj · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:03 am

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 25):
That the NY Times, considered to be leading and respected newspaper in the USA, published this allegation also shows a huge flaw in their editorial management, likely done to get more people to buy their paper or their subscription fee website.

I agree, but in light of whats been alleged wouldn't a simple statement from the BEA helped to quash the rumors and inevitable hysteria that has followed?

Delta777Jet · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:03 am

Quoting racko (Reply 10):
That apparently depends on the airline, some require to always have 2 people in the cockpit, some don't. LH doesn't.

This requirements to have always 2 makes sense no matter what has happened in this crash. Should be reviewed immediately by LH.

Quoting aw70 (Reply 15):

I don't understand why so many people here seem to be focused on foul play having occurred. All it would have taken for this to happen is for the remaining pilot in the cockpit to suffer a massive stroke or aneurysm while the other one was in the lavatory. When suffering the stroke, the pilot accidentally pressed some buttons, or pushed the stick forward.

Yes that could happen, but the other pilot would have been back and normally get through the door by entering the emergency access code. It's very hard to believe that the ill pilot would bend himself over the lock cockpit door button in such event.

curlyheadboy · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:09 am

Airbus video covering reinforced cockpit door operations. Interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSC_KLmCBWw

aw70 · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:14 am

Quoting Delta777Jet (Reply 31):
Quoting aw70 (Reply 15):

I don't understand why so many people here seem to be focused on foul play having occurred. All it would have taken for this to happen is for the remaining pilot in the cockpit to suffer a massive stroke or aneurysm while the other one was in the lavatory. When suffering the stroke, the pilot accidentally pressed some buttons, or pushed the stick forward.

Yes that could happen, but the other pilot would have been back and normally get through the door by entering the emergency access code. It's very hard to believe that the ill pilot would bend himself over the lock cockpit door button in such event.

As far as I understand it, all it would have taken for this to go horribly wrong would have been a little too much hesitation on the part of the pilot who was locked out. Which is not far fetched, unfortunately:

- sole pilot in the cockpit suffers massive stroke, somehow sends the plane into a moderately steep descent via some uncoordinated movements

- pilot outside wastes too much time knocking, only resorts to using the emergency code too late

We are only talking 8 minutes here. If the other pilot did not immediately return from the lavatory once the descent commenced, there might only have been 5 minutes left until impact once he started knocking and actually trying to get in. If he wastes just a few minutes knocking and trying to enter the entry code (maybe he had to ask an FA for it), the disabled pilot would not have had to actively deny him entry for this to go down the way it did.

Edit: this post is of course in no way intended as a (hypothetical) criticism of the locked out pilot. With so little time to react, chances are that he could not have prevented this even if he had acted perfectly. Especially if the PIC suffered the stroke immediately after the second pilot went to the bathroom: that would easily clip 1-3 minutes of the 8 he had to do anything about the whole matter.

[Edited 2015-03-26 03:32:34]

BubbleFrog · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:25 am

Quoting travelavnut (Reply 28):
Please stay Wilco, your input is highly appreciated. I know it's difficult, but please ignore the idiots.

I second that.

Although I understand your feelings (well, I don't, as I have never experienced anything remotely similar, but you get my drift).

peterk · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:30 am

Are the mobile phones of the passengers examined? Maybe they took pictures or videos of what happened?

capri · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:30 am

We haven't heard from military what the interceptive fighter jet saw or witnessed, or did I miss it?

Mastropiero · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:30 am

Quoting tim73 (Reply 26):

Quoting tailskid (Reply 22):
I'm pressing the suggest deletion button on you.

You are out of touch and over the top.

That is the preciously the attitude in safety issues which causes accidents. Somebody suggesting a little bit controversial must be put down immediately! Tell me, what exactly in my reasoning is wrong? This looks like that "one in a million car acceleration" problem to me. Very difficult to find but it is there.

What is wrong in your reasoning is that you jump to conclusions without knowing what actually happened, your argument being "it looks like blablabla"? Seriously, based on what looks like that?

You don't know the facts beyond what is known, neither do I, nor does Wilco, who is in a much better position than us anyway to do so. And with posts like yours you manage to turn away people who actually CAN offer valuable input. Thank you for that.

AirPacific747 · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:31 am

In my airline, it's standard procedure that a cabin crew member is in the cockpit when one of us have to go out of the cockpit to go to the lavatory for example.

s5daw · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:32 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 29):
And here's the switch in the cockpit:

Holy mother of good... do I see correctly it's in the middle console, just waiting for the left pilot to collapse and switch it to lock as his hand falls down?

Not to mention objects switching it... looks at this 360 photo... now look at the glasses!?
http://www.viewat.org/?i=en&id_pn=2978&sec=pn&srch=cockpit

speedbird217 · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:33 am

Quoting tim73 (Reply 19):
That is hiding behind numbers. Preciously, what the car industry in the US did. What are the changes the SAME airliner was hit with TWO similar incidents?

Here is another interesting statistic: You have 98 posts in this forum, and all of them I read in this thread so far are disrespectful to other people and of very poor quality.

I hope that this tragedy will be explained soon. My thoughts to the families and friends of the victims.

TheSonntag · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:36 am

Quoting peterk (Reply 37):
Are the mobile phones of the passengers examined? Maybe they took pictures or videos of what happened?

Highly premature. But if you look on how the CVR looked, you can imagine what you would regarding bodies, not even speaking of mobile phones.

teme82 · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:38 am

Quoting s5daw (Reply 41):
Holy mother of good... do I see correctly it's in the middle console, just waiting for the left pilot to collapse and switch it to lock as his hand falls down?

I don't think so. See the protecting stuff on it's sides. For me it seems that they are a bit higher than the switch itself.

curlyheadboy · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:40 am

Quoting Mastropiero (Reply 39):
We haven't heard from military what the interceptive fighter jet saw or witnessed, or did I miss it?

I read reports in the media stating the French fighter that was scrambled found nothing, which is consistent with the timeline of the event. By the time they were on site it was already all over.

kl911 · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:41 am

Quoting tailskid (Reply 22):
I'm pressing the suggest deletion button on you.You are out of touch and over the top.

I agree, Tim73 is awfully disrespectful here to Airbus, Germanwings and crew.

seahawk · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:43 am

Quoting TheSonntag (Reply 43):

Highly premature. But if you look on how the CVR looked, you can imagine what you would regarding bodies, not even speaking of mobile phones.

On the other hand Micro-SD cards are pretty durable.

flyingturtle · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:45 am

Quoting peterk (Reply 37):
Are the mobile phones of the passengers examined? Maybe they took pictures or videos of what happened?

I think they are. It's not a big problem for somebody with a BSc degree in electronic engineering from a University of Applied Sciences to build a device that reads data from bent, mangled but still working SD card.

Some of the passengers might be aviation-savvy frequent flyers, and sinking half an hour before arrival in DUS *must* raise their suspicion. So cameras are turned on. This depends, of course, on the passengers still being conscious.

David

TheSonntag · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:47 am

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 48):
I think they are. It's not a big problem for somebody with a BSc degree in electronic engineering from a University of Applied Sciences to build a device that reads data from bent, mangled but still working SD card.

Provided you can find them in this moutainous area. It isnt exactly flat.

Regarding the use of mobile phones LH, and presumably 4U have a rather relaxed policy - using them in flight mode is allowed. So I would not rule out some people have filmed it. If so, however, I for sure do not want to see it.

Aaron747 · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:54 am

Quoting aw70 (Reply 15):
All it would have taken for this to happen is for the remaining pilot in the cockpit to suffer a massive stroke or aneurysm while the other one was in the lavatory.

That is actually more unlikely than foul play given the available information and certain scientific realities. As pilots are far more subject to medical scrutiny than the general population, they are particularly unlikely to suffer those types of events. As I posted earlier, the American Heart Association estimates individuals under 50 who have passed rigorous examination are extremely unlikely to suffer any cardiac events for a minimum of 7 years. Add in other factors, like whether a slumped body would contact flight controls, and what sequence of doing so would be required to get an A320 to deviate from altitude, and the probability becomes even more unlikely.

Quoting aw70 (Reply 15):

I don't understand why so many people here seem to be focused on foul play having occurred.

Occam's razor. The explanation with the least number of hypotheses to put to the test is often correct.

jetfuel · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:56 am

it was the FO who was blocked outside, and the captain inside flight deck.Both were speaking in german prior to the incident. When banging on the door, the FO receives no reply, no reaction apparently.

Source : Le Monde.fr
Crash de la Germanwings : le copilote était coincé à l'extérieur du cockpit avant l'accident

LXLucien · Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:56 am

Quoting pvjin (Reply 27):
The problem with fumes sometimes entering cabin exists on all airlines, with possible exception of B787. It has something to do with the way how most modern airliners take their air through engines. Try google for aerotoxic swyndrome for more info.

But if that would be the problem, a lot of RJ100 (Avro's) would have gone down by now because of that problem. The Avro is well known being one of the worst aircraft in regards to fumes and toxic gas entering the bleed air system - and causing problems to PAX and Crew. But until now I did not come across an investigation where the pilots got unconscious because of the fumes. So I highly doubt there is a connection between the fumes and this crash. Although I don't want to speculate, but the authorities would have known if there would be a problem with fumes and pilots getting incapacitated in Airbus aicraft. And it's not just Germany or France who want to cover stuff up, in the EU all airlines have to write such occurrences to the authority of the respective country. So also, lets say Austria or Switzerland, would have made such things public to warn airlines.

Quoting capri (Reply 38):
We haven't heard from military what the interceptive fighter jet saw or witnessed, or did I miss it?

Yes this question bothers me for quite a time now, those eye witnesses who stated the aircraft almost got hit by a fighter jet...
But nothing heard from then on about this topic.
This means probably, that the eye witness made some things up in his mind - as so often with eye witness (who always hear strange engine noise etc.)

Quoting s5daw (Reply 41):
Holy mother of good... do I see correctly it's in the middle console, just waiting for the left pilot to collapse and switch it to lock as his hand falls down?

No it's not that easy, the switch is not in the center of the middle console, more like almost at the back of the console.
It would have been an almost improbable coincidence that the arm of the captain (who has to sit very far back with his seat) hit the switch at the exact angle to get it triggered. Also the switch is somehow protected with two "fins" so the movement has to be exactly up to down.
But you are right, from a design prospective, down = unlocked / up = locked would be better...

wjcandee · Thu Mar 26, 2015 11:00 am

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 24):
That the NY Times, considered to be leading and respected newspaper in the USA, published this allegation also shows a huge flaw in their editorial management, likely done to get more people to buy their paper or their subscription fee website.

Here in the US, like it or not, it is the job of the media to not just play lapdog to the government authorities but to feret out information on an important story however they can.

In recent years, most formerly-great American newspapers and broadcast outlets have just played lapdog to our federal government officials. They report what they are told, and the bury stories or slant stories if hey don't lke the facts. They have become sad, sensationalist organs.

This discovery is one of the first pieces of good, solid reporting by the New York Times in a long time.

Note, too, that other officials (and the stories are written to make clear that they are indeed other officials) have now leaked varying versions of the same essential story to Agence France Presse (AFP) and the Associated Press and the Wall Street Journal.

Sad CNN is just left with reporting that "other media outlets" have reported this story, while the ones mentioned above have done primary reporting where they were able to get the information from their own primary sources. But credit the Times with getting the story first.

I would much rather be in a system where the authorities are responding to this kind of information as opposed to the authoritarian regime in Indonesia, which insisted on reading out the black boxes themselves so they could control the information, and who have since basically buried the information.

Sorry, I know it's a messy system we have, but it's a better system than one where government gets to hide stuff of importance to the public. That said, it's very unfortunate how these bombshell stories have come so quickly and without context, causing more pain to families already awash in it.

4tet · Thu Mar 26, 2015 11:02 am

I really think that entering in a cockpit must be really difficult.

In the Delta case, even with the copilot inside trying to open the door, it was not possible for the pilot to gain access to the cabin, regardless of emergency codes, switches, locks and so on...

Maybe it's time to rethink about that policy, and also "anti-terrorist" policy in general... We live in a imperfect world.

Every one knows the effort curve... There comes a point that to "gain 0,1% of security" we are loaded with more and more procedures, laws and norms that can be really unconvenient and even dangerous in many cases.... and we must assume that.

s5daw · Thu Mar 26, 2015 11:03 am

Quoting LXLucien (Reply 51):
It would have been an almost improbable coincidence that the arm of the captain (who has to sit very far back with his seat) hit the switch at the exact angle to get it triggered.

And even less probable to happen just when the other pilot goes to use the restroom. Still, it kind of feels this switch should be on the overhead console. And an FA should enter cockpit if a pilot goes out. I'd be surprised if LH doesn't implement this policy very, very soon, if nothing else for publicity.

racko · Thu Mar 26, 2015 11:05 am

Quoting capri (Reply 37):
We haven't heard from military what the interceptive fighter jet saw or witnessed, or did I miss it?

The whole descent only took 8 minutes, and the fighter surely wasn't alerted immediately. Highly unlikely that it got there while the aircraft was still flying, even if it was already airborne when it got alerted. If ithad to be scrambled no chance to get there whatsoever at all.

[Edited 2015-03-26 04:08:34]

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net