Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
American 767
Topic Author
Posts: 4555
Joined: Wed May 19, 1999 7:27 am

Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Fri Apr 03, 2015 4:19 pm

As the previous thread got quite long I created Part 15 to continue the conversation.

We kindly ask that you remain respectful of everybody. This is a hot topic and things easily get heated.

May all the victims rest in peace.

Regards,
Ben Soriano

Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 14 (by American 767 Mar 30 2015 in Civil Aviation)
Ben Soriano
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Fri Apr 03, 2015 6:02 pm

Well he killed everyone, and now there is no way around it.

It really pisses me off, because aspire said on the other thread it lowers EVEN more the standards of living, of security and of course human interaction. Now Pilots are caged up front, Pax never to be trusted and the crew to handle all those problems...

If both pilots become incapacitated, I bet some of us A netters would be surprised on how many people are familiar with airliner controls, they are not pilots but know some of the systems or have played flight simulator... its a fighting chance to survive, but until someone can control a plane remotely, that is all we have.

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1779
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Fri Apr 03, 2015 6:52 pm

Mandala499 wrot:

Quote:

Yes.
Feasible? No.

Take me to the nearest airport, then how to land? Autoland? You need ILS for that, even if it's just Cat I for these kinds of situations. Problem... not all runways have ILS. In my part of the world, your nearest ILS could be over 300NM away and it might not even be serviceable or be at the runway unsuitable for the wind.

I'm not so sure. Picking a suitable destination to land at seems like the easiest problem to solve. The more difficult cases are where there is no suitable destination with ILS, or the plane has some issues. Lets say the hijackers start breaking windows to lose pressurisation.

Still, under the assumption that all hell has already broken loose, some other options start to be more attractive. Advanced auto land or remote control options, if they ever become reality, might be first reserved for such circumstances.

As an immediate reaction to this accident? No. Something that we'll see some planes be able to do in 15-20 years? I wouldn't necessarily bet much against it... even with the understanding of all the difficulties associated with such new functionality (security, different conditions, etc).
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Fri Apr 03, 2015 7:07 pm

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 2):
I'm not so sure. Picking a suitable destination to land at seems like the easiest problem to solve. The more difficult cases are where there is no suitable destination with ILS, or the plane has some issues. Lets say the hijackers start breaking windows to lose pressurisation.

Who knows, Boeing may dust off this 2006 patent: Boeing patents anti-terrorism auto-land system for hijacked airliners

And this also shows what is possible: Xavion
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 2381
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Fri Apr 03, 2015 7:21 pm

Wow, that FDR ...

If there's ever been an incident (it's becoming increasingly clear that this wasn't an "accident" by the general interpretation of the term) that validated the design and structure of those things, this is it.

400+ mph impact direct into the side of a mountain, FDR ends up in that condition ... and the memory was still readable.
 
D L X
Posts: 12721
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Fri Apr 03, 2015 7:48 pm

Quoting tomlee (Reply 205):
Quoting D L X (Reply 204):
To survive this and still be readable shows that Flash memory is something special, isn't it?

The fire-insulation also helps as flash memory really doesn't like getting too hot.

I think you may be surprised! Flash doesn't like being burnt to consumption -- nothing does. But it does pretty well under heat that does not consume. This guy proved that you can drop flash in boiling water for five minutes without having any effect on the storage. It makes sense -- Flash memory keeps its contents by lodging free electrons in a substrate. Heat doesn't affect the charge until the substrate melts or is consumed.

http://www.pcdoctor-guide.com/wordpress/?page_id=243
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Fri Apr 03, 2015 8:55 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 5):

Boiling water and fire are two wildly different temperatures. Flash doesn't like high temperature at all.

Boiling water (~100degC at 1atm)
Fire (~1,400degC for a candle flame which is a paraffin (also used in solid rocket motors with an oxidizer) fire basically)
For a jet-a air fire ~1,000 degC is a good round number.

If we use the time acceleration temperature dependent reaction equation known as the arrhenius equation, ( http://www.eeweb.com/blog/eli_tiomki...ure-and-nand-flash-in-ssd-products )

To put it into numbers assuming the memory is qualified for a 10 year life at 100degC (55,85,125degC are some common test temperatures)

if you test at 100degC that is that life is divided by 1 (same) (if you where testing 55degC memory it ages at about 100x rate of ageing to ruin the memory in 100degC bake it would take ~1 month to simulate 10 years)(water submersion for long durations would ruin the memory through other mechanisms (corrosion), which is why the data recorder memory units are also hermetically sealed)

if you test at 200degC that is that life is divided by ~1300 to around 60 hours.

if you let it get to 1000degC (It would catastrophically fail but whatever) that life is divided by ~31,800,000,000 of a test estimate of ~10 milliseconds. (It is an exponential function basically, the number is meaningless at that point though as it pretty much is saying don't even try it as the thermal gradient would take longer than 10ms to occur so your test would be all over the place)

So the fire/thermal insulation is very important to the flash memory survivability in keeping the temperatures nominal (I believe they may use intumescent coatings in the paint which is why it looks so charred as these coatings are designed to char itself to develop carbonized insulating barrier on top of the inner heat insulation until it runs out so the inside stays at a very low temperature). ( https://youtu.be/p-AHzOEe3NQ , it grows depends on the type of coating)

The maximum temperature the memory can get to retain data in a fire for 1 hour = 10 years is at 286degC, 547degF ( slightly above the maximum temp of a household oven, well below the auto-clean setting ) and your insulation/coatings would be designed to achieve some target time/temp curve to protect the memory from an external fire of a set duration. (with these specific numbers obviously)

The FDR looks so charred probably because the coatings where activated by a fire.

[Edited 2015-04-03 13:57:58]
 
Okie
Posts: 4240
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Fri Apr 03, 2015 10:47 pm

Quoting tomlee (Reply 6):
For a jet-a air fire ~1,000 degC is a good round number.

Thanks for the info.

The FDR is rated for 3.400g's and temperature of 2000F/1100C for 1 hour from what I can gleam.

The test information that I read indicated that after hour of 2000F then the device is allowed to cool, it did not say what temp the surrounding atmosphere was for cooling, and then still function with a new data cable.

I would suppose that if the device was in a pile of hot rubble that would take hours or more to cool to ambient then there could be a different outcome according to your numbers.

Okie
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 1:22 am

Quoting TheRedBaron (Reply 1):
If both pilots become incapacitated, I bet some of us A netters would be surprised on how many people are familiar with airliner controls, they are not pilots but know some of the systems or have played flight simulator... its a fighting chance to survive, but until someone can control a plane remotely, that is all we have.

The technology already exists to be able to control a plane remotely.

The question is: Would airlines / countries want to have the added risk of having their planes 'hacked' and taken remotely by somebody else?

Also, the plane would need to be in range of an appropriate airport to land at (eg: ILS capable, etc.).

Technology wise, it would not be difficult at all to make an autopilot system accessible / controllable from the ground.

Again, the question is: Would airlines / countries want their planes to have that capability / risk?

Also, would pilots be comfortable flying a plane that could be taken over remotely? I'm not so sure...

Quoting planemaker (Reply 3):
Who knows, Boeing may dust off this 2006 patent: Boeing patents anti-terrorism auto-land system for hijacked airliners

Maybe...

[Edited 2015-04-03 18:31:31]
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
capri
Posts: 499
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 1:32 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 10:55 am

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/...taly/ar-AAaqoo1?ocid=mailsignoutmd

4U in an emergency landing after what someone claimed a passenger panic attack over Italian Alps but the airline said otherwise.

Has anyone heard about this?...
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1078
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 2:16 pm

Quoting capri (Reply 9):

in the article it says "nausea". I wonder if this is enough for a medical diversion, since Rome would not have been that far away.
 
MigPilot
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 2:17 pm

An autoland system as last ditch measure to save a plane is something which may deserve consideration. It won’t negate scenarios like bad pilot action during finals, but at least it could have saved the day in this specific case (and probably a few others). If the autoland routine can be activated either from inside the plane or remotely, hardened cockpit doors and extreme crew/pax segregation rules also would lose their justification.

Anyway, there are probably a ton of ‘side effects’ which come along if this is implemented and maybe new problems arise nobody thought of.
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1078
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 3:15 pm

Quoting MigPilot (Reply 11):
An autoland system as last ditch measure to save a plane is something which may deserve consideration

Pilotless flying will happen at some point in the future, not becuse of this case but because of economics. But it will take a long time.
 
MigPilot
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 3:32 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 12):
Pilotless flying will happen at some point in the future, not becuse of this case but because of economics. But it will take a long time.

Just to be clear, my point was not about pilotless flying. It’s about an emergency feature which could be implemented in today’s airliner. Supposed a suitable airport is in range of course.
 
lancelot07
Posts: 1078
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 8:22 pm

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 4:22 pm

Quoting MigPilot (Reply 13):

But you still have to choose an adaequate airfield. fly there and land - all either automatically or on remote control, and in an emergency, possibly wit a damaged plane. Not an easy task at all. Possibly more demanding than a pilotless flight on a good day.
And nobody would invest the money for it to happen unless there is return on invest.

[Edited 2015-04-04 09:27:03]
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 4:25 pm

A remote controlled aircraft is opening another can of worms..... somebody hacks the plane and..... back to square one.

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
MigPilot
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 4:37 pm

Quoting lancelot07 (Reply 14):
But you still have to choose an adaequate airfield. fly there and land - all either automatically or on remote control, and in an emergency, possibly wit a damaged plane. Not an easy task at all.


The whole point of an autoland feature is to not allow remote control - beyond the ability to initiate the process. This would only open more options for hijacking. The routine, once started, has to bring the plane safe to the next nearest suitable airport.

if there are secondary failures during that phase that exceed the capability of HAL – well then you are out of luck.

[Edited 2015-04-04 09:39:22]
 
777way
Posts: 6457
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 1:38 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 5:21 pm

Some official who viewed the crash site first says he saw men, women, children and babies he repeated yes even babies, according to the Mirror online second day of the crash, is he lying, everything disintegrted.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6600
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 5:31 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 8):
Technology wise, it would not be difficult at all to make an autopilot system accessible / controllable from the ground.

It's easy enough to do it... securing it, is the issue...   

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 2):
As an immediate reaction to this accident? No.

As a non-quick fix, I am open to the idea albeit skeptical. Anyone who wants this as a quick fix is just fooling him/her/themselves.

If you want it by an "override all" button, one needs to make sure that it's only going to be able to be pressed by an authorized person in the right circumstances, otherwise, it'll end up wasting a loooot of fuel! (we haven't even got to the landing yet).

Then, you need to notify the cockpit of such activation otherwise if it's an inadvertent activation, the crew might think something is wrong with the plane.

Then, you can reset a lot of stuff on the airplane. Things that are related to the control of the aircraft will have a circuit breaker inside the cockpit. Could this then go around in circles?

So, this needs a looot of thinking to make it work right... but it's obvious this ain't going to be easy to make it foolproof.

Quoting MigPilot (Reply 16):
The routine, once started, has to bring the plane safe to the next nearest suitable airport.

How to bring it down safely at the nearest suitable airport? If it has no ILS on the right runway, or the ILS that's supposd to be used, is inoperative, etc, etc, etc...

Imagine if it's an inadvertent activation, and the crew can't override it, and the plane lines up on an airport with an unserviceable ILS or no ILS at all... Would be messy!
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
MigPilot
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 5:49 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 18):


I agree with you that it’s not going to be an easy fix. Much more thinking and tweaks have to go into it. However I think it's worth of consideration.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6600
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 6:00 pm

Quoting MigPilot (Reply 19):
I agree with you that it’s not going to be an easy fix. Much more thinking and tweaks have to go into it. However I think it's worth of consideration.

As long as it is thought thoroughly...   
I don't think the technology is there yet to make it reliable enough, but technology is going that way anyway..
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
MigPilot
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sat Apr 04, 2015 6:08 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 20):
As long as it is thought thoroughly...

That might indeed be the problem   Let’s see what the future brings…

[Edited 2015-04-04 11:09:08]
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 5:00 am

Interesting that quite a few contributors seem to think that this incident 'makes a case' for fully-automatic controls - that is, fewer if ANY pilots?

In point of fact it more or less makes the case for MORE pilots, if anything - so that at least two are on the flight-deck at any one time. The 'sole cause' of this incident appears to have been that a single (suicidal) pilot was left alone on the flight-deck, and no-one else could intervene? So it 'makes a case' for at least two pilots to be 'up front' - meaning at least three on board? And, indeed, that's what the various 'authorities' appear to be pressing for - meaning, essentially, at least three pilots on board at all times?

Myself, I don't think 'pilotless' airliners are even on the horizon yet. I for one would never fly on one - I wouldn't even ride in a 'driverless' taxi or bus.

And the relevant authorities appear to see things my way - they've lost no time in pressing for two pilots on the flight-deck at all times, which means three guys on board for almost any trip? Looks to me as if, in present circumstances, any sort of 'pilotless airliners' are at least a hundred years from ever happening?

[Edited 2015-04-04 22:05:32]
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 5:06 am

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 22):
And the relevant authorities appear to see things my way - they've lost no time in pressing for two pilots on the flight-deck at all times, which means three guys on board for almost any trip?

No, the authorities don't appear to see things your way.

More authorities are mandating 2 *people* in the cockpit at all times - not two pilots. Two people as in - one pilot plus one FA. When one pilot from a two pilot flight needs to leave the cockpit to take care of business a FA will stay in the cockpit with the other pilot until the other pilot returns.

This won't result in more pilots.

This will just result in FAs getting to spend more time up front  
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 5:10 am

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 22):

I don't think we should have pilotless aircraft but I do think we should have full authority automatic protections like ground collision avoidance (Which already exists and has been proven to work). And if you have a door which can open to the cabin crew you can fight back against any one crew member taking over the cockpit. The automatic protection would delay any attempt to nosedive the plane which would give crew time to take back control.

Pilot-less aircraft (drones) already exist just pilot-less passenger aircraft are not likely to be implemented widely as even high speed passenger trains still have drivers (there are tons of automatic controls with full authority there as well). The saying if a human is present anywhere you can never stop them from killing everyone is false because you sure can delay them so that they can't carry out the act fast enough for the rest of the crew to fight back.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 5:12 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 23):
This will just result in FAs getting to spend more time up front

Fair enough, 777Jet. Except that one has to ask, if another deranged pilot pointed the nose down and applied full throttle, what could an FA do about it?
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 5:30 am

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 25):


Fair enough, 777Jet. Except that one has to ask, if another deranged pilot pointed the nose down and applied full throttle, what could an FA do about it?

Fight back? We are talking about life or death... I don't think they are just going to sit there and smile...

FAs are not useless and I'm sure plenty have some idea about the basics of flying a plane or how to work out what is going on...

The FA could aslo try to open the door as well so that the other pilot would not be locked out.

Also, having another person in the cockpit might be enough to put off a nut job pilot from doing something stupid. When they are left alone in there - out of sight, out of mind. However, having someone right next to them to have to deal with might be enough of a deterrent to stop them from trying something stupid.



[Edited 2015-04-04 22:35:39]
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 5:45 am

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 25):
Fair enough, 777Jet. Except that one has to ask, if another deranged pilot pointed the nose down and applied full throttle, what could an FA do about it?

First if the malicious actor for some reason didn't knock you out (dumb plan basically) you knock them out or grab their head and poke their eyes out and beat the living daylights out of them. (It is a fight for your life and everyone else) Then you try to recover the flight by reversing the actions you saw and get help from the crew. Why the malicious person didn't first knock you out and then lock the door is beyond me but whatever. Three people and the malicious actor is very likely to be subdued quickly.

This nose down can crash immediately scenario should be eliminated given it doesn't appear to have much practical use other than crashing suddenly from cruise. What purpose is there in entering an beyond limits extremely steep unrecoverable nose dive with 100% throttle which any number of sensors could say oh your going to hit the ground very fast, and very quickly.

A ground avoidance system which at bare minimum forces the plane to crash land at a shallow angle and much reduced speed would mitigate scenario and give people the time to fight back or at least have some chance of surviving the crash. There would be no need to disable the system because you could still land even with the protection going falsely activating because it doesn't actually stop you from a low speed low angle approach which is what a landing is.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 5:49 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 26):
The FA could aslo try to open the door as well so that the other pilot would not be locked out.

Also, having another person in the cockpit might be enough to put off a nut job pilot from doing something stupid.

Fair enough, 777Jet, might be enough. Come to think of it, an even simpler solution might be to sacrifice a row of seats and give the pilots a lavatory of their own, inside the cockpit?  
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 5:53 am

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 28):
Fair enough, 777Jet, might be enough. Come to think of it, an even simpler solution might be to sacrifice a row of seats and give the pilots a lavatory of their own, inside the cockpit?

Cost/weight/time to modify would be a bit unpalatable.
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1779
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 6:40 am

Quoting tomlee (Reply 29):
Cost/weight/time to modify would be a bit unpalatable.

Tomlee, this may be a moment where NAV30 has some point. I do not think this is something that should be done for narrowbodies. But I could see a requirement in the future for doing this for the widebodies. New ones.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:10 am

Quoting NAV30 (Reply 28):
Fair enough, 777Jet, might be enough. Come to think of it, an even simpler solution might be to sacrifice a row of seats and give the pilots a lavatory of their own, inside the cockpit?

If the pilots had a lav of their own then to solve the issue of one pilot locking the other pilot out of the cockpit then the door of the 'pilots only lav' with direct cockpit access must be designed in a way so that the pilot who wants to remain at the controls and crash the plane can't lock the good pilot in the lav. So what type of door would allow for privacy but solve that issue? I'm sure the pilots would want more than just a curtain...
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
456
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2001 4:20 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:30 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 31):

A door which opens to the inside (or some kind of a slide door)?
I would be curious whether the extra weight/extra space which is needed wouldnt be a problem
 
mandala499
Posts: 6600
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:53 am

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 30):
Tomlee, this may be a moment where NAV30 has some point. I do not think this is something that should be done for narrowbodies. But I could see a requirement in the future for doing this for the widebodies. New ones.

There is a way to do this for narrowbodies. Just move the door into the cockpit side and be done with it... tell the pax at the front to go to the rear lav!   

Another way is to have a mechanism to dead lock the lav from the inside when you open the toilet door from the cockpit... only minor changes required.
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 8:12 am

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 33):
Another way is to have a mechanism to dead lock the lav from the inside when you open the toilet door from the cockpit... only minor changes required.

For a while I was thinking to have two doors on the front lav next to the cockpit - one for pax to use to enter and another door connecting to the cockpit for the pilots to use to access the lav. That way pax would never see the pilot leave the cockpit and an extra lav for just the pilots wouldn't be needed. However, I believe this could be a double-edged sword:

The door from the lav to the cockpit would need to be almost as strong as the current cockpit door in order to keep bad pax from trying to enter the cockpit through the lav / cockpit door. It follows from that that if the door from the lav into the cockpit is that strong then there is most likely going to be a way for the pilot in the cockpit to keep the lav door shut and therefore keep the other pilot locked out of the cockpit if he / she wants to do something stupid.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 33):
There is a way to do this for narrowbodies. Just move the door into the cockpit side and be done with it... tell the pax at the front to go to the rear lav!

That could be the solution  

As long as the usual lav door is sealed off properly so that the lav can only be accessed from the cockpit...

Also the seats up front where the premium cattle sit can be given 'emergency bags' just in case they can't make it to the back of the bus in time  
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13725
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 11:47 am

http://www.tagesschau.de/inland/germ...bsturz-luftfahrtbundesamt-101.html (German only)

In the above link, it is reported that the LBA (German Aviation Office) did not know of Andreas Lubitz's depression episode that ended in 2009. However, it's unclear whether they had to be informed about it or not, because physicians are only required to inform the LBA about such severe illnesses since April 2013. That being said, a psychological evaluation is not required for a pilot's licence renewal. LH won't discuss this report.

I'm split about this. If LH or the doctors involved werent required to report this at the time, then they didn't do anything wrong. But if they were, then this could turn into a major scandal.
Sometimes the only thing more dangerous than a question is an answer. - Ferengi Rule of Acquisition 208
 
na
Posts: 9835
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 12:54 pm

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 35):

In any case this more an more centers around shortcomings in the medical sector and a questionable information policy.
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 2:16 pm

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 30):
Tomlee, this may be a moment where NAV30 has some point. I do not think this is something that should be done for narrowbodies. But I could see a requirement in the future for doing this for the widebodies. New ones.

Modifying the door lock which has no physical footprint and implementing better safety control systems which are just line replaceable units are going to be far more effective and not impact cabin space requirements. Enlarging the cockpit basically is a extremely expensive idea. There is no significant benefit as the other could still attack and lockout the cockpit having the washroom inside the cockpit just makes it even easier to hide this.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 33):
There is a way to do this for narrowbodies. Just move the door into the cockpit side and be done with it... tell the pax at the front to go to the rear lav!

I'd rather not have a plane with less wash rooms than they already have. Lets just say if you gave people the choice between having no wash rooms and hours of flight and a pilot less plane they would pick the one with wash rooms. The hyper loop train concept has "emergency" toilets in the seats in the current concept not sure how many people are going to like having a pot in their seat, imagine what the smell would be like if you couldn't flush these, sudden stop and it would get "messy".

It is far simpler to just have a key that opens the door when needed no space, no weight, no cost added compared to a second wash room or double door. These only make the cockpit even more locked up and would just make it even easier to hide the fact you knocked/killed out the other while costing a lot more, adding structural complexity, and additional weight.

Having a double door wash room would make it larger to accommodate the doors while also needing double cockpit doors (you might as well have the second door in the existing passage) but the weight of the door isn't insignificant nor is the attachment modifications you would need.

Just having a proper lock on the cockpit door instead of the static pin codes is a much simpler solution.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 14268
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 5:57 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 18):
Imagine if it's an inadvertent activation, and the crew can't override it, and the plane lines up on an airport with an unserviceable ILS or no ILS at all... Would be messy!

You can easily imagine an autoland feature not requiring anything on the ground, with GPS + radar + infrared cameras and some intelligence (capability to recognize a landing strip, very simple to do).

Quoting tomlee (Reply 24):
Pilot-less aircraft (drones) already exist just pilot-less passenger aircraft are not likely to be implemented widely as even high speed passenger trains still have drivers (there are tons of automatic controls with full authority there as well). The saying if a human is present anywhere you can never stop them from killing everyone is false because you sure can delay them so that they can't carry out the act fast enough for the rest of the crew to fight back.

A modern high speed train with all the bells and whistles recently crashed in Spain and that was because of the man in the front seat.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Sun Apr 05, 2015 8:12 pm

Quoting Aesma (Reply 38):
A modern high speed train with all the bells and whistles recently crashed in Spain and that was because of the man in the front seat.

That train line didn't have the automatic protection. The segment where they derailed lacked the bell/whistle/autobrake functionality all it could do was warn him he was about to crash but didn't have the authority to take over.

"However, the new high-speed line joins a conventional track shared with low-speed trains, at the curve where the accident happened. The conventional track only had the older ASFA signalling system, which will warn drivers if they are exceeding speed limits, but will not automatically slow or stop a speeding train." ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santiag...a_rail_disaster#Corrective_actions )

An automatic full authority speed protection would have prevented that derailment. The automatic warning was not sufficient. The conclusion of the investigation was that the fully automatic train speed regulator should be installed. These rail mounted transponders can't be easily overridden as they serve a critical safety function and the train physically should never enter the curve at speeds above their set points.

Also there exists no override for over speed protections as there is no physical reason to need to have your train jump off the rails in the train industry. There is a auto-train stop override due to the rare need to pass a signal at danger (red) but there is no reason to speed through a curve which will 100% cause a derailment, similarly there is no need to nosedive a plane in an unrecoverable manner directly into the ground as that will cause a 100% chance of a crash where 0% of the people will survive.

What you referenced is a perfect example of authoritative emergency automation that would have saved lives. The line segment now has three newer transponders with full speed control authority.

[Edited 2015-04-05 13:28:41]
 
cloudboy
Posts: 1124
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2004 12:38 pm

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Mon Apr 06, 2015 12:27 am

The LA times has an article declaring that the pilot must have suffered from aggression, and not just depression.
http://www.latimes.com/world/europe/...ression-20150405-story.html#page=1

I definitely have to agree here that I don't think it was just suicide. This is a bigger issue than that. I am not sure that a simple fix to the door lock is going to be enough - that was simply the easiest way he had available to him assuming he was guilty. If he couldn't lock the captain out, he would have found another way. Better to focus on preventing the situation in the first place.
"Six becoming three doesn't create more Americans that want to fly." -Adam Pilarski
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Mon Apr 06, 2015 12:33 am

Quoting cloudboy (Reply 40):
Better to focus on preventing the situation in the first place.

Preventing murder isn't exactly something we have an "easy" fix for.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-d...prevented-the-germanwings-disaster

Quoting cloudboy (Reply 40):
This is a bigger issue than that. I am not sure that a simple fix to the door lock is going to be enough - that was simply the easiest way he had available to him assuming he was guilty. If he couldn't lock the captain out, he would have found another way.

So if we have two people he would find another way the point is if you combine a better door lock, two/three people rule, better screening/communication, and so on and so forth you reduce the risk significantly and deter copy cat crimes because the conditions at least have changed on all fronts.

This Germanwings case is identical to the LAM470 just instead of the FO it was the captain. You can't rely on mental health to stop this it isn't the sole solution. A copy cat may not even have a mental health problem as it could be to get insurance or revenge and be pre-planned well in advance and their mental health record would be perfectly clear.

[Edited 2015-04-05 17:40:16]
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Mon Apr 06, 2015 12:41 am

Quoting Aesma (Reply 38):
A modern high speed train with all the bells and whistles recently crashed in Spain and that was because of the man in the front seat.

And they did not have the safeguards but th point remains, if somebody wants to kill you and plans accordingly no safeguard is 100% accurate.

This on the article:

Quote:
A well-designed personality inventory alone — the kind of detailed questionnaire used by many employers —probably would have flagged traits that diverged dramatically from the standard profile of a pilot: emotionally stable, resilient and self-disciplined. To have declared Lubitz "100% fit to fly," as Lufthansa Chief Executive Carsten Spohr initially did, "was like pronouncing the Titanic unsinkable just after it's hit the bottom of the ocean," Victoroff said.

As I said 10 threads ago, this should have been screened before and this guy should have never EVER graduated from pilot school...

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Mon Apr 06, 2015 12:47 am

Quoting TheRedBaron (Reply 42):
And they did not have the safeguards but th point remains, if somebody wants to kill you and plans accordingly no safeguard is 100% accurate.


The point falls flat on its face because the safeguard that was being referring to as all the latest bells and whistles wasn't being used (automatic overspeed protection) and if it was it would have prevented the crash. It also cannot be overridden easily as there is no button to press to just turn it off. The safeguard works, sure it isn't 100% accurate, but you can't derail on turns with it and you still have a human driver.

Automatic protections with authority does not exclude having a human driver the two can complement each other so that their combined strengths are best utilized in making a system safer and more reliable.

That case is a perfect example of a full authority protection which would have prevented a disaster. (And now it is installed across many similar turns in that network)

[Edited 2015-04-05 18:25:34]
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Mon Apr 06, 2015 1:05 am

Quoting tomlee (Reply 37):
Lets just say if you gave people the choice between having no wash rooms and hours of flight and a pilot less plane they would pick the one with wash rooms.

I would pick the plane with the pilot.

Quoting tomlee (Reply 37):
Having a double door wash room would make it larger to accommodate the doors while also needing double cockpit doors (you might as well have the second door in the existing passage)

That's another interesting idea.

But another issue with that is that the pilot in the lav could still be locked out of the cockpit as there would be no direct cockpit access from the lav.

Quoting cloudboy (Reply 40):
If he couldn't lock the captain out, he would have found another way.

Maybe. Maybe not.

If he tried something on the other pilot and didn't take him out with his first effort the other pilot might end up kicking his you know what / restraining him. Then upon landing the nut job pilot would most likely end up doing some serious time somewhere...
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Mon Apr 06, 2015 1:15 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 44):
I would pick the plane with the pilot.

Hope your doctor is good with UTIs with more and more antibiotic resistant bacteria it could be quite serious. Pilots (min 2) + automated protections (ground avoid) + revised door (cabin crew unlock) and the normal wash room layout is my ideal (having one wash room or none would be quite uncomfortable and people may have accidents in there seats and it would get pretty disgusting very rapidly).

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 44):
That's another interesting idea.

But another issue with that is that the pilot in the lav could still be locked out of the cockpit as there would be no direct cockpit access from the lav.

Well the whole problem is that the modified wash room / extra doors don't stop a lockout from occurring which doesn't address the problem.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 44):
If he tried something on the other pilot and didn't take him out with his first effort the other pilot might end up kicking his you know what / restraining him. Then upon landing the nut job pilot would most likely end up doing some serious time somewhere...

Also even if he eventually won, if the door could not be locked out to the cabin crew, the person would have to fight even more crew. And provided one can put up some resistance the cabin would probably hear something as you can just scream while your fighting for help. But if the door can be locked out and you lose that is it, even if the cabin is trying to help.

[Edited 2015-04-05 18:22:41]
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Mon Apr 06, 2015 1:25 am

Quoting tomlee (Reply 45):
Hope your doctor is good with UTIs with more and more antibiotic resistant bacteria it could be quite serious.

I hope the computer flying your pilotless plane doesn't come down with a virus or get hacked.
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
Tangowhisky
Posts: 667
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 2:26 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Mon Apr 06, 2015 1:29 am

Quoting MigPilot (Reply 21):
Let’s see what the future brings…

We can go on and on about finding ways to ensure one pilot does not get locked out. The truth of the matter is that even with both pilots seated in the flight deck, the rogue pilot can still crash the plane. There are crucial phases of flight that the rogue pilot can take advantage off. All it takes is a sudden full roll command on the sidestick at 20 feet in the air and there is not a thing the good pilot can do to stop the catastrophe. There are many other actions the bad pilot can do and even with a fly by wire plane, there are not enough protections.

I was speaking to a friend of mine last week who works at a major airline and he told me that airlines are going to get hit with massive insurance rate hikes when those pilots on sick leave will return. The costs are coming (oversight, processes, legal consultation, etc.).

It is time for autonomous aircraft.
Only the paranoid survive
 
tomlee
Posts: 610
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:01 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Mon Apr 06, 2015 1:30 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 46):
I hope the computer flying your pilotless plane doesn't come down with a virus or get hacked.

Why under my ideal it still has pilots and the computers are isolated air gapped autonomous just as the existing FBW computers are. If you can have an isolated air gapped systems getting hacked remotely then existing planes could be hacked by that same logic (Critical systems already run on computers it just has isolation). Automatic ground avoidance doesn't require remote control the plane can detect that independently of external signals.

Having authoritative remote control is a bad idea (latency, hacking, jamming, ...) the control room should be on the plane with two controllers sitting in it with a better door lock design.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 47):
We can go on and on about finding ways to ensure one pilot does not get locked out. The truth of the matter is that even with both pilots seated in the flight deck, the rogue pilot can still crash the plane. There are crucial phases of flight that the rogue pilot can take advantage off. All it takes is a sudden full roll command on the sidestick at 20 feet in the air and there is not a thing the good pilot can do to stop the catastrophe. There are many other actions the bad pilot can do and even with a fly by wire plane, there are not enough protections.

With a full authority protection that can't be bypassed they would not be able to instantly crash the plane anymore and that scenario gets eliminated just as rail overspeed protections prevent certain derailment. EGPWS operates in all phases of flight (landing/takeoff included) and newer systems can both detect and compensate.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 47):
I was speaking to a friend of mine last week who works at a major airline and he told me that airlines are going to get hit with massive insurance rate hikes when those pilots on sick leave will return. The costs are coming (oversight, processes, legal consultation, etc.).

Insurance always increases prices after accidents that is normal, they run purely on statistics. But pilotless planes in commercial service don't have statistics and that is something insurance people don't like at all (unknown risks). It would take years of service even if faultless to gather enough data to have nice rate decreases for total automation.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 47):
It is time for autonomous aircraft.

It certainly is not time for fully autonomous aircraft. It is time for more full authority protections but you still need pilots as computers can't do the whole if I'm going to crash do I hit this bridge with a few cars on it or this large in session school with thousands of people within. Getting that to work automatically isn't going to happen any time soon.

Humans are good at thinking on their feet while computers are good at doing some well understood task constantly (like detecting when the plane is going to intersect the ground).

Maybe one day there may be fully autonomous aircraft in commercial service but the technology isn't mature enough to just go from all piloted planes to all non-piloted planes. Takes time and careful thought.

I think people/automation are generally good. There are edge cases humans can cover very well and edge cases computers can handle very well and if you have both you can cover more edge cases than just one alone (We did invent computers to do work we are not very good at processing in our head). Sure there might be some odd edge cases the combination produces but you can deal with them with things like better door design which on the scale of system complexity isn't exactly a hard problem.

[Edited 2015-04-05 18:50:56]
 
MigPilot
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Germanwings A320 Crashed Enroute BCN-DUS - Part 15

Mon Apr 06, 2015 4:06 am

Quoting tomlee (Reply 48):
t is time for more full authority protections

The problem I see with a full authority "crash protection" is that it relies too much on sensory input. Sensors can go wrong, and they do all the time. Most cases won’t make it to the public since they are non-events, covered by FCOM procedures.

To be effective, a full authority protection must be active all the time, in all control laws - i.e. no possibility for the pilot to deactivate it any more. How do you want to make sure that a degraded sensor input or a combination thereof does not result in the protection crashing a plane, without any way for the pilots to override it?

In the end, a full authority protection is not much different than a pilotless plane: The flight control system has the final word and must be able to fly a plane under all conditions and failure cases which currently require pilot input. I think we are far away from there yet.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos