Airbus - again.

Post #400,357 by mmoffitt 3/24/15 10:02:48 AM Reply	Airbus - again. A Swiss Airbus 320 is down in a mountainous region of southern France, and all 148 on board are believed to be dead, officials announced early Tuesday morning. The airplane was en route from Barcelona to Dusseldorf and was operated by Germanwings, a low-cost arm of Lufthansa. A distress call was made by the crew at 10:47 a.m. local time, and the aircraft disappeared from radar at about 11:20 a.m. The crew said the airplane was in "an abnormal situation," according to the French transport ministry. Search crews are now on the scene and debris has been located. http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Swiss-A320-Down-In-Alps-223735-1.html Can't wait to see what the pilot did wrong on this flight.
Post #400,365 by a6l6e6x 3/24/15 12:32:49 PM Reply	It was an old plane -- 24 yo. But, in theory makes no difference if maintained, Alex "There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." -- Isaac Asimov
Post #400,367 by mmoffitt 3/24/15 2:59:29 PM Reply	That's not old. My airplane is 55 years old!
Post #400,371 by a6l6e6x 3/24/15 5:30:00 PM Reply	Yeah, but you don't go up to 40 K feet. So, compression and decompression cycles are not so deep. Alex "There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." -- Isaac Asimov
Post #400,377 by mmoffitt 3/25/15 8:40:50 AM Reply	Well, if you're going to pick nits. ;0) Allegiant's fleet average age is 22 years, Delta's is 17, American's and United are both 13.6 years. So, a 24 year old airplane being in service is, yes, older than most but not unheard of. But of equal importance IMO, if your an airline that is retiring your Boeing aircraft and replacing them with European Airtrash models, having a younger fleet average is hardly something to be proud of.
Post #400,372 by pwhysall 3/24/15 6:55:06 PM Reply	And Boeings never crash? Change the record.
Post #400,376 by mmoffitt 3/25/15 8:33:31 AM Reply	Sure, but for fatal crashes Airbus wins! Fatal crash rates per million flights: Airbus A320/318/319/321 0.10 Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 0.08 http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/rate_mod.htm HTH.
Post #400,381 by malraux 3/25/15 9:47:06 AM Reply	Mein Gott 2 millionths of a percentage point difference. What has Airbus been doing?? Those devils! Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #400,382 by pwhysall 3/25/15 9:52:19 AM Reply	What a massive margin of victory /s
Post #400,383 by mmoffitt 3/25/15 10:26:55 AM Reply	Give Airbus a few more years, it'll be larger.
Post #400,384 by pwhysall 3/25/15 10:36:37 AM 3/25/15 10:36:59 AM Reply	Will it double? To four millionths of a percentage point? Er. Mer. Gerd! Edit: heh. Edited by pwhysall March 25, 2015, 10:36:59 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #400,385 by mmoffitt 3/25/15 10:46:59 AM Reply	Will it matter? Trying to deflect attention from the fantastic safety record of Airbus in the last year or so, you brought Boeing up. I demonstrated, clearly, that at least thusfar Boeing has a lower rate of fatal air crashes. Your point is, apparently, that Boeing is almost as bad as Airbus. Almost, but not quite. Add in the other idiotic design ideas you geniuses across the Atlantic came up with and I'd still prefer flying on a 10 year old Boeing to flying a new Airbus EVEN IF Boeing's safety drops to that of Airbus.
Post #400,386 by pwhysall 3/25/15 10:53:23 AM Reply	Two. Millionths. Of. A. Percent. >raises pinky to corner of mouth
Post #400,388 by boxley 3/25/15 1:43:09 PM Reply	before or after you mined a nostril? Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
Post #400,403 by pwhysall 3/25/15 4:47:19 PM Reply	FOUR millionths of a percent!
Post #400,407 by boxley 3/25/15 9:33:52 PM Reply	thats not much of a booger :-) Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
Post #400,415 by Ashton 3/26/15 4:50:54 AM Reply	Numbers-porn; you're usually not so easily deflected to the simplistic ploy. Am I weird (too) then, to simply re-state The Problem (even though this glaring design disparity might prove irrelevant in this crash, IF.. another terminal-sociopath? is ultimately proven to be the cause.) Side-stick -vs- Tandem physical-yoke Ya gets only one reply: WHICH design ??? guarantees that BOTH Operators Know Instantly: what THE-OTHER-IS-DOING. Ain't that a fucking-DUH! comparo? (My view of Airbus, CIEIO on down: is that their intransigence in this obvious, massive conceptual flaw is Shrub-grade naked Stubbornness.) Juvenile gutlessness to admit it IS a naked-flaw. Their weepy-egos -VS- more of The Same cross-purpose clusterfuck when the next eerie/brand-new, What Broke Now? event is escalating into complete puzzlement ... and one or both: flailing at the controls. Maybe another game of darts, and skip that extra pint? :-0
Post #400,417 by Another Scott 3/26/15 8:15:46 AM Reply	Hardware can't guarantee that one knows what the other is doing. As long as there is a pilot and a co-pilot and each are tasked with being able to fly the plane, the controls must permit it. The side stick vs yoke issue is red herring, IMO. What matters is conversation in the cockpit and the training (and mental stability) of the people. Remember what Scully said in his Airbus over the Hudson? "My airplane." That's all it takes. The Space Shuttles had sticks: FWIW. Cheers, Scott. (Who hopes the initial story about what happened doesn't end up being incorrect - we don't need wild speculation in cases like this.)
Post #400,419 by boxley 3/26/15 9:26:40 AM Reply	especially when one pilot is locked out the cockpit and the other has no response Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
Post #400,425 by mmoffitt 3/26/15 11:21:06 AM Reply	Coupled controls do help, though. Tragically not in this case, but in general.
Post #400,426 by pwhysall 3/26/15 11:50:15 AM Reply	[citation needed] When have coupled controls actually averted an actual disaster that was actually happening? Or is this a tiger-repelling rock? Genuine question.
Post #400,430 by mmoffitt 3/26/15 12:59:51 PM 3/26/15 1:01:47 PM Reply	Read with comprehension much? Read the Subject Line of the post to which I was responding and then try to tell me that I need a citation. Er, okay, maybe I do for people on your side of the Atlantic. I keep forgetting that English is a foreign language to you. Edit: In case you still don't get it. Having coupled controls does let each pilot know what the other is doing with the control stick. How can you not see that? Edited by mmoffitt March 26, 2015, 01:01:14 PM EDT Edited by mmoffitt March 26, 2015, 01:01:47 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #400,432 by pwhysall 3/26/15 1:21:03 PM Reply	Just answer the question. I'm not disputing that coupled yokes are coupled. Clue: snark is best delivered without a massive helping of comprehension fail.
Post #400,434 by mmoffitt 3/26/15 2:59:27 PM Reply	Okay. I'll play. Have coupled controls ever saved lives? You bet your ass they have. There is no question they have saved lives, hundreds if not thousands of them. Ask any primary flight instructor.
Post #400,445 by pwhysall 3/26/15 3:47:09 PM Reply	Assertion. Dude. Facts. Please. This is just you saying words. I notice you've broadened the scope to training, which is of course a speciality area and one unrelated to what we were talking about, which is regular commercial flights.
Post #400,453 by mmoffitt 3/26/15 4:50:23 PM Reply	You brought up a question I did NOT make a comment about.
Post #400,439 by Ashton 3/26/15 3:34:05 PM Reply	'The side stick vs yoke issue is red herring, IMO.' [Fail] Are you (too..) actually not grasping the necessity that BOTH 'operators' need the clearest/quickest INPUT-info of what each is 'doing' ??? ..that any 'speaking' ... is slow, imprecise and useful only when you--in FACT--have the time for filling-in other details (like switch flipping elsewhere, and such as have no tactile input.) Q. for you, too: Ever fly a light plane, however briefly? How did that compare with what (any old eidetic memory had amassed from) n-second-hand descriptions? Boggled at your two opening didactic sentences: as. if. you. really Knew :-/ This ain't bloody physics/all by-itself.
Post #400,447 by Another Scott 3/26/15 4:12:07 PM 3/26/15 4:15:31 PM Reply	Flying - no. As a kid I knew a scout leader who was a pilot. He took me up in his Pipe[r] Cub (or similar) for a brief jaunt around the airport, but I don't recall handling the controls (if that were even possible). It was a weird sensation, being so close to being exposed (just a thin skin of aluminum...). If you have two people operating the same controls, there's a problem. That's why "my airplane" is vital. The only example that MM can point to where the non-coupled sticks in an Airbus was an issue (AFAIK) was the Air France 447: In a July 2012 CBS report, Sullenberger suggested that the design of the Airbus cockpit might have been a factor in the accident. The flight controls are not linked between the two pilot seats, and Robert, the left seat pilot who believed he had taken over control of the plane, was not aware that Bonin had continued to hold the stick back, which overrode Robert's own control.[237][238] Reference 238 says: "CBS News aviation and safety expert Captain Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger explained that he believes that the disappearance would have been less likely to have happened if the plane had been a Boeing instead of an Airbus. This is because the control wheels [in the Boeing] are larger and more obvious. Sullenberger showed CBS News correspondent Mark Strassmann the difference with an Airbus simulator. There's a small movement on the Airbus flight controls called a sidestick, which raises the nose of the plane and instructs it to climb. Pilots rarely perform the maneuver at high altitudes because it can be very dangerous, but that is exactly what the pilot of Flight 447 did." (Emphasis added.) If you have two pilots manipulating the stick/yoke, you're doing it wrong. No matter how the two yokes are designed. Robert should have said, and meant, "my airplane". And a pilot who pulls back on the stick/yoke at high altitude is doing it wrong. Having coupled controls wouldn't have prevented him from doing so. IOW, the problem isn't the design of the plane, it's the training and communications of the pilots. Yes, of course, one can try to design around mistakes and miscommunications like these, but it's not going to fix the underlying problem. The money spent on hardware would be better spent on training and evaluation and implementing best-practices. IMHO. Cheers, Scott. Edited by Another Scott March 26, 2015, 04:15:31 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #400,451 by drook 3/26/15 4:39:05 PM Reply	And doing that makes all the planes safer -- Drew
Post #400,454 by mmoffitt 3/26/15 5:02:01 PM Reply	Nobody's ever claimed that! And a pilot who pulls back on the stick/yoke at high altitude is doing it wrong. Having coupled controls wouldn't have prevented him from doing so. No, it wouldn't have. BUT if the control sticks were coupled, there would have been a tactile indication to the pilot in the left seat that the pilot in the right seat had yanked the control stick back. That would have led to the left seat pilot taking corrective action. Because there was no indication coming from the decoupled control sticks, the left seat pilot wasn't clued into the primary problem. You do understand that, right? You further understand that it is right and proper to call an engineering decision that reduces safety "a design flaw", yes? It's not the only design flaw with an Airbus, but it is a spectacularly stupid one.
Post #400,456 by Another Scott 3/26/15 6:20:21 PM Reply	You did read the rest of my post, right? :-) Wikipedia on the A320 Family: From 1959 through 2013, the Airbus A320 family of jets experienced 14 fatal hull-loss accidents for every million takeoffs, one of the smallest fatality rates of any family of jets included in the study. These incidents are very, very rare. They are tragic, but it's not a dangerous airplane so it can't be a dangerous design. Every airliner has engineering compromises. Money spent linking the sticks and providing feedback, and so forth, is money that can't be spent on other things - like more rigorous training about cockpit communications - that may cover many more types of pathologies that can lead to accidents. FWIW. Cheers, Scott.
Post #400,473 by mmoffitt 3/27/15 8:50:39 AM Reply	So coupling the controls was too expensive? You are really reaching on this one, Scott. ;0) I'd be willing to bet there are a couple of hundred families that might disagree with you.
Post #400,421 by pwhysall 3/26/15 9:48:23 AM Reply	Appealing to facts not in evidence Intuitively, you're right. In terms of practical results in reality, you're right, but it just doesn't matter. You can "duh" yourself hoarse; the facts are that, for all practical purposes, it doesn't matter. The stats don't lie. Two millionths of one percent separates the two brands. You know what really saved a shitload of lives? It wasn't dual yokes, that's for sure. In fact, it wasn't anything nerdy at all. It was boring old Crew Resource Management.
Post #400,435 by Ashton 3/26/15 3:12:43 PM Reply	You're in-lurve with modrin TLAs like "CRM"--as if That 'cooks the rice' On a TANDEM control pair you need no slowed-down/intellectual-palaver-filtering of words: to grasp: EXACTLY what the other person is attempting to do ... as. it. happens ['it' being: his/her exact inputs to the attitude control System.] You can't get this information Quicker nor more accurately. Why you persist in calling this irrelevant--have you ever 'flown' anything?--in face of those who regularly count on Mr. Bernoulli to counter the effects of Mr. Gravitational Attraction ... remains {sheesh}-grade puzzling, here. Conflate abstract 'Stats' with ... the visceral-experience of an actual process within real-time ...one more time? and I'll approach Her Majesty's Master-Debater Accreditation Service about some demerit Awards. Maybe we each inhabit separate \| parallel universes and that's why communication always was doomed, species-wide (?)
Post #400,438 by drook 3/26/15 3:22:40 PM Reply	Thought experiment Suppose the evidence clearly showed that fly-by-wire was conclusively and significantly safer than manual control of flight surfaces. ("Safer" defined as "less likely to crash.") In the case of a single pilot, an electronic control stick is the correct setup. When there are two pilots, who in theory should be taking turns, you have the possibility that they are trying to do different things. They shouldn't be doing that at the same time. With manual linkages that can't happen unnoticed. Is the likelihood of that failure mode greater than the increased safety of fly-by-wire? Sure, it "feels" wrong to imagine pulling up on the stick and it doesn't do anything because someone else is pushing down and you don't know that. But if that happens, you know that half the people in the cockpit are trying to do the wrong thing. In that case I just might prefer that the "expert system" figure out what to do. -- Drew
Post #400,442 by Ashton 3/26/15 3:45:21 PM Reply	Excellent point; shall need some pondering.. but for the moment, the massively-nested algorithms are unfathomable by human jelloware: in any realistic time frame for decisions. We have to rely on homo-sap final Deciders, for an unknowable time-frame. While we're awaiting the First truly comprehensible Fail-Safe Source Code, I aver that: FEELING what is happening, immediately! beats all [word]-exchanges: for deciding whether you need to cold-cock a loonie sitting next to you? and fly this thing out of trouble or ... just TELL HIM/HER why you are bloody-sure it is a Mistake. And then cold-cock if you get back gibbering ƒeare-filled nonsense. We may get "there"; we sure Haven't Yet.
Post #400,446 by drook 3/26/15 4:08:02 PM Reply	Look at the latest research on self-driving cars They're finding that for years we've been solving the wrong problem. We've been trying to take people completely out of the equation until we need them: construction zones with poor/inaccurate markings, unusual weather conditions, unexpected mechanical failure, etc. What they have figured out is that people are really bad at maintaining alertness when completely disconnected from the process. What works better is a drive-by-wire system where the driver makes general inputs - go, stop, lane change - but the car decides what to do with the engine, brakes and steering. Computers are better and faster than all but the very best drivers at this level of control. Fly-by-wire systems seem to have learned half that lesson. The pilots provide input saying "go higher" or "turn left" and the system decides what to do with the flaps and engines. But auto-pilot has been in use for so long that we've come to expect it. Maybe it would be better to leave the fine control to the systems but make the pilots actually fly again. -- Drew
Post #400,443 by pwhysall 3/26/15 3:45:48 PM Reply	OH NOES A MODERN TLA! IT MUST BE SHIT AND RUBBISH CRM was developed in the wake of the Tenerife crash (two Boeings, fact fans!) and other fleshoid-based fuckups. In 1979. "Modern". Heh.
Post #400,455 by mmoffitt 3/26/15 5:07:06 PM Reply	Yep, two Boeings wrecked by a European.
Post #400,457 by pwhysall 3/26/15 6:43:39 PM Reply	And this is why you fail.
Post #400,503 by Ashton 3/28/15 8:05:05 AM Reply	(The CRM idea isn't bollocks, of course) But as a deflection of this issue: it is. Yah, know about that Nederlander #1 pilot's self-cleared take-off ..and the wimpy PNF who didn't say NO!! ... thus everyone, mostly, died. We were talking about, not crew sociology generally: but about the Value / Or Not, of instant feedback when two pilots are (hoping they are..) helping each other fly the plane, while under great stress. And, (as re the universe/the whole-fucking Cosmos and Everything ... you were explaining how you already had all-that-flying-stuff permanently Sorted, too. And I was saying: when you are that presumptuous, and essaying Certainty of such stuff too: you are daft. So maybe no next plane will stall out exactly as ... when a CRM-certified loon like Bonin was killing F. 447 all. the. way. down. Maybe. But with that side-stick still permitted.. any compulsive Still Could. And, freaked-out? fucking-May. Ta ... next we take on the detection of secret-psychotics with epaulets and enough daily-patter to seem 'normal'. Easy-peasey problem, eh?
Post #400,444 by pwhysall 3/26/15 3:45:49 PM 3/26/15 3:47:53 PM Reply	Dupe oops Edited by pwhysall March 26, 2015, 03:47:53 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #400,378 by mmoffitt 3/25/15 9:08:56 AM Reply	Horrible image. Second picture here: http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/24/world/gallery/france-plane-crash/index.html
Post #400,422 by malraux 3/26/15 10:14:56 AM 3/26/15 10:15:16 AM Reply	Pilot error indeed http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/26/us-france-crash-idUSKBN0MK2U020150326 Andreas Lubitz gained sole control of the aircraft after the captain left the cockpit, refused to re-open the door and appears to have operated controls, sending the plane into its fatal descent, Marseille prosecutor Brice Robin said. He did this "for a reason we cannot fathom right now but which looks like intent to destroy this aircraft," Robin told a news conference in Marseille broadcast live on national TV. Ugh. :-( Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson. Edited by malraux March 26, 2015, 10:15:16 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #400,423 by drook 3/26/15 10:24:10 AM Reply	Guess he couldn't live with the fact he wasn't flying a Boeing -- Drew
Post #400,424 by Another Scott 3/26/15 10:33:43 AM Reply	Errg. The BBC reporting on it this morning makes it seem like he was a fairly normal guy who loved flying (glider pilot (like Scully), etc.). I wonder if there is a broken heart/scorned love aspect to this tragedy. :-( Cheers, Scott.
Post #400,458 by boxley 3/26/15 7:26:59 PM Reply	an assumption is being made that he was unwilling to open he door, he may have been incapacitated Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
Post #400,460 by malraux 3/26/15 7:30:37 PM Reply	The autopilot was set to an altitude of 100ft while the pilot was out. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #400,461 by Nightowl 3/26/15 7:37:25 PM Reply	Re: The autopilot was set to an altitude of 100ft while the pilot was out. Yeah, the news just indicated that doing that was a deliberate act, so the pilot had to be conscious and able to do that. Also setting the door control to locked was another deliberate act that prevented the pilot from using the key pad. From all accounts at this time it appears that he deliberately crashed the plane. Brenda ___________________________________________________________________ I feel like a melted-down owl between two slices of parent!
Post #400,472 by mmoffitt 3/27/15 8:46:47 AM Reply	That's possible, but unlikely here imo. The remaining pilot did apparently disable the keypad entry of the cockpit door. When that happens, the keypad can't be used for a set interval of time (between 5 and 20 minutes IIRC). It's possible that he got violently ill and started a descent and was planning an emergency landing, but became completely incapacitated before he could manage to pull it off. But then, why would he have intentionally disabled the keypad door mechanism? They also said that the co-pilot was "breathing normally" until impact. AFAIK, they haven't found the other black box yet, but it should be able to indicate for certain that the door disable switch was tripped. In that case, pilot incapacitation seems unlikely in the extreme.
Post #400,477 by boxley 3/27/15 10:15:01 AM Reply	from the latest news it appears that it was deliberate Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
Post #400,483 by Nightowl 3/27/15 1:39:32 PM Reply	Re: from the latest news it appears that it was deliberate It seems that way. They found that he had a note from a doctor excusing him from work that day, and yet he went to work. Sad that he couldn't admit the problem existed and not fly that day. Brenda ___________________________________________________________________ I feel like a melted-down owl between two slices of parent!
Post #400,484 by mmoffitt 3/27/15 1:55:51 PM Reply	I don't know how Europe does it. But what I've read indicates to me that he was looking at the equivalent of losing his medical here. That would be career ending.
Post #400,485 by malraux 3/27/15 2:10:32 PM Reply	His response was definitely career ending. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #400,486 by mmoffitt 3/27/15 2:11:49 PM Reply	And an affirmation of the physician's finding.
Post #400,497 by Nightowl 3/28/15 12:23:46 AM Reply	He wanted to go down in spectacular fashion and be remembered Airbus crash pilot Andreas Lubitz had been planning a spectacular gesture to make everyone "remember" who he was, it was claimed on Friday night. An ex-girlfriend of the Germanwings pilot who crashed his plane in the French Alps, killing all 149 others on board, described him as "tormented" and able to hide secrets. Maria, 26 (not her real name), told Bild newspaper that when she heard about the crash she remembered that he had said he was going do something "that would change the system" and "make everyone remember" him. She added: "It didn't make sense at the time but now it all does." Maria, who is thought to have met Lubitz at work, said he would wake up at night screaming in terror: "We're going down." Full article here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/aviation/11501075/Andreas-Lubitz-planned-spectacular-gesture-that-would-go-down-in-history-claims-ex-girlfriend.html Well...he'll certainly be remembered... Brenda ___________________________________________________________________ I feel like a melted-down owl between two slices of parent!
Post #400,498 by Nightowl 3/28/15 12:23:54 AM 3/28/15 12:25:31 AM Reply	Ignore...dupe post. Sorry. ___________________________________________________________________ I feel like a melted-down owl between two slices of parent! Edited by Nightowl March 28, 2015, 12:25:31 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #400,507 by scoenye 3/28/15 11:03:38 AM Reply	Doesn't matter much Having come out at a low-cost operator would have been a career ender, official loss of license or not. Calling in sick is not good for the profit margins and they do not have the protections that staff at the old state airlines still have to some extent. The undercurrent that things are amiss has always been there, but it usually gets drowned out by other, more important news. In the wake of this disaster, though, the situation has been getting at least a bit more exposure. Some of the things that have come out are that a good number of young pilots, like Lubtiz, are paying the opertors to fly. It is their only hope of recuperating the money spent getting their license. And 20% of all the pilots are "contractors". I.e. they fly at the beck and call of the operator for next to nothing, but are expected to keep up with training and regulations on their own dime. Add all that to the stress inherent to the job, and it is a wonder that depression has not reached epidemic proportions yet. Than again, maybe it has as no one dares to talk about it.
Post #400,508 by Another Scott 3/28/15 11:20:30 AM Reply	Excellent points. I would expect worker protections are stronger in Germany than in the US, but medical fitness is a huge deal for pilots. For obvious reasons. Here's hoping companies everywhere, and not just in aviation, carefully look at the report when it comes out. When companies promote their exclusivity, status, etc., and work to get people who are willing to devote their lives to working there, those companies have responsibilities to the people to keep them safe, treat them respectfully, and understand that that the workers' economic and emotional investment is huge. Crushing peoples' psyche, even if objectively required for safety, shouldn't be done in a vacuum. People aren't disposable, and people who are responsible for hundreds of lives and millions of dollars worth of equipment and potentially billions of dollars in liability judgments, doubly so. Tragic all around. I hope the correct lessons are learned. Cheers, Scott.
Post #400,523 by Ashton 3/28/15 5:19:54 PM Reply	Share your unrealistic hopes.. because one. must. Our kultur long ago decided that it was OK--re every. one's. health, survival--to invoke the famous highwayman koan, Your money/or your life! {mofo.. implicit} Proliferation of tony knock-off clinics, all For-profit, with spoils going to the Eye-of-each-pyramid ..and a big ETC. is what we wrought, via accepting the ethics-free umbrella of the overriding vulture-nature of our capitalist national religion. Statistics ain't got no ethics either: an acceptable #crashes/company/decade [or aircraft-model?] is the 'bar' which apportions the spending; decisions all made in the mentioned, wealthy-already Eye of the Org. As scoenye reminds, the 'amiss' undercurrent has already been there. Nobody has a nice model of a litmus test for those of whom Much is expected, [simply: Perfection] while Pay and equally-important Epaulets are withheld.. (in some cases, even decent food and shelter is not affordable): after you land that multi-$M machine with its multi-$B cargo-of-Liabilities. Many here have seen skits about the double, triple-bunking of crews of less-than-Iconic marques; corollary to each of these skits: how many of these Live sleep-deprived/thus WORK sleep-deprived? ..most working-days of any year. Have a nice/cheap/safe Flight; pick-any-two. (BONUS: If flights cost lots more.. and soon: there will be less lethal pollution/day too.) So.. you know.. (right?) the Real-mofos, those who apportion via an early-inculcated Zero-sum concept of life-itself? will--even now, 3+ days after this kid Lost It!--see any next expenditures in terms reduced to two aspects: 1) We have to spend PR money Now! to sell reassurances/thus appearances that: we will 100%-spot any next clone {yaShure..} 2) Every dollar, Euro, Guilder of that comes directly out of my Second-Veyron piggy-bank, so we will-not overspend on the above. (I labor here to withhold my feelings about the Master-Gamers of All systems; those who, currently control most actions that ever cost over a couple million zlotys, planetwide); all know that such-as-these give nary a Shit about the truthiness in yours, scoenye's remarks. They care-not a Shit even whether the planet can maintain, so long as they die-first with more Stuff than can be inventoried in a fortnight. (What do we always do, once a pestilence has been positively I.D.'d and the news finally penetrates avge-grade jelloware? Fingers crossed.) Could our species possibly garner more than a [D-] collectively ... on Deportment? (I award no Points for some rather lovely koans extant, as those were intended for Others to follow.) :-/ We must continue to expect better, especially of the young and not-yet concretized ... ... in perpetual hopes that not-All of us are indeed Bastards. I'm a sucker for that, too. :-)
Post #400,524 by Ashton 3/28/15 5:53:13 PM Reply	Flying amortization -vs- Student Loans SImilar scams? both avenues encounter the Crass, foremost--it seems. Many have struggled along, making whatever min-payment-Forever... keeps then off the FAIL-so-Prosecute roster. Their "degrees", worthless to any Std. crass-CIEIO who sees only a commodity. (When you need an MBA, merely to survive--do you really want to live in a spot where bizness ethics governs all neighbors, too?) (I guess that anyone who flies an Embraer and such--for more than a summer's duration say?--already has the UV-revealable Scarlet-letter on forehead): A (Ain't Got our kind of Cuth.) Wonder how long it takes the more alert wannabes to discover ... Gehabt, KIndern! and %what? shall eventually seek ..revenge on some scale. I admit my ignorance of what %meritocracy "a Captain makes", but Air France 447 and its Bonin clearly indicated a kid in that seat via aristocracy underpinnings (and in another crash, a pilot had let his kids PLAY with teh pretty Glass-wall and buttons.) I no verbs. Who really did say (first?) ..the more you find out, the darker it gets.
Post #400,565 by rcareaga 3/30/15 12:47:28 PM Reply	Could be you win the thread I wonder if there is a broken heart/scorned love aspect to this tragedy. There are conflicting accounts, but I've read a couple of reports to the effect that Lubitz' girlfriend had announced a couple of days earlier that she planned to move out of the apartment they shared. Add to the existing account of a "control freak" and I come up with the following mental (I do not say rational) process: "She's leaving me? She's leaving me? No fucking way! I'll make her see reason...She's still leaving? I'll show her. I'll kill myself, and then she'll feel bad. Fuck, I'll kill myself and an entire planeload of holiday-goers, and then she'll feel really bad." Few of us enjoy rejection, but certain personality types take it very badly (I remained in a stunned funk for years following the disintegration of my own domestic arrangements, although it wouldn't have occurred to me to take it out on the occasional passengers in my car), the bulk of the extreme responses taking the form of murder of the estranged other, or murder/suicide, Lubitz apparently taking it to the next level and then some. Absent a written statement of intent we can probably never know, but I suspect that the "scorned love" element you have suggested is the likeliest motive. cordially,
Post #400,575 by Nightowl 3/30/15 7:57:01 PM Reply	That and being deemed unfit to fly. Great post! Nice to see you Rcareaga! Brenda ___________________________________________________________________ I feel like a melted-down owl between two slices of parent!
Post #400,587 by mmoffitt 3/31/15 10:15:35 AM Reply	There are more differences between how the Europeans do it and we than I realized. I've heard it reported that the co-pilot was "treated for depression and suicidal tendencies" before receiving his pilot's license. That absolutely would not happen here. Any history of any mental issues are lifetime disqualifiers for receiving even a Private Pilot license, let alone Commercial and ATP beyond that. If you so much as use a mild anti-depressant (even for off-label use) you lose your ticket permanently. No way anyone starts or finishes flight training (at any level) if they were being treated for a mental illness of any sort.
Post #400,608 by crazy 3/31/15 3:37:12 PM Reply	blame it on the nazis http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3019193/How-Nazis-blame-Germanwings-pilot-Andreas-Lubitz-allowed-fly.html
Post #400,612 by drook 3/31/15 5:11:25 PM Reply	That's a tough one -- Drew
Post #400,615 by Ashton 3/31/15 6:30:17 PM Reply	NYT sez that.. some slack is cut though, even here. NYT. Pilots’ fears about the consequences of being honest about their mental health was one reason the Federal Aviation Administration in 2010 loosened its policy, allowing them to take certain antidepressants and still fly if the illness was mild. Before the policy changed, some pilots received mental health treatment and antidepressants from private doctors but concealed that information from airlines and regulators, said doctors familiar with the agency’s practices. But all can see (except those who always cry [Certain!] about any opinion) ... We haven't the foggiest idea how--via any cockamamie law or other pressure--to prevent Anyone from committing an unprecedented action. Maybe someday, wnen the Securitat-chip is implanted at birth.. say 2025?
Post #400,619 by pwhysall 4/1/15 8:17:59 AM Reply	Zero tolerance is superficially appealing... ...but simply means that people will actively avoid reporting whatever is being zero toleranced.
Post #400,620 by Another Scott 4/1/15 8:27:40 AM Reply	This. We can't use science to treat disease and conditions and at the same time think that huge consequences of accepting such treatment are not important. If people have mental issues, the solution isn't to punish them for seeking treatment. How? Dunno, exactly. But letting them fly alone on a day that a doc says they shouldn't probably isn't a good idea. :-( Having 2 people in the cockpit at all times should help in most cases. Assuming the pilots don't have guns, of course... :-( There's been an epidemic of zero-tolerance in the US. It needs to stop. Cheers, Scott.
Post #400,627 by Ashton 4/1/15 3:23:19 PM Reply	Alternates for pilots? (Muricans love black/white Draconian answers to serious, complex questions.) Given the cut-throat competition for one of the Well-paid slots (whatever the ratio to the often insulting pay for those who shepherd only a few dozen lives at a time) there could be some (formal) acknowledgment of your well-stated opening: If a mental quirk arises, person could be temporarily be tasked with training others or similar tasks requiring experience of flying the actual hardware in use. Presuming that, in many cases an episode does not portend a declining spiral, is somewhat treatable--even within our current tenuous grasp of all such matters--formal recognition of this alternative could help lots. Still, even were this method applied in good faith, there remains the prospect of no successful treatment, the only-delayed instant loss of all chops and income. More incentives? guaranteed pensioning off, with qualifications to address scamming. Consider thus: the Corporate expense of such a pension is trivial compared with [One mangled planeload.] Corporate must have this explained in language an MBA could comprehend, or any bright 12 yo. And that is not even snark/some are sociopaths themselves. The obvious determinant of any solution to [perpetual] biped unpredictability is to use the fucking-money to ameliorate the pilot's sudden-death fiscally, encouraging self-reporting sans stigma ... and for Corporate to realize it's not only the humane solution, it's also the approach that places passengers in least jeopardy. Translate the costs into the Liabilities of every (what's the TLA for piloting-direct-into-ground, again?) although there will be those because of weather and other conditions, not mental ones. Airlines Could do this. Will they? ... Can we Make Them? Evading this dilemma with Stats is the natural inclination of every Biz-major, ever with eyes on the biggest prize: more-for-Me. aka What, me worry over an event every 5 years? 10 years? (Same argument re cat rescue: why bother? when your piddling efforts can't alter millions of routinized executions, via percentages to 10 decimal places.) But there's still the $Ms of hardware Loss and $Bs of Cost/per-dead-body:--THE PR--and the families in ever expanding circles. What is that Worth to a Corporation ..such as those we know? (It's easy re the futility of cat rescue: THAT ONE gets to LIVE. And we humans get endorphins for realizing the fact and acting on it). I'd bet that Corp shareholders/(screw the self-electing BODs) would support, by stock-purchase: this rationale as humane for the afflicted pilot/humane for the saving of even ONE-more mental-caused crash. And for being refreshing amidst the Crass-majority of Corps. Let's test that theory: doing $Well by Doing Good (but not as Tom Lehrer satire.)
Post #400,635 by Another Scott 4/1/15 5:59:57 PM Reply	Well said. People do need alternatives rather than being kicked to the curb...
Post #400,433 by Another Scott 3/26/15 2:02:55 PM Reply	Eerie earlier crash. http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20131129-0 :-( (via beltane at Balloon-Juice.) Cheers, Scott.

Welcome to IWETHEY!