Airbus A320 Down

So far I haven't been able to get a second source for that info. All the other news outlets are saying, "The NYT is reporting that sources...."
 
RotorAndWing said:
Yes. That accident and a few others brought more stringent rules, such as the AAiP (Aging Aircraft Inspection Program) and more emphasis on Aircraft Corrosion.

My point is people not familiar with transports get the idea that they are maintained like small GA aircraft, which is not the case.
Click to expand...

Part 91 small personal/coperate jets aren't even maintained as poorly as legacy GA piston.

Its a whole different world working on jets for a large 145 repair station.

135 ops is insane compared to GA piston.

I have no first hand 121 knowledge but imagine its pretty crazy too.
 
I've never had an issue with calling a spade a fukcing shovel.

Sometimes it is what it is.

deal
 
Fox News (the most trusted news source in America) is reporting the voice recorder revels one of the pilots was locked out of the cockpit and tried to break back into the cockpit. The pilot inside was disabled or deliberately crashed by the remaining crew member.
 
Last edited:
RotorAndWing said:
Prove anything I said is false. :nonod:

You came out of the other thread on Airbus looking like a fool, and now you're attempting that same feat here.

Play your silly games elsewhere.
Click to expand...

You're the only fool here with your childish games, son.

"I didn't say that" but you certainly implied it...in other words, you're a long way from honest.
 
Flying_Nun said:
Merde. One pilot locked out of cockpit.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/world/europe/germanwings-airbus-crash.html?_r=0&referrer=


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Well that was an interesting read. No structural problem at all sounds like. Interesting that the other pilot in the cockpit didn't make any sounds.

I fully expect History to be airing a video with the funky hair dude about him being beamed out of the cockpit and the plane was then redirected with a tractor beam.:rolleyes2:
 
Jimmy cooper said:
Strange.....I thought Germany was doing quite well under Merkle. Reports indicate that Germany is at the top of the heap in the EU and well under control. The airline used to train its people right here in the U.S. Is this still true?
Click to expand...

They're supporting half the bloody EU on it, and have the same problem we do with the "Trickle Down" economic model. They just haven't fallen as far as we have yet; they are however catching up.
 
dBrad said:
Sounding an awful lot like a suicide mission. I really hope that is not accurate.
Click to expand...

It's hard to think anything else with that CVR. I would think if it was a medical incapacitation the plane wouldn't have descended.
 
Henning, your post count keeps getting lowered. Lol
 
Just a naive question here... is it possible, at all, that a medical event on the pilot alone in the cockpit might have happened?

I'm not familiar at all with the way the Airbus controls work, but is there a way a potential slumping action could put the aircraft into that steady descent?

A couple things about the suicide theory bug me. Mainly, why the 8-10 minute descent? Why not just push it over and be done with it?
 
stratobee said:
So you're saying door physically blocked and intentional descent? But if one really would want to crash an airplane, then why go down at 3000ft/min? Push it over and get it done.
Click to expand...

To not scare the pax too bad?:dunno:
 
RotorAndWing said:
Who said he didn't? Again, as previously mentioned, there is an over ride.
Click to expand...

And a cockpit side override for the cabin side override, as you alluded to before--and we won't say more!

BUT... if there had been a depressurization, the door would have unlocked automatically--the control panel for the door security has two pressure transducers--it's part of the circuit that locks the door... they will unlock (and open towards the cockpit via differential pressure) if the cockpit had lost pressure. So it WASN'T THAT....
 
woodchucker said:
Just a naive question here... is it possible, at all, that a medical event on the pilot alone in the cockpit might have happened?
Click to expand...

Very doubtful.

woodchucker said:
I'm not familiar at all with the way the Airbus controls work, but is there a way a potential slumping action could put the aircraft into that steady descent?
Click to expand...

Not really.

woodchucker said:
A couple things about the suicide theory bug me. Mainly, why the 8-10 minute descent? Why not just push it over and be done with it?
Click to expand...


If the reports are true, the only person that could answer that is not around anymore.
 
Is there a publicly accessible record of who is piloting a commercial aircraft?
 
The bewilderment of the Lufthansa CEO regarding this incident is telling.

There has been no mention of any faults being revealed via ACARS. If you cut back to AF447 they were referenced very early in the piece.

The Lufthansa CEO would be apprised very early by his own people if any hint of mechanical problems was evident. But nothing so far except extreme bewilderment.

The aircraft was travelling at excessive speed; in excess of VMO. That is acceptable if you are on fire and heading for Nice or somewhere like that. This aircraft remained on track.

Travelling in excess of VMO in a A320 disconnects the AP and triggers the high speed protections which pitch the aircraft up. This aircraft did not pitch up. Which probably means it was being over-ridden by whomever was flying it.

That raises the possibility that the aircraft was hand flown all the way down.

That is ok if you are trying to get to an airport quickly but this aircraft stayed on track and headed directly for the Alps.

This aircraft did not capture any altitudes. Either the descent altitude was set below 6000 feet on the FCU; unlikely but it could have been done in error for the initial descent, or it was being hand flown.

Pulling open des on an emergency descent, provided a lower altitude is set in the FCU, in cruise engages the speed mode which would have captured the cruise mach, which then would have crossed-over to an IAS somewhere on descent. The autothrust commands IDLE and the selected speed is controlled by the elevators.
Therefore only way to achieve max speed is if someone sets it there. There is no reason to do so, and you certainly don't deliberately fly in excess of VMO. The high speed protections would be fighting against you.

Barring some sort of irrecoverable autoflight glitch, the foul play aspect will be increasingly looked at.
 
woodchucker said:
Just a naive question here... is it possible, at all, that a medical event on the pilot alone in the cockpit might have happened?

I'm not familiar at all with the way the Airbus controls work, but is there a way a potential slumping action could put the aircraft into that steady descent?

A couple things about the suicide theory bug me. Mainly, why the 8-10 minute descent? Why not just push it over and be done with it?
Click to expand...

FWIW, "I read on the internet" that the A-320 has a computer override overspeed protection that would result in that exact descent profile if someone were to intentionally try to crash the plane.
What say the experts?
 
Thinking about AF447, can you just pop a critical system breaker and send the system into full basic(I forgot the name) Law and get manual reversion with no protections? At that point it appears like you just point it down the path you want and let go and the plane will hold that right?
 
Henning said:
Thinking about AF447, can you just pop a critical system breaker and send the system into full basic(I forgot the name) Law and get manual reversion with no protections? At that point it appears like you just point it down the path you want and let go and the plane will hold that right?
Click to expand...

Quick answer? "No".

There is no single fail point that would drive the aircraft into direct law.
 
Is this data accurate?

A320 Displays and Panels
Cockpit Door Panel
Cockpit Door Switch
Frequency Displays and Transfer Button

UNLOCK
Unlocks door when raised above the detent and held in this position. Door must be pushed to open. UNLOCK is an override and reset selection of any previous action.

NORM
When NORM is selected, it allows the door to be locked when closed. It also allows the door to be opened after an emergency access code entry and 30 second delay in case of pilot incapacitation.

LOCK
Momentarily placing the cockpit door switch to LOCK illuminates the red cockpit access panel light, rejects keypad entry request, inhibits aural alerts, and prevents further access code entry for 20 minutes. The cockpit door switch returns to NORM when released, but remains in locked mode for 20 minutes or until UNLOCK is selected.
Click to expand...
 
Henning said:
Huh, then how did a single pitot failure send it into direct law? There's no way to mimic that?
Click to expand...

Wasn't AF447 dual pitot failure?
(And I think in that case it went into "alternate law".)
 
WoooPigSooie said:
The bewilderment of the Lufthansa CEO regarding this incident is telling.

There has been no mention of any faults being revealed via ACARS. If you cut back to AF447 they were referenced very early in the piece.

The Lufthansa CEO would be apprised very early by his own people if any hint of mechanical problems was evident. But nothing so far except extreme bewilderment.

The aircraft was travelling at excessive speed; in excess of VMO. That is acceptable if you are on fire and heading for Nice or somewhere like that. This aircraft remained on track.

Travelling in excess of VMO in a A320 disconnects the AP and triggers the high speed protections which pitch the aircraft up. This aircraft did not pitch up. Which probably means it was being over-ridden by whomever was flying it.

That raises the possibility that the aircraft was hand flown all the way down.

That is ok if you are trying to get to an airport quickly but this aircraft stayed on track and headed directly for the Alps.

This aircraft did not capture any altitudes. Either the descent altitude was set below 6000 feet on the FCU; unlikely but it could have been done in error for the initial descent, or it was being hand flown.

Pulling open des on an emergency descent, provided a lower altitude is set in the FCU, in cruise engages the speed mode which would have captured the cruise mach, which then would have crossed-over to an IAS somewhere on descent. The autothrust commands IDLE and the selected speed is controlled by the elevators.
Therefore only way to achieve max speed is if someone sets it there. There is no reason to do so, and you certainly don't deliberately fly in excess of VMO. The high speed protections would be fighting against you.

Barring some sort of irrecoverable autoflight glitch, the foul play aspect will be increasingly looked at.
Click to expand...


Well... That explains why all the "people in the know" early on said there was no explosion, and they knew it from the get go what happened... Maybe the plane had wifi and the pilot locked out emailed home office of his situation... ...
Can this get any more bizarre :dunno::dunno::confused:
 
Henning said:
Single, #2 which was on the active Autopilot.
Click to expand...

From the final AF447 report (emphasis added):
...temporary inconsistency between the measured speeds, likely as a result of the obstruction of the pitot tubes by ice crystals, causing autopilot disconnection and reconfiguration to alternate law;
Click to expand...
 
Seems easy to find how to open the door as crew guides are on the internet... but I guess someone with knowledge could kill that system.
 
RotorDude said:
From the final AF447 report (emphasis added):
Click to expand...

IIR the FDR tracks correctly it was only the #2 that failed, and only briefly. The other two maintained signal, but it's been a while since I went through all that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top