Germanwings Flight 9525 crashes in French Alps

520 posts in this topic

I apologise if you feel it was a personal attack, arundasi, I merely pointed out the hypocrisy of not posting the Daily Mail link.

 

The bigger question that this video raises which is purportedly of the last moments of the flight, ( I doubt its authenticity personally), is how it got into the hands of the press?

 

If TT really wants to show solidarity, condolence and sympathy with the victims and relatives I would suggest that a day of not posting on this thread would be a much greater demonstration of empathy and respect than speculation and hypothesising how the relatives would feel about this damn video? That is what I will be doing anyway.

7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

French police official Lieutenant Jean-Marc Menichini denied that investigators had found mobile phone footage at the crash site, telling CNN that the reports were “completely wrong” and “unwarranted”.

 

source

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

changing stuff just to placate people who dont undersand risk is not a good thing.

 

There are very few people who understand risk, and very many who don't.

However, we live in a democracy, where everyone gets an equal vote. That means that there are very few votes cast by people who understand risk, and very many cast by people who don't.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The bigger question that this video raises which is purportedly of the last moments of the flight, ( I doubt its authenticity personally), is how it got into the hands of the press?

 

"The cloud" can be a source of the video...

 

I share many of my "Lilly" pics and videos on the cloud so that my mum can see them without me having to compress them and mail them etc etc..

 

That could be where the vid was leaked from..

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After seen something as dramatic as an avoidable plane crash people want to see some measures taken to reduce the risk. Most people do not understand that the probability for that hapenning is still zero, even if it happened once. So they won't be happy until something is done in order to reduce the risk, even if the risk was already zero.

 

P.S., In a democracy the risk of people who do not understand risk being heard is higher than people who understand it.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The risk is actually less than it was before the crash, with the pool of possible suicidal pilots being reduced by one. Try explaining that in the Bild.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really, because you now have to take into consideration the copycat effect plus more pilots have now been made aware that this was even a viable option in the first place. Not only that the job of an airline pilot has been greatly reduced in stature meaning less people with intelligence will want to take this up as a vocation which will mean lowering the average IQ of pilots meaning even the ones that don't want to crash will do so anyway inadvertently.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So they won't be happy until something is done in order to reduce the risk, even if the risk was already zero.

 

They will even be happy (-ier) if the "something" actually increases the risk of an event (or has a negative effect on the non-participants as with the ZÜP).

 

 

P.S., In a democracy the risk of people who do not understand risk being heard is higher than people who understand it.

 

Thats pretty certain.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

more pilots have now been made aware that this was even a viable option in the first place.

Hardly like this is the first murder/suicide commercial pilot - there have been at least 5 and possibly 7+ of these in the past, and some attempted ones as well.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There are very few people who understand risk, and very many who don't.

However, we live in a democracy, where everyone gets an equal vote. That means that there are very few votes cast by people who understand risk, and very many cast by people who don't.

 

What you say is true, however at least on TT the majority of red/green and comments suggest that actually (yes, I know we are not representative) most people seem to be fairly rational about flight safety and do not want arbitrary change.

 

Maybe Im overestimating people, but Id like to think that there are lots of level headed people and that in any case education is a better solution than pandering.

 

I myself am not against new or improved rules as such, maybe the 2 in the cockpit rule is good for example. But I want decisions made based on facts and statistics not kneejerk bull and they should not be rushed through without proper thought.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breaking News: Blackbox found...

 

http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/germanwings-absturz-zweite-blackbox-in-den-alpen-gefunden-a-1026622.html

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came across a German news video which showed a few seconds clip pupporting to be taken from inside the passenger cabin of the flight. I cant remember the URL, but the video was embedded from the Liveleaks site as it had the Liveleaks logo on it.

 

Today something occurred to me. Some weeks back I was looking at some videos of flight turbulence. In particular, this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3rTVFB5r8E. The sounds seem almost identical to me to the pupported video of the Germanwings clip. They would probably have to be properly compared and audio analyzed but I have a feeling it indicates a fake.

 

Why anyone would want to create a video like that is just sick. I think the Liveleaks video and any others claiming to be from the crash should be removed, regardless of whether it is genuine or not.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So here is my 10 Euros on the subject of the video:

 

1) What date was yesterday? April 1st

 

2) When AF447 crashed in the Atlantic a few years ago shortly after the first wreckage & a few bodies were recovered from

the surface (most were 4000 m deep) a video appeared - claiming to be from within the plane. Indeed EB posted it on TT

claiming it was sent to him (now why would anyone do that) & fell for the hoax - was proved to have been from elsewhere.

 

3) Notice its gone very quiet on the video-front? Web.de & others pasted the story initially & soon removed again.

If Bild & co really had a genuine video they would be kicking up a stink, demanding to be put in charge of investigations.

 

4) This "video" is claimed to originate within the team of investigators. I very highly doubt that one.

The only microscopic doubt here is that there will certainly be a number of cheque-book journalists running around & temptation...

 

5) Why should someone do such a video? Pretty obvious: money, trying to miscredit the investigators, pouring salt into the wound...

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Bild and Paris Match were the only media outlets that saw it. Here is the English Bild link:

http://www.bild.de/news/ausland/flug-4u9525/absturz-englische-version-40379746.bild.html

 

 

 

So here is my 10 Euros on the subject of the video:

 

1) What date was yesterday? April 1st

 

2) When AF447 crashed in the Atlantic a few years ago shortly after the first wreckage & a few bodies were recovered from

the surface (most were 4000 m deep) a video appeared - claiming to be from within the plane. Indeed EB posted it on TT

claiming it was sent to him (now why would anyone do that) & fell for the hoax - was proved to have been from elsewhere.

 

3) Notice its gone very quiet on the video-front? Web.de & others pasted the story initially & soon removed again.

If Bild & co really had a genuine video they would be kicking up a stink, demanding to be put in charge of investigations.

 

4) This "video" is claimed to originate within the team of investigators. I very highly doubt that one.

The only microscopic doubt here is that there will certainly be a number of cheque-book journalists running around & temptation...

 

5) Why should someone do such a video? Pretty obvious: money, trying to miscredit the investigators, pouring salt into the wound...

 

Thats also what I think. It seems highly unlikely that a mobile phone sim could be found and then passed to journalists so quickly, and by recovery workers?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So here is my 10 Euros on the subject of the video:

 

4) This "video" is claimed to originate within the team of investigators. I very highly doubt that one.

The only microscopic doubt here is that there will certainly be a number of cheque-book journalists running around & temptation...

 

5) Why should someone do such a video? Pretty obvious: money, trying to miscredit the investigators, pouring salt into the wound...

 

You hit the nail on the head.

Journalism, if you can really even call it that these days has achieved the absolute nadir in the frantic pursuit of sensationalism.

Here so eloquently expressed of all places in a NYT article:

 

 

Journalism ethics experts in the United States said Wednesday that the video story synthesized what they described as a confluence of disturbing trends shaping the news business in the 24/7 Internet age: reckless urgency, absence of healthy skepticism and disregard for the consequences to credibility if a story is wrong.

http://www.nytimes.c...ments.html?_r=0

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Transponder data returned from this flight included information about autopilot settings. That data appeared to show that at the time the co-pilot was alone in the cockpit the autopilot setting was changed so the plane would descend to ~100 feet.

 

Now that the flight data recorder has been found, the French BEA has confirmed it: (Original French) (English via Google translate).

The only person in the cockpit set the aircraft to fly at 100 feet AND on several occasions changed settings to increase the speed of descent - so he wasn't incapacitated.

 

He knew the route and the area. IIRC satellite images showed clear visibility so he could see the mountains ahead. He selected a height well below the mountains AND continued to make adjustments during the descent to make the crash happen more quickly. He would have known how many people were sitting a few metres behind him.

 

That's not suicide - it is murder.

9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's not suicide - it is murder.

Listen to what is said in the first part, 18:45 till 19:10...

 

 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Germanwings kamikaze pilot, Stephen Fry and Robbie Williams all seem to have one common denominator - they all give me the creeps.

 

One problem at the moment is that these pysochometric tests can be worked around (read link below) with anyone that has half a brain.

 

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/53423

 

What we need is a better method of testing to eliminate the fruitcakes.

 

I apologize, the Germanwings pilot was not a kamikaze. This would be an insult to kamikaze pilots. I sincerely hope he rots in hell.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears that analysis of the flight data recording shows that the copilot practised the maneuver, to crash the plane, on the outward flight from Düsseldorf.

 

From the BBC

 

The full report is due out later today...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BEA preliminary report has been published English PDF. Page 28 has the findings including:

 

"The selected altitude changed from 38,000 ft to 100 ft while the co-pilot was alone in the cockpit. The aeroplane then started a continuous and controlled descent on autopilot.

Several altitude selections towards 100 ft were recorded during descent on the flight that preceded the accident flight, while the co-pilot was alone in the cockpit."

 

Earlier, (p8) there's a note in the report stating 100ft "is the minimum value that it is possible to select on A320." - He actually turned the altitude knob down to the lowest possible value.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now