rygD
Nihilistic Mystic
Gruntfuggly, many of those points, with changes appropriate to the topic, are true of all high profile news stories. This is a major reason why I don't follow the news.
Germanwings flight 9525
- Thread starter Hồng Thất Công
- Start date
ekianjo
Hardcore Member
What's so strange to "walk to your death" if you are determined ? Maybe he wanted to enjoy the view as long as possible.
All seem to indicate that he was preventing the other pilot from entering (locking the door himself), not answering the radio communications, and making the plane go down on his own volition. So if you have a better explanation, feel free to share !
elw3
ƐʍlƎ
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2010
- Messages
- 1,859
That line gave me the police raiding my rooms as terror prevention. No kidding.
Oh yea and about that locked "anti terror safety" doors: Those damn terrorists can now even kill without even existing. Thats a new level of terrorism! Quick, we need more anti terror stuff!
Last edited by a moderator:
Gruntfuggly
Mostly Harmless
I don't have a better explanation. My point is that it is unusually early to be releasing information as to the cause of the crash. It just doesn't look like suicide to me. It's been reported that the pilot tried to break the door down - how can that be deduced from the (damaged) voice recorder?
ekianjo
Hardcore Member
Exactly. When a plane goes down in perfect weather conditions and no apparent mechanical failure, you dont want the fear of terrorism to spread in case you already know it was something else. Airlines have all to lose if people become scared of flying.
ekianjo
Hardcore Member
When you have the black boxes it does not take that long to get to the root cause. Look at AF rio-paris. They had no clear idea what brought the plane down in the first place (apart from the pitot issue) and once they were able to recover the boxes it became clear within days that it a human error who brought the plane down.
Here the black boxes (at least 1) are almost readily available.
Neelix
Insecticidal Maniac
I'm with Gruntfuggly on this one. From what I can tell the current theory and all information released so far seem to have been put forward by the prosecutors, rather than the BEA. The BEA doesn't seem to have publicly released any findings yet at all. (see here)
I find myself with questions I have no way to answer based on the information that I've seen and heard so far. Do they know for certain that the co-pilot was actually conscious or could he have lost consciousness and slumped against the altitude down button? Is it certain the door lock was engaged after the pilot left the cockpit, or could the lock have been engaged all along? (it was after all an electronic lock) Could the pilot have accidentally set the lock when leaving the cockpit?
I think I'll reserve judgement until the BEA publishes it's report.
- Neelix
I find myself with questions I have no way to answer based on the information that I've seen and heard so far. Do they know for certain that the co-pilot was actually conscious or could he have lost consciousness and slumped against the altitude down button? Is it certain the door lock was engaged after the pilot left the cockpit, or could the lock have been engaged all along? (it was after all an electronic lock) Could the pilot have accidentally set the lock when leaving the cockpit?
I think I'll reserve judgement until the BEA publishes it's report.
- Neelix
Asmo
Advanced Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2008
- Messages
- 2,279
The voice recorder apparently caught the sounds of the pilot trying to re-enter the cockpit, first via the intercom, then by knocking on the door and identifying himself repeatedly, with increasing intensity. It also recorded the passenger's screams as they approached the mountains.
The rate of descent was controlled by autopilot, Lubitz appears to have set an altitude and left it to take them down, rather than taking it down manually. It would be almost impossible to do that accidentally - once enabled, it's then a dial rotated to the desired altitude and pulled out to activate.
It's being reported that he had taken a break from flight training because of a 'major depressive episode' -
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/03/27/uk-france-crash-co-pilot-idUKKBN0MN0K320150327
The rate of descent was controlled by autopilot, Lubitz appears to have set an altitude and left it to take them down, rather than taking it down manually. It would be almost impossible to do that accidentally - once enabled, it's then a dial rotated to the desired altitude and pulled out to activate.
It's being reported that he had taken a break from flight training because of a 'major depressive episode' -
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/03/27/uk-france-crash-co-pilot-idUKKBN0MN0K320150327
Last edited by a moderator:
ekianjo
Hardcore Member
You should really read all info available before having a fixed opinion.
Neelix
Insecticidal Maniac
How does having questions and reserving judgement constitute a fixed opinion?
- Neelix
Asmo
Advanced Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2008
- Messages
- 2,279
Hồng Thất Công
Đả Cẩu Bổng Pháp
It's safer to rely on robots to fly the airplanes these days...
Gruntfuggly
Mostly Harmless
So you think it's better to generate wild speculation and make stuff up? :blink:
rygD
Nihilistic Mystic
These are almost exactly what I was thinking. There are so many possibilities. My guess for the suicide explanation is that someone wants a scapegoat, and due to what they know it is convenient to go with it. It seems unlikely to be only suicide, if it was the case. It will be pretty funny if the early decision is suicide and it turns out the pilot had a seizure or some other thing where his body was working against him in some way (I don't know if the person in the cockpit is the one Asmo's quote mentioned, however these are the kinds of things I thought of as soon as I heard "suicide").
I also dislike the "we need to tell them it isn't terrorism" bull shit. By constantly discussing terrorism about every little thing you keep it fresh in the mind of the people. Keep at it and they start to think that every bad thing must be terrorism. Why don't people blame a god, or aliens, or a government mind control program, like in the good old days? At this time I wouldn't be surprised if the responsibilty falls to gravity...
I do. Are there any areas along that route with a history of other unexplained incidents?
ekianjo
Hardcore Member
In light of the recent discoveries, I hope the nay-sayers (who were saying this pilot could not have committed suicide) are now going to revise their (wrong) opinion. 'Nuff said.
rygD
Nihilistic Mystic
That seems like a stupid position to take. Unless posts have been edited no one has said that here, so not sure who that is supposed to be about.
ekianjo
Hardcore Member
Last edited by a moderator:
Neelix
Insecticidal Maniac
You need to learn to read. Neither one of us said it couldn't have been pilot suicide.
Conclusions made before all the evidence is found or available are prone to error, and the media has a tendency to report early speculations as likely explanations, and then keep reporting them that way.
Have you never heard of the concept innocent until proven guilty? When it comes to placing blame I'd rather initially give people the benefit of the doubt only to later find out they were guilty, than tar and feather them only to later find out they were blameless.
- Neelix
Conclusions made before all the evidence is found or available are prone to error, and the media has a tendency to report early speculations as likely explanations, and then keep reporting them that way.
Have you never heard of the concept innocent until proven guilty? When it comes to placing blame I'd rather initially give people the benefit of the doubt only to later find out they were guilty, than tar and feather them only to later find out they were blameless.
- Neelix
ekianjo
Hardcore Member
Excuse me but you need to learn to read as well. Your comment was certainly more moderate but that one on the last page left no place for interpretation :
Basically he called BS on everything we heard on the following days of the crash.
Have you ever heard of the concept of probability ? When there's an alarming lack of supporting evidence that the pilot would NOT have crashed the plane by itself, using logic is not a very bad indicator. oh and by the way we have two black boxes now, so what evidence do you need on top of that? Let the justice decide whoever is guilty later, but at least we clearly know what happened here, let's not entertain any other alternative scenarii anymore.
Last edited by a moderator: