I can't shake the suspicion that there is something fishy about this explanation...The company is getting off the hook very easily by blaming everything on a suicide pilot and the media are lapping it up, no witnesses are alive that could confirm what happened. The company was at the risk of facing heavy legal charges, which could have possibly brought it down. Somehow the human bad apple story is diverting all the potential uncomfortable questions that might otherwise have been asked about the company. But then I'm an incurable conspiracy nut.
German Plane Crashes
- Thread starter SkyRider
- Start date
Looks like this deuchebag had psychiatric issues
"He underwent psychiatric treatment for 18 months and repeatedly failed to advance to higher levels in his pilot training because of depression, even though he had successfully completed the course."
..fuck why let him fly then????. http://ow.ly/KRpxE
"He underwent psychiatric treatment for 18 months and repeatedly failed to advance to higher levels in his pilot training because of depression, even though he had successfully completed the course."
..fuck why let him fly then????. http://ow.ly/KRpxE
It was a short haul flight... the pilot should have been able to hold it for 2 hours.
But... that won't stop a lunatic hell-bent on bringing a plane down... he would eventually figure out a way.
Even with this accident, airplane crashes are so rare that you stand a better chance of winning Lotto Max than getting killed in an airliner crash. You take a far greater risk of dying in a car crash. The acceptable risk of being being in a fatal airplane crash is 10 to the minus 7 probability per flight hour, and is due to human factors. That's one in 10 million. For Western airlines, the figure is many times less risky. The chances of a mechanical fault causing the destruction of an airliner is one in one billion per flight hour.
Putting a flight attendant in the flight deck also involves more risk because of a further unknown added to the equasion; who guards the guard? And who protects the guard from the presumably insane pilot? Besides, if one of the pilots is hell bent on killing himself and everybody on board, there is little a flight attendant can do. There are quite a few things a pilot can do to cause the destruction of an airliner, even at altitude. Remember, an airplane is not a car or a train on tracks.
Even in the safest of endeavours, residual risk can never be completely eliminated.
Putting a flight attendant in the flight deck also involves more risk because of a further unknown added to the equasion; who guards the guard? And who protects the guard from the presumably insane pilot? Besides, if one of the pilots is hell bent on killing himself and everybody on board, there is little a flight attendant can do. There are quite a few things a pilot can do to cause the destruction of an airliner, even at altitude. Remember, an airplane is not a car or a train on tracks.
Even in the safest of endeavours, residual risk can never be completely eliminated.
Just how would cameras prevent a pilot from committing suicide? He'd probably wave at it while auguring the plane in.
Last edited:
It would be better if pilots stayed in the cockpit until the flight lands.
No coming out at all except in grave circumstances.
If they need to take a crap use a bedpan or start constructing some kind of cockpit washroom in new planes.
I don't care about their dignity.
If a pilot feels like doing everybody in they are far less likely to do it if they have to bash someones brains in first with a blunt object.
No coming out at all except in grave circumstances.
If they need to take a crap use a bedpan or start constructing some kind of cockpit washroom in new planes.
I don't care about their dignity.
If a pilot feels like doing everybody in they are far less likely to do it if they have to bash someones brains in first with a blunt object.
I guess they'll have to put a slit in the door to slip through crew meals, just like they do for prisoners in solitary confinement.
A person who all of a sudden, with no warning wants to kill himself and everybody on board is psychotic. Psychotic persons have no qualms about bashing someone over the head with a blunt object, or the crash axe in the cockpit.
If you remove their dignity, they're not going to fly the airplanes anymore. Anybody can be bought though, and they are going to be replaced with new pilots with little experience who don't care about their dignity, and people are going to whine when the accident rate goes up.
What they need to do is borrow from the automotive industry and develop some sort of "smart key" technology for the cockpit.
My stupid car (which I hate) does have an "intelligent key" which I have to admit, is pretty intelligent. I can't lock my keys in the car if I tried. It knows that the key is inside the car and I'm not. (Weight sensor in the seat.) It also remembers all my seat settings, mirror settings, etc. It will allow me to open the door if I'm outside and just push on a little rubber pad, but it won't allow a passenger to open their door, even if I'm standing right beside the car.
Now, applying this to the aircraft industry couldn't be so difficult could it. Each pilot has a transponder. It maybe be even woven into their belts. If there are not 2 pilots in the cockpit, the door can't be locked. The plane would then lock the autopilot on until such time as both pilots were back in their seats and the system registered the weight in the seat (over 100 pounds) and both transponders.
Hell, you could even go bio-tech with retina recognition. The system has to have the transponder, the weight in the seat and retina recognition or else the auto pilot remains on.
A back up could be that the system could be disabled by ATC should there be a system screw up.
My stupid car (which I hate) does have an "intelligent key" which I have to admit, is pretty intelligent. I can't lock my keys in the car if I tried. It knows that the key is inside the car and I'm not. (Weight sensor in the seat.) It also remembers all my seat settings, mirror settings, etc. It will allow me to open the door if I'm outside and just push on a little rubber pad, but it won't allow a passenger to open their door, even if I'm standing right beside the car.
Now, applying this to the aircraft industry couldn't be so difficult could it. Each pilot has a transponder. It maybe be even woven into their belts. If there are not 2 pilots in the cockpit, the door can't be locked. The plane would then lock the autopilot on until such time as both pilots were back in their seats and the system registered the weight in the seat (over 100 pounds) and both transponders.
Hell, you could even go bio-tech with retina recognition. The system has to have the transponder, the weight in the seat and retina recognition or else the auto pilot remains on.
A back up could be that the system could be disabled by ATC should there be a system screw up.
There were warnings from his doctors but he kept them from Luftansha and everybody else. This will piss off the liberal lefties (who will argue it is a gross violation of his privacy rights) but doctors must be legally required to report bat crazy pilots like him to their employers/authorities.
BTW: Cameras in the cockpit will at least tell us what happened to MH370 so we don't waste time and money looking for the plane in all the wrong places. It might also bring some closure to the families of the victims.
Stoo
Fellated Member
Good plan until someone steals the pilot's "fob" or what have you.
I think that they will need to make it acceptable for a Doctor to report a problem to the pilot's employer... And airlines will need to be prevented from terminating a pilot who's unwell.
Mental illness is probably the most difficult security threat to deal with. Fortunately, it's not likely widespread...
It is now being reported that the guy's girlfriend of 7 years dumped him the day before:
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/0...irlfriend-day-before-crash-being-treated-for/
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/0...irlfriend-day-before-crash-being-treated-for/
Two people in the cockpit rule is a reasonable solution. A technology solution is enticing but requiring two people basically reduces the opportunity dramatically.
Allowing ATC to remote take over is interesting, but the prospect of hackers remote disabling plane security systems is equally "interesting".
Allowing ATC to remote take over is interesting, but the prospect of hackers remote disabling plane security systems is equally "interesting".
Similar threads
