Germanwings A320 believed crashed
 

Unconfirmed reports that a Germanwings Airbus A320 has crashed in the French Alps enroute from Barcelona to Düsseldorf.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32030270

Stress that, at this stage, neither Germanwings nor Airbus are confirming a crash despite both being aware of the reports.

Seems the flight disappeared from flightradar24 at 6,800ft at 0939Z today (8.39pm AEDT).

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...h-live-5390012

Aircraft appears to be D-AIPX (MSN 147 & built in 1990).

Planespotters.net already have the aircraft as "written off".

http://www.planespotters.net/Product...ermanwings.php

Seems a little premature at this stage!?

I have to say, I also have issues with the tweet published by flightradar24... supposing the aircraft hasn't crashed and lands at DUS (or anywhere) safely. Is it okay to create panic based on information that essentially relies on antennas on people's homes? Shouldn't a website such as FR24 contact the authorities as its first action and leave it at that?

Unfortunately it's not looking good as French President Hollande is speaking to the media, so it looks confirmed.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-2...es-say/6345634

Update: BBC are saying a "mayday distress call was transmitted and debris has been found at 2500 m altitude in alps"

Condolences to the families of the passengers and crew.

from abc news

http://www.flightradar24.com/data/ai...-aipx/#5d42675

From Germanwings Facebook Page

UPDATE: We must unfortunately acknowledge that flight 4U9525 flight from BCN to DUS across the French Alps is killed in an accident. It is a plane of the type A320. There were 144 passengers and 6 crew members on board. Lufthansa and Germanwings have connected a telephone hotline: on the free phone number 0800 11 33 55 77 relatives of passengers can sign up and be looked after there. All employees of Germanwings and Lufthansa are in deep sympathy with their thoughts and prayers are with the families and friends of the passengers and crew members.

During an interview

Reps were unable to answer the press to what caused the flight to be delayed 5 hours from departure, 8 hours after the crash.

No distress call
 

There was no distress call, but reports this morning state that because the a/c descended from 38,000 to 6.000 feet in 8 minutes, French ATC issued the distress alert when the a/c disappeared off their radar at that altitude and could not be contacted. Oddly there was no radio communication from the a/c during that descent, suggesting that radio failed and/or that crew were incapacitated in some way.

Sadly two Australians are reported to have been on board.

Video from the crash site shows debris scattered over a large area, and a piece of fuselage with three windows, the aircraft registration and German flag, one of the only larger objects at the scene (and a small section of the rudder/tail).

Such sad news to have this confirmed. RIP to those onboard, and thoughts and prayers to those left behind. Two Australians and a group of school students...

Early days yet, but
 

Descent profile, lack of any distress call, age of aircraft, recency of servicing - sorry to speculate but looks to me like a major de-pressurisation event, followed by a planned rapid descent during the course of which the crew unexpectedly lost oxygen and became hypoxic, rendering them unable to pull out of the descent. :(

Seriously Philip, come on. Do you have to?

"Sadly two Australians are reported to have been on board."


Sadly there were 150 people on board:mad:

Latest news is speculating:

* de-pressurisation event (as mentioned previously)
* clogged pitot tubes causing uncontrolled descent ( http://avherald.com/h?article=47d74074)

The AoA Vanes are not pitot tubes. They are, of course, the AoA vanes. There was an Airbus OEB which came out a couple of months ago in regards to this problem, with required actions (memory items) in the event that it should occur. It places the aircraft into alternate law and enables the pilots to recover control of the aircraft.

Mick

The CVR was damaged in the crash, first images released by BEA France. The flight data recorder has not been located at this time.

Wow!
 

Given the forces these devices are built to resist (typically 3,400 Gs and 5,000 psi), those photos are a graphic illustration of the forces unleashed on impact. And the scratches suggest quite a bit of post-impact bouncing and scraping too. :eek:

this is the 3rd crash in recent times where something has gone wrong after aircraft reaches cruise level , normally the time co-pilot or pilot use the toilet and leave the cockpit , sounds to me like pilot or someone at the controls may have deliberately crashed plane , as may be the case for MH370 as was case for SilkAir Flight 185 , latest reports suggest a loud noise similar to someone trying to open cockpit door was heard on flight recorder , maybe pilot and co pilots need to carry keys to cockpit door , as well as having as regular mental health check ups !

The outer frame of the Flight Data Recorder has been found, but not the recorder itself.

Un-official - CDR suggests one pilot left the cockpit before the un-expected descent and was unable to get back in. There is the sound of gentle knocking on the cockpit door , then heavy knocking, but never any answer.

This is not directed to you but I personally think it would be wise not to speculate too much about the accident (there's a thing called Pprune) if people want too. People have lost loved ones (passengers and crew members) and speculating on what happened won't help those who are grieving from this accident.

I think we should wait until official media releases/reports come out so we can understand what really happened.

This subforum description says:

"Airline and airport business, strategy, service and network, inflight product, seasonal schedules, operations, regulatory and government policy, general industry news and happenings, discussion, comments and queries (wholly outside Australia and New Zealand)"

(emphasis is mine)

There is no difference speculating here or on pprune.

French Prosecutor, Bryce Robin, says the Captain was locked out of the cockpit and the Copilot flew the aircraft into terrain.

No more speculation:

Breaking News ABC Radio

From French Prosecutors "Co-pilot crashed the plane"

Barely plausible
 

It may be plausible but I'd like to understand why that might have been done - there doesn't appear to be any reason to get back at either Germany or Spain, there were no demands made, and if the intent was truly malicious why not fly the plane into the centre of a town - why in such a remote location? In other words, the 'reward' for the suicide mission that is being described is not discernible, making it quite unlikely to me ... Having said that, the French prosecutor is quite adamant that 28 year old German co-pilot Andreas Lubitz deliberately locked the captain out of the cockpit, set the aircraft to descend, switched off TCAS, and ignored all calls from ATC. What an awful scenario if that turns out to be true.

Philip - why would there necessarily be demands or malice?

Might just be a guy who decided he had had enough - unfortunately his method took out 149 innocent lives as well. Mental instability can result in actions incomprehensible to those who are not suffering.

EasyJet and Virgin Atlantic have both announced they will implement a "Two crew in the cockpit at all times" policy, following the GermanWings tragedy.

As have Norwegian and Air Berlin.

The question now is, that even if there are two crew in the Cockpit at the same time, does the stand in person have the knowledge to recognise or overcome the nefarious actions of a rogue flight crew member??

Surely if someone needs the loo, they need the loo. If you only have two crew on a 6 hour leg, what happens? Or are they suggesting three members in the cockpit?

They would be suggesting a member of the cabin crew would take the seat of the 'absent' pilot until that pilot returned. I don't know the answer to Stephen B's question but imagine it would be a fairly senior member of the cabin crew who would have to be trained in flightdeck security.

While I take my hat off to the airlines for their quick response, in my opinion there is still a vulnerability in that there's nothing stopping a member of the flightdeck crew and a member of the cabin crew from conspiring with each other.

I recently returned from the States where I flew AA on several sectors, mostly in 1B. I noticed the aircrew had a procedure for flight crew 'nature/chat stops'

The flight crew would call the FA and advise one of them wanted to leave the cockpit.
The FA would call one of the other FA's, so now two together outside the cockpit area.
One of the FA's would get a meal trolley and form a barrier between the galley and main cabin.
FA would buz flight crew, ok to come out. FA stands at barrier.
One of the flight crew comes out and one of the FA's would move into the cockpit and close the door.
After the flight crew finished his break, he would make sure no one walking towards barrier and call the cockpit on the phone. FA stands at barrier.
Door would open, and FA walk out, keeping hold of the door and let flight crew in. IF the other flight crew guy wanted out at the same time, the barrier remains in place, FA would remain holding the door open until other flight crew came out.
A very sound procedure, as always two persons in the cockpit, and a barrier to stop any one passing the galley area. This way always a person to open the door for the other flight crew.

Isn't it time to reconsider a method off unlocking the cockpit door from outside the cockpit which is only known to flight/cabin crew.

Especially if the flight crew becomes incapacitated and the cabin crew needs to enter the cockpit.

Even if the Pilot/Cabin Crew enter the Security Code to open the A320 cockpit door (after the 30 seconds), the one pilot remaining in the cockpit just needs to hit the Lock switch, and the door will not open.

They could consider a system that allows the cockpit door to be opened remotely from the Airline's Operations centre, in the case of an emergency. Not sure how practical this is technically.

This is a hard balance between protecting against terrorism, and practical entry to the cockpit in the case of an emergency.

So if "when the elapsed time is over, with no action from the crew, the door goes into unlocking mode", then a not-so-incapacitated lone crew member could still override the codepad, which to me means the codepad in itself isn't enough. AA's procedure seems appropriate and from what I've seen, procedures in Australia aren't terribly different to that (although never seen the cart used as a barrier).

Sorry for duplicating parts of your post, Grahame... I didn't see your reply until after I replied.

I wondered about remote unlocking from the Ops Room as well. Like you, not sure how practical or expensive that would be, but seems very logical. I presume cabin crew have some means of contacting the Ops Room from the cabin in an emergency - sat phone, radio, something like that?

How about redesigning the flight deck area, and allow for a pilot only toilet accessible from the cockpit?

Bit of a stretch i know.. but if you can have space for crew rest areas maybe you can make space for crew toilets as well.

Thanks for the feedback.

This might be of interest:

http://news.aviation-safety.net/2013...pilot-suicide/

http://www.ibtimes.com/pilot-suicide...-plane-1519756

ACI covered some of these:

Silk Air (ACI s12e4)
Egypt Air (ACI S3e8)

Not included

* US Air Bae146, where the flight crew were shot and the aircraft was downed by a disgruntled employee (ACI s11e10)
* Fedex Dc-10 where the crew was attacked and survived. (ACI s3e4)

* MH370 (Maybe.......) (ACI s14e11)

If they are going to have a system to unlock the door remotely, they should just ditch the whole Black Box thing and send all the flight data back through the air to the Ops Centre. Seems a much better way of doing things than trying to find a black box after the thing has crashed. The technology is there right now, look towards what the military do. (i.e. Drones).