German-Wings Copilot "one of us"?

At 17:44 30 March 2015, Mike Schumann wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 9:30:05 AM UTC-4, Don Johnstone wrote:
At 12:48 30 March 2015, Mike Schumann wrote:

Since 9/11 the threat has changed. There hasn't been a successful
Hijackin=
g yet (except by pilots). Every attempt has been blocked by an
immediate
r=
esponse by the crew and passengers to subdue to bad guy(s). The need
for
s=
ecure cockpit doors has passed.

No it has not. Unauthorised access to the flight deck is still the
greater
threat, still is potentially more harmful and more likely than any of
the
other problems which occur in flight. The current incident is rare,
very
rare as is a mechanical failure or mistake by the flight crew resulting
in
a crash. The only reason there are fewer hi-jackings is that it has
been
made too difficult.

There have been 3 fatal airline accidents in the last 17 months that
appear
to be the result of pilot suicides. How many hijackings have there been?

Is your memory really that short?

On Mon, 30 Mar 2015 17:05:44 +0000, Benedict Smith wrote:

At 16:47 30 March 2015, Martin Gregorie wrote:
I've not seen anything to show this is anything but some reporter's
imagination.

Have a look at the flightradar 24 forum,
http://forum.flightradar24.com/threa...lysed-the-raw-
data-from-the-transponder-of-4U9525-and-found-some-more-data They detail
how this was found and have also released the raw data so anyone can
check it.
Ben.

Thanks for that.

I didn't know that Mode S would carry that sort of data: presumably its
there as a way to spot a fat-fingered an altitude change setting.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 12:56:07 PM UTC-7, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Mon, 30 Mar 2015 17:05:44 +0000, Benedict Smith wrote:

At 16:47 30 March 2015, Martin Gregorie wrote:
I've not seen anything to show this is anything but some reporter's
imagination.

Have a look at the flightradar 24 forum,
http://forum.flightradar24.com/threa...lysed-the-raw-
data-from-the-transponder-of-4U9525-and-found-some-more-data They detail
how this was found and have also released the raw data so anyone can
check it.
Ben.

Thanks for that.

I didn't know that Mode S would carry that sort of data: presumably its
there as a way to spot a fat-fingered an altitude change setting.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

That Airbus had CPDLC and ADS. That gives the European controlers the ability to "See" exactly what is set in the FMC and I believe the MCP. And I seriously doubt it was Fat-fingered to descend to that low altitude. I am fairly certain that the conclusion of the investigators is what happened.

On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 12:56:07 PM UTC-7, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Mon, 30 Mar 2015 17:05:44 +0000, Benedict Smith wrote:

At 16:47 30 March 2015, Martin Gregorie wrote:
I've not seen anything to show this is anything but some reporter's
imagination.

Have a look at the flightradar 24 forum,
http://forum.flightradar24.com/threa...lysed-the-raw-
data-from-the-transponder-of-4U9525-and-found-some-more-data They detail
how this was found and have also released the raw data so anyone can
check it.
Ben.

Thanks for that.

I didn't know that Mode S would carry that sort of data: presumably its
there as a way to spot a fat-fingered an altitude change setting.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

/*acronym alert */

Mode-S in a sufficiently configured aircraft will reply to UF20 (uplink format 20) request for different BDS (Binary Data Store) register contents, like in this case a BDS register containing vertical intent (aka A/P altitude select) data. You will only see those replies from the aircraft when the ground based Mode-S interrogator asks for it, typically as part of a Mode-S EHS (Enhanced Surveillance) facility. EHS like this is is used in many locations in Europe, Unfortunately not used in the USA.

Mode S can potentially transmit a lot of detail about a suitably configured aircraft and it's operation. Another example is that Mode-S is used as part of TCAS-II to coordinate TCAS-II resolution advisories between two TCAS-II equipped aircraft (so for example both don't get told to climb into each other). Those Mode-S broadcasts can be monitored from the ground and controllers (at least in principle) alerted to an aircraft's TCAS-II system issuing a RAs.

Even Mode-S transponders used in gliders, like the Trig TT-21 and TT-22 are Level 2 transponders and so will can reply to UF20 requests, but the Vertical Intent register won't contain data...

The data that ADS-B actually transmits also comes from (different) BDS registers (containing just basic aircraft specs, pressure altitude and GPS data), but is relatively limited and certainly does not include the Vertical Intent data.

A good article is at http://defenseelectronicsmag.com/sit.../512RFDSF3.pdf

Posted by Tony Clark : Bipolar UK glider pilot (now ex pilot)

Re : u.r.a.s post 28th March

Title :- Germanwings compared to my BGA case.

Thanks for your comments Jonathon May (post 34) and Don Johnstone (post
33).

Not very correct in detail, Jonathon, but you did absorb one of the basic
concepts . . that I was bitter at the time of being denied passenger
clearance by the BGA medic, after the club CFI had cleared me 'technically'
. . but I now view this (over a decade later) as a generous judgement by Dr
Peter Saunby (the BGA Medical Advisor) since he was enlightened enough to
allow me to continue single-seat flying, albeit only from one nominated UK
club site only.

It was very unfortunate that I later 'wrote off' our jointly owned Vega
syndicate sailplane during a badly judged outlanding, indirectly caused by
my bipolar condition (see my u.r.a.s post re details) . . but this could
obviously have been 'maybe' taking my granddaughter for an ASK21 flight . .
Peter Saundby was proved correct.

However, the main point of my post was amazement that the German commercial
pilot was cleared to fly, not one passenger, as in my case, but thousands
of passengers, after 18 months of 'depression' in 2009.

May I urge r.a.s contributors to read Dr Peter Saundby's response to my
initial post . . his explanation of the German medical confidentiality laws
are both incredulous and frighening.

At that time (over a decade ago) Don Johnstone and I spoke privately by
email, of matters 'bipolar', and he was very supportive, knowing as he
does, much more about the bipolar condition than 99% of the population.

NOW RESUBMITTED TO INCLUDE THE WHOLE OF MY MESSAGE :-

Posted by Tony Clark : Bipolar UK glider pilot (now ex pilot)

Re : u.r.a.s post 28th March

Title :- Germanwings compared to my BGA case.

Thanks for your comments Jonathon May (post 34) and Don Johnstone (post
33).

Not very correct in detail, Jonathon, but you did absorb one of the basic
concepts . . that I was bitter at the time of being denied passenger
clearance by the BGA medic, after the club CFI had cleared me 'technically'
. . but I now view this (over a decade later) as a generous judgement by Dr
Peter Saunby (the BGA Medical Advisor) since he was enlightened enough to
allow me to continue single-seat flying, albeit only from one nominated UK
club site only.

It was very unfortunate that I later 'wrote off' our jointly owned Vega
syndicate sailplane during a badly judged outlanding, indirectly caused by
my bipolar condition (see my u.r.a.s post re details) . . but this could
obviously have been 'maybe' taking my granddaughter for an ASK21 flight . .
Peter Saundby was proved correct.

However, the main point of my post was amazement that the German commercial
pilot was cleared to fly, not one passenger, as in my case, but thousands
of passengers, after 18 months of 'depression' in 2009.

May I urge r.a.s contributors to read Dr Peter Saundby's response to my
initial post . . his explanation of the German medical confidentiality laws
are both incredulous and frighening.

At that time (over a decade ago) Don Johnstone and I spoke privately by
email, of matters 'bipolar', and he was very supportive, knowing as he
does, much more about the bipolar condition than 99% of the population.

On Tuesday, March 31, 2015 at 5:48:37 AM UTC+13, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Mon, 30 Mar 2015 07:51:26 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

There have been half a dozen crashes in the last 15 years cause by
pilots going rogue. Just a year ago there was (most likely) MH370.

I can only think of one very probable (German Wings[*]) and one possible
(MH370). Can you give references for the rest?

You can easily google a number of articles. Here's one from before MH370

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



[*] AFAIK the only evidence so far is from the cockpit voice recorder,
reporting that nothing was said inside the cockpit during the descent or
that terrain proximity warnings were triggered. So at present, I'm not
inclined to accept that as more than very probable cause until data from
the hardware monitoring black box(es) confirm intentional control use and/
or that the terrain proximity warning was disarmed. One report had words
to the effect that 'the autopilot was reset from 38,000 ft to 100 ft' but
I've not seen anything to show this is anything but some reporter's
imagination.

I've previous reported here that this was shown by Mode S data automatically received and stored (as they do for every flight in the world within range) by the FlightRadar24.com web site. Are you suggesting that FlightRadar24 have falsified the data for some reason?

At 17:44 30 March 2015, Mike Schumann wrote:


There have been 3 fatal airline accidents in the last 17 months that
appear
to be the result of pilot suicides. How many hijackings have there been?

There is no evidence as yet to prove, beyond reasonable doubt that the
above statement is at all true.
In the case of MH370 there is very little evidence to support any cause.
The fact that the aircraft appeared to continue at altitude, in the wrong
direction for a long time would seem to indicate that the crew was
incapacitated or dead. The most likely cause of that would have to be lack
of Oxygen. The circumstances would also tend to show that the passengers
suffered the same fate as the crew. There is little or no evidence that the
cause of the disappearance was a deliberate act.
The same applies to the current case. There is evidence to show that the
co-pilot did some very strange things, took actions which were unexpected.
There is no evidence to show that he did this "deliberately". We are in a
position where we think we know but really we do not.
We do however know that terrorists gained access to the cockpits of
airliners and deliberately crashed them into buildings, do you remember
that Mike? In those cases we know what happened because there is evidence
which confirms it.
As with all air accidents the conspiracy nuts and speculators are in
hyperdrive. Until we know for certain what occurred it would be stupid to
reverse an action which we know prevents a known threat. If it is shown
that pilot suicide is a greater threat than terrorists taking over an
aircraft then that will be the time to consider making changes.

At 09:33 31 March 2015, Don Johnstone wrote:
At 17:44 30 March 2015, Mike Schumann wrote:


There have been 3 fatal airline accidents in the last 17 months tha
appear
to be the result of pilot suicides. How many hijackings have there
been?

There is no evidence as yet to prove, beyond reasonable doubt that
th
above statement is at all true.
In the case of MH370 there is very little evidence to support any
cause
The fact that the aircraft appeared to continue at altitude, in the
wron
direction for a long time would seem to indicate that the crew wa
incapacitated or dead. The most likely cause of that would have to
be lac
of Oxygen. The circumstances would also tend to show that the
passenger
suffered the same fate as the crew. There is little or no evidence
that th
cause of the disappearance was a deliberate act.
The same applies to the current case. There is evidence to show
that th
co-pilot did some very strange things, took actions which were
unexpected
There is no evidence to show that he did this "deliberately". We are
in
position where we think we know but really we do not.
We do however know that terrorists gained access to the cockpits o
airliners and deliberately crashed them into buildings, do you
remembe
that Mike? In those cases we know what happened because there is
evidenc
which confirms it.
As with all air accidents the conspiracy nuts and speculators are i
hyperdrive. Until we know for certain what occurred it would be
stupid t
reverse an action which we know prevents a known threat. If it is
show
that pilot suicide is a greater threat than terrorists taking over a
aircraft then that will be the time to consider making changes.

Are you suggesting that the Malaysian and German investigators are
conspiracy nuts, Don?

At 10:11 31 March 2015, John Galloway wrote:
At 09:33 31 March 2015, Don Johnstone wrote:
At 17:44 30 March 2015, Mike Schumann wrote:


There have been 3 fatal airline accidents in the last 17 months tha
appear
to be the result of pilot suicides. How many hijackings have there
been?

There is no evidence as yet to prove, beyond reasonable doubt that
th
above statement is at all true.
In the case of MH370 there is very little evidence to support any
cause
The fact that the aircraft appeared to continue at altitude, in the
wron
direction for a long time would seem to indicate that the crew wa
incapacitated or dead. The most likely cause of that would have to
be lac
of Oxygen. The circumstances would also tend to show that the
passenger
suffered the same fate as the crew. There is little or no evidence
that th
cause of the disappearance was a deliberate act.
The same applies to the current case. There is evidence to show
that th
co-pilot did some very strange things, took actions which were
unexpected
There is no evidence to show that he did this "deliberately". We are
in
position where we think we know but really we do not.
We do however know that terrorists gained access to the cockpits o
airliners and deliberately crashed them into buildings, do you
remembe
that Mike? In those cases we know what happened because there is
evidenc
which confirms it.
As with all air accidents the conspiracy nuts and speculators are i
hyperdrive. Until we know for certain what occurred it would be
stupid t
reverse an action which we know prevents a known threat. If it is
show
that pilot suicide is a greater threat than terrorists taking over a
aircraft then that will be the time to consider making changes.

Are you suggesting that the Malaysian and German investigators are
conspiracy nuts, Don?

Absolutely not John, in fact the contrary. They know more than us. All we
have are a lot of "facts" which may or may not have been invented by the
media. The investigators have released some "facts" but no conclusions. The
"facts" that we have may be related or not, even if they exist, but even if
they are indeed facts they are not sufficient to support any definite
conclusion. As far as I am aware the investigators in both cases have not
reached any conclusion. The media have, but their priority is increasing
their profits, not ascertaining the truth. The conclusions being bandied
about at present are formulated by journalists who are well known for not
letting the truth get in the way of a good story, which feeds the
conspiracy nuts and speculators, which gives the journalists more to write
about, which feeds ............ ad nauseum.