Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nor could he program in a delayed command to begin a landing pattern in, say, five minutes after leaving the cockpit.
Without any opinion on whether or not the Captain "could have" sedated the FO, and noting that the technology for realtime streaming of audio and video from the cabin doesn't currently exist (but is not outside our current level of technology to create), I want to correct you here. He most certainly COULD have programmed the plane to start a descent 5 minutes after leaving the cockpit. In fact, an entire flight, from takeoff to touchdown could be programmed even before the engines get turned on.
Will the FMS in the A320 command a descent without engagement from the pilot?
My airplane was old school, and while the FMS could calculate descents the aircraft would not begin a descent until the pilots told the autopilot to initiate descent.
Now it is true that flight plans are entered into the FMS before flight, which includes TOC (Top of Climb) and descent points via the filed arrival. Normally the instrument approach in use isn't programmed since the pilots are unsure what approach they'll receive until ATC gives them instructions. Either way, most flights on autopilot would terminate on some segment on the final approach a few miles away from the airport without additional input from the flight crew.
Will the FMS in the A320 command a descent without engagement from the pilot?
My airplane was old school, and while the FMS could calculate descents the aircraft would not begin a descent until the pilots told the autopilot to initiate descent.
Now it is true that flight plans are entered into the FMS before flight, which includes TOC (Top of Climb) and descent points via the filed arrival. Normally the instrument approach in use isn't programmed since the pilots are unsure what approach they'll receive until ATC gives them instructions. Either way, most flights on autopilot would terminate on some segment on the final approach a few miles away from the airport without additional input from the flight crew.
No you must either push or pull the alt knob after selecting a different altitude. It won't descend on its own like the Boeing products.
Best guess is he set 100' and pulled to give him an open descent command.
No you must either push or pull the alt knob after selecting a different altitude. It won't descend on its own like the Boeing products.
Best guess is he set 100' and pulled to give him an open descent command.
That would be the norm. But we have the flight from Bilbao to Munich, where the plane descend with Autopilot, but the pilots managed to get it under their control. If that happened in this case and the Copilot collapsed under the burden, he was actual sick, still not knowing what illness, this would be a possibility, but not reasonable. How you would feel as a pilot, going to toilet, coming back after 4-5 min, the plane descends, you cannot get back into the cockpit, no answer, you scream, take an ax, alarm is heard of grounding, passengers scream and you are helpless, can do nothing to avoid a crash, facing death, isn't that system insane?
Well, the "arms race" to defeat events like this has just moved up several notches. Hopefully, common sense will prevail over the dream of "fail safe".
Well, the "arms race" to defeat events like this has just moved up several notches. Hopefully, common sense will prevail over the dream of "fail safe".
Well...I'd say you're wrong and the common sense you invoke is neither that common nor ethically acceptable.
While relaxed attitudes about "statistically rare" events sound quite reasonable and psychologically well-adjusted, you forget that a "statistically rare" event can set in motion tons of copy cats if measures are not taken.
School/mass shootings used to be an incredibly rare statistical event.
Not anymore.
I prefer a well planned and well thought-out "arms race" to an "whatchagonna do" approach to the business of hanging hundreds of people up in the sky and moving them through the air at insane speeds. Also, I have a hunch that some people feel "statistically rare events" should be allowed to happen when "it's their time" simply because their twisted mind believes that these events will happen to "other people". Imagine your child in it. Then you will hopefully get a little less relaxed about it. Give it a try.
When you're in this kind of business, you simply CAN'T BE TOO CAREFUL.
People have become jaded about flying because it is so commonplace today.
That doesn't mean safety standards should be relaxed or gambles accepted as "part of life".
The "arms race" to the 100% infallible plane should continue because there is no human life that deserves to be taken out in this manner. It's just that simple.
Do nothing about this particular situation and watch the next copycat at it.
That is crazy low hours! Do you turn over the controls of your company assets and reputation to an employee w/ 2.5 weeks experience ? I will hope not!
I agree, he was not only written sick by the doctor, but should never be on a passenger plane with 144 passengers. He tried to get a license in USA, but got only for gliders and single airplanes I guess. Lufthansa says, he was 100 % fit to fly, but they forget that their rules are not 100 %, otherwise the crash would not happen.
I have a question, could the crash be avoided by remote control from the ground? Anyone knows?
Well...I'd say you're wrong and the common sense you invoke is neither that common nor ethically acceptable.
While relaxed attitudes about "statistically rare" events sound quite reasonable and psychologically well-adjusted, you forget that a "statistically rare" event can set in motion tons of copy cats if measures are not taken.
School/mass shootings used to be an incredibly rare statistical event.
Not anymore.
I prefer a well planned and well thought-out "arms race" to an "whatchagonna do" approach to the business of hanging hundreds of people up in the sky and moving them through the air at insane speeds. Also, I have a hunch that some people feel "statistically rare events" should be allowed to happen when "it's their time" simply because their twisted mind believes that these events will happen to "other people". Imagine your child in it. Then you will hopefully get a little less relaxed about it. Give it a try.
When you're in this kind of business, you simply CAN'T BE TOO CAREFUL.
People have become jaded about flying because it is so commonplace today.
That doesn't mean safety standards should be relaxed or gambles accepted as "part of life".
The "arms race" to the 100% infallible plane should continue because there is no human life that deserves to be taken out in this manner. It's just that simple.
Do nothing about this particular situation and watch the next copycat at it.
There are usually sensible, lower cost measures that can both further reduce the probability of this type of "accident" (if it is even known with any degree of confidence) and re-assure passengers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
