[canucklad]

Hi eselle
Simply put, yes.

All employers have a duty of care to their employee’s wellbeing and welfare. But when a results driven culture takes hold of a company, it becomes almost inevitable that mistakes it will begin to happen. Follow the paper trail and inevitably, like a spiders web it will ensnare someone who hasn’t thought through cause and effect in the wider orginazition..

And the airline industry is littered with tragedies that could have been avoided, if behind the desk corporate quarterbacks had not been so cavalier in their decision making. I’m not suggesting they make decisions , knowing that that those decisions will result in the dilution of safety levels.

But, I’m afraid, all too often a results driven decision, made in a boardroom and implemented with a gung ho attitude, diktat style fails to consider the bigger implications, and consequences of what seems like good business sense at the time.

And sadly, the aftermath of that decision might take years to materialize, as short cuts, and many seemingly minor practices are implemented to impress a middle manager , so they can in turn impress their boss and so on , and actually the original exec has probably left , for , in many cases another industry all together.

[esselle]

Hi Canucklad

Fully get the creep over time, but isn’t it a bit of a stretch to conclude that it is what may have caused a relative newcomer to an organisation to do something so wholly extreme?

[canucklad]

Apologies esselle, if I’ve implied blame in this instance.
Totally not my intention. And not knowing the full details of this tragedy would be improper of me or anyone else to speculate.

Having experienced, like most people, times in my life were I’ve felt like crawling under a blanket and hope things get better moments I’m definitely in the camp of people need to take responsibility for their life. ……Shamefully, I struggle with the concept of people blaming their actions on depression, so suicide baffles me even more. .

My comments were a general narrative on corporate governance.

[LuganoPirate]

I can sort of understand people committing suicide, especially where they are suffering from a terminal illness or are totally depressed. But why kill 149 innocent people with you? That’s the part that’s incomprehensible to me. I’m just hoping it wasn’t the case as flying is stressful enough (as much as I enjoy it) without the worry the pilot may choose to kill us all.

I’ve also been reading it’s possible to fly a plane remotely. Isn’t it time some device was fitted that would allow someone on the ground to immediately take over the plane, immobilizing the flight deck, so it could be bought safely down in the event of a terrorist trying to take the plane over, crew incapacitation or an event like this?

[LuganoPirate]

Locked doors could then become a thing of the past and cockpit visits could again be the norm.

[TimFitzgeraldTC]

Hi LP

I think the ability of someone on ground to override flight crew – whilst understandable after what has happened is actually even more worrying – someone in theory could then crash multiple planes?

I think like all things in life we have to accept that nothing is “fail safe” and there are always risks – however minimal in any situation we find ourselves in – and by creating extra layers of so called security we just create new potential problems.

I am taken aback by the French going to blame immediately the pilot (which may well be the cause of this crash). However in recent disasters we’ve had people telling us 1 thing – only to back track 24 hours later. So whilst I understand why they might want to say what they have said – I think it is actually too soon to state this as outright cause so quickly.

[Tom Otley]

I agree.

We’ve been inundated with theories, Pilot error, Suicide, Terrorism – mechanical error

http://www.imeche.org/news/institution/press-release/institution-responds-to-germanwings-4u-9525-air-disaster

but while there’s a natural tendency to jump to conclusions, it does feel as though this conclusion has been reached very quickly. It may be right, but if we ever know for sure it won’t be in the near future.

Meanwhile the debate will move to how airlines can monitor the mental health of their pilots, and the mechanics of what a pilot can and can’t do both with the aircraft and locking himself (or herself) into the cockpit.

[canucklad]

Agreed, Just listened to the 4.00pm news bulletin, and it does seem an incredible jump from hearing a pilot breathing to the assumption the French have arrived at.

[LuganoPirate]

So it could have been a heart attack?

Fully agree with you SiteAdmin, and I wonder if pilots are still subject to psychological testing as pilots at KLM were (are?).

[Ahmad]

I fully agree with Tim Fitzgerald on both counts. Creating further layers of security or allowing people on the ground to take control of planes is a sure recipe for disaster. And the less said about jumping to conclusions and announcing them prematurely due to intense media and other pressures the better.

[MartynSinclair]

1. would a high impact crash leave bodies in a recognisable state? – asked because Sky News reports collecting bodies off the mountain…

2. still no explanation about lack of fire on impact…

[MrMichael]

Martyn, given the forces I would sadly say it will be difficult to identify body parts without DNA. At the speeds reported of the impact and the pictures of the debris scene would suggest very few if any intact bodies will be found.

I think you will find there were isolated small fires, but again the impact spread the aircraft over a large area, including the carried fuel. It would only be those bit of fuel that came in to contact with extremely hot parts of the airframe such as the engine core that would have burned. You tend to only get the intense fires where the impact/wreckage zone is small.

I think the answer to this terrible tragedy must be at least two flight deck crew in the cockpit at all times. A step backwards to the sixties in many ways, but I see no alternative. The problem here is not so much what happened, or how often it happens, but public confidence.

[stevescoots]

In my teenage years I used to be part of a wartime aircraft recovery group. Many of the digs we did were high speed impacts with nothing bigger than 40cm could be found and where the ground still was full of fuel some 40+ years later. back in the early 80’s I witnessed an A10 warthog nosedive into the ground at Wainfleet range (the days when you could watch live fire practice) there was a huge flash but the fire was out within a couple of minutes. sadly the pilot did not survive as he was at about 200 feet half way through the roll when ejecting.

[MrMichael]

Just seen on BBC that a number of airlines are implementing a “2 on the flight deck at all times ” policy as soon as they can. Lufthansa have said they have no plans to change their policy. How bloody arrogant, how bloody insensitive. It is an LH plane that smashed in to the ground with a strong possibility that a 2 on the flight deck could have prevented it and some 150 innocents would be alive today. LH should hold their heads in shame, not perhaps for the terrible incident, but for the crass statement of not intending to change their policy. Whoever decided on that position when they are still collecting bodies should be fired. A no comment at this time would have sufficed.

[stevescoots]

BA had the right answer. cockpit staffing is a matter of security and we do not release details of security, or word to that effect

[Author]

Posts