Germanwings A320 Crash

flazio

BBC reporting that 2 babies and 16 fifteen year old school kids were on the flight, helicopter landed and found no survivors.

lintdrummer

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

While unlikley, personally I don't see it as all that far fetched either. I mean would such a cyber attack be at least technically possible? Or failing a cyber attack, perhaps using some sort of directed energy, very powerful radar beam or whatever, to damage the avionics?

I'm no expert but if this was possible, the long and steady decent would in my mind point to the aircraft's systems being fed false data about its pitch or altitude or it software being doctored to produce this effect.

Do you even understand radar? Stop asking far fetched questions about systems you don't even understand.
To answer your question quickly : no.
Individual avionics computers will reject data unless it carries a specific identifier code. Cables carrying the data are shielded against external interference, and the aircraft itself is essentialy a Faraday cage.

kona

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

While unlikley, personally I don't see it as all that far fetched either. I mean would such a cyber attack be at least technically possible? Or failing a cyber attack, perhaps using some sort of directed energy, very powerful radar beam or whatever, to damage the avionics?

I'm no expert but if this was possible, the long and steady decent would in my mind point to the aircraft's systems being fed false data about its pitch or altitude or it software being doctored to produce this effect.

EDIT: As it turns out this is not an off the wall idea afterwards. Aviation expert Sally Leivesley suggested that Indonesian Airlines flight MH370 may have been the first victim of such a cyber attack.http://www.ibtimes.com/new-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-cyber-hijack-theory-emerges-after-vulnerabilities-found-inflight

Stop.

Calina

Tippex wrote: »

Apparently the largest piece of Debris is the size of a car.

Where did you hear that?

Most of what I have heard all morning on the French news suggests the plane is mostly together which supported the idea that there wasn't a mid air break up.

dzilla

J3sus why do the media have to be in Dusseldorf airport taking photos of distressed family members.

Calina

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

EDIT: As it turns out this is not an off the wall idea afterwards. Aviation expert Sally Leivesley suggested that Indonesian Airlines flight MH370 may have been the first victim of such a cyber attack.
http://www.ibtimes.com/new-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-cyber-hijack-theory-emerges-after-vulnerabilities-found-inflight

She is not an aviation expert.

Take a look at her bio here. http://www.newrisk.com/drsallyleivesley.html

EICVD

dzilla wrote: »

J3sus why do the media have to be in Dusseldorf airport taking photos of distressed family members.

Because the modern day media are leeches. My thoughts are with families & friends of the deceased who may RIP.

Cookiemunster

Calina wrote: »

Where did you hear that?

Most of what I have heard all morning on the French news suggests the plane is mostly together which supported the idea that there wasn't a mid air break up.

BreakingNews.ie ‏@breakingnewsie 8m8 minutes ago An official with the local council has said the crashed #A320 plane "is disintegrated. The largest debris is the size of a car."

sully2010

Inquitus wrote: »

Loss of crew conciousness something akin to the Greek flight a few years back?

Its a possibility but if that happened how did the aircraft go into what looks like a rapid controlled descent into terrain. The Helios flight flew on until it ran out of fuel. The fact they had 10 minutes to issue a mayday and didn't could suggest incapacitation. They may have de-pressurised at 38,000 ft, put in into descent and then passed out. Purely speculation, a lot of unanswered questions.

Xpro

For more accurate information rather then all the media speculations

http://avherald.com/h?article=483a5651&opt=0

Tugboats

EICVD wrote: »

Because the modern day media are leeches. My thoughts are with families & friends of the deceased who may RIP.

They are giving the people what they want. For the most part we're grief junkies. Twitter and facebook have exploded with rip messages, poems and we have the standard mourning thread on after hours

Chemical Byrne

Calina wrote: »

How would you see such a thing working out of interest?

Well on the previous link I posted Dr. Leivesley is suggesting that a small device such as a phone could be used to hack the planes software via the in flight entertainment system.

Someone also mentioned earlier that an A320 recently entered a dive. Perhaps a failed attack or experimentation by would be cyber terrorists?

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/was-missing-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh370-hijacked-using-a-mobile-phone/story-fnizu68q-1226856570824

And lintdrummer, I've done extensive reading on radar and directed energy weapons. The Pentagon has done a lot of research into the use of AESA radar derived technology as an actual weapon do physical damage. But I'm really talking about cyber attacks here rather than DE.

Are there any photographs or the crash site available yet?

tmq

[QUOTE= plane "is disintegrated. The largest debris is the size of a car."[/QUOTE]

The pictures on the IT website earlier (which I think were from L'Equipe tweets) showed much larger debris i.e. about 1/4 of the body intact.

kona

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

Well on the previous link I posted Dr. Leivesley is suggesting that a small device such as a phone could be used to hack the planes software via the in flight entertainment system.

Someone also mentioned earlier that an A320 recently entered a dive. Perhaps a failed attack or experimentation by would be cyber terrorists?

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/was-missing-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh370-hijacked-using-a-mobile-phone/story-fnizu68q-1226856570824

And lintdrummer, I've done extensive reading on radar and directed energy weapons. The Pentagon has done a lot of research into the use of AESA radar derived technology as an actual weapon do physical damage. But I'm really talking about cyber attacks here rather than DE.

Your embarrassing yourself.

galwayjohn89

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

Someone also mentioned earlier that an A320 recently entered a dive. Perhaps a failed attack or experimentation by would be cyber terrorists?

Thought that was caused by iced AOA sensors?

Tippex

Calina wrote: »

Where did you hear that?

Most of what I have heard all morning on the French news suggests the plane is mostly together which supported the idea that there wasn't a mid air break up.

Being reported by Sky News (not really reliable on the more technical aspects. but)

RoryMac

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

Well on the previous link I posted Dr. Leivesley is suggesting that a small device such as a phone could be used to hack the planes software via the in flight entertainment system.

Someone also mentioned earlier that an A320 recently entered a dive. Perhaps a failed attack or experimentation by would be cyber terrorists?

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/was-missing-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh370-hijacked-using-a-mobile-phone/story-fnizu68q-1226856570824

And lintdrummer, I've done extensive reading on radar and directed energy weapons. The Pentagon has done a lot of research into the use of AESA radar derived technology as an actual weapon do physical damage. But I'm really talking about cyber attacks here rather than DE.

I know nothing about planes but that's still enough to know there is no way the in-flight entertainment system could be used to access the flight controls of a plane.

eatmyshorts

unkel wrote: »

How come a plane form Barcelona to Dusseldorf is diverted over the Alps as standard? Maybe I'm showing my ignorance here, but that makes no sense to me at all. Over the Alps gives you 10000 - 15000ft less to play with in case something case wrong / fewer options for landing and terrible prospects for rescue operations. Apart from the fact that the distance is further, so takes longer and uses more fuel. And I can't imagine any of the line between Barcelona and Dusseldorf be particularly busy with air traffic. No where near what you would have over greater London / Ruhrgebiet / Netherlands / Paris etc.

Airspace structure.
Quite a lot of French airspace is restricted areas.
Flying in busy airspace almost never allows direct routings. You have to think of it in a 3 dimensional sense. Separation is required from all other routes and from other aircraft climbing, cruising and descending.
All of Europe is very busy with traffic, just have a look at FlightRadar 24 on any day.

Flying over the Alps is no issue at all. I regularly fly over the Himalayas, sometimes only clearing peaks by 4,000 or 5,000 ft at cruise altitude.

Tippex

http://www.airlive.net/2015/03/breaking-crash-of-a320-in-south-of.html

DubDani

According to the local rescue coordinator on site the plane is completely destroyed and broken in about a dozen decent sized pieces, that are scattered over about an Hektar (10000 sqm) in size. (taken from German News Sites)

L1011

Does anyone know if the cycle limit extension is just a paper exercise (as is normal) or required any inspections/modifications? This frame was fairly close to the original expected cycle limit, but not actually at it yet.

*Kol*

L1011 wrote: »

Does anyone know if the cycle limit extension is just a paper exercise (as is normal) or required any inspections/modifications? This frame was fairly close to the original expected cycle limit, but not actually at it yet.

What do you mean by cycle limit extension? How many FC were on the aircraft??

Chemical Byrne

RoryMac wrote: »

I know nothing about planes but that's still enough to know there is no way the in-flight entertainment system could be used to access the flight controls of a plane.

Well a number people, a security expert and former pilot and a senior security advisor to the Home Office, seem to think that such an occurrence is possible and have experimentally demonstrated the concept. I think both of them know a lot more than any of us and have access to knowledge that is not available on the surface internet.

kub

I am turning off sky news now they seem to suggest that the age of the plane has something to do with it, throwing up stats about the amount of flights it has had since new, the amount of passengers etc......guess work is wonderful.

lord lucan

Anymore conspiracy stuff about software hacks and like will be infracted and deleted, there's a conspiracy theory forum for that sort of thing, not here.

wretcheddomain

Clear image of the tail here.

NoelJ

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Ok, lets not loose the run of our selves here. A320's have not been 'freaking out' lately. One incident of AoA probes causing an issue, (they're not on the wings btw, and there's 3 of them for redundancy) for which an airworthiness directive was issued. 5,000fpm is hardly a 'dive', much less than what you would expect in an emergency descent for example. Why do you think a bit of the 'tail wing' fell off???

Lufthansa alone have reported it happening several times. It happened to Iberia out of Bilbao in 2001 too.

Tippex

kub wrote: »

I am turning off sky news now they seem to suggest that the age of the plane has something to do with it, throwing up stats about the amount of flights it has had since new, the amount of passengers etc......guess work is wonderful.

They are continually contradicting themselves as news becomes available. Earlier today they had said that they believe the aircraft to be relatively intact but as now is being reported the plane has broken up and is spread over an area of about 2k.

Calina

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

Well a number people, a security expert and former pilot and a senior security advisor to the Home Office, seem to think that such an occurrence is possible and have experimentally demonstrated the concept. I think both of them know a lot more than any of us and have access to knowledge that is not available on the surface internet.

I'd be interested in more details to be honest with you. In particularly, how they experimentally demonstrated the concept and on what plane.

Secondly, a lot of A320s used for short haul do not necessarily have individual passenger controllable inflight entertainment systems installed. I don't want to state for certain whether this plane did or did not but since it's common for short haul flights not to have them, it might be worth confirming that it did first.

I've just seen mod instruction: I don't require an answer for this tbh.
Apologies.

L1011

*Kol* wrote: »

What do you mean by cycle limit extension? How many FC were on the aircraft??

46,x00 (can't remember what the X is). 48,000 was the design life of the A320. Airbus have extended this to 60,000 with the "extended service goal" package, which could be as simple as another sheet of paper basically.

I doubt it's of any major importance, just saw that the cycles were high enough.