Germanwings A320 Crash

pfurey101

The tail looks in tact - so thats one piece of speculation ruled out.

Actually it doesnt look like the Germanwings tail.

radar0976

Unconfirmed image of the crash site.

martinsvi

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.

Are there any photographs or the crash site available yet?

1) german wings is a low cost carrier with no in-flight entertainment systems on board
2) IFE and avionics bay are completely isolated systems. IFE's are usually installed by 3rd party companies (not Airbus or Boieng) and they are not even allowed to connect in to the same power line, not to mention data cables, by hacking IFE, worst thing one could do is change the movies or upload some naked pics
3) computers on AC in general are very robust, designed for certain puprose and nothing else.. worrying that someone with a smartphone can bring the plane down is pretty much like worrying I could empty your fridge just by getting access to your wifi

vicwatson

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.

That's what I was wondering earlier it the thread and I posted an image from Flightradar illustrating the route Barca - Dussel and then the route which I later found out is the planned route but it just looked a nonsensical route to take.

Tenger wrote: »

No need to be an ass. You posted a non related post in a an effort to cause shock. You were very quickly shown the non-relevance of that email post.
Keep to the topic on hand.

Ok Tenger, but it wasn't my intention to shock, rather my intention to illustrate coincidence, and perhaps a lack of common sense on behalf of AL - considering the ads first couple of destinations were Barcelona and Dusseldorf ( I accept your intervention nonethless and you wont hear any more from me on AL - apologies).

pfurey101

Tippex wrote: »

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.

Thats because they haven't a clue and dont care that they havent a clue. They are in the business of making up and not reporting news.

CathalDublin

radar0976 wrote: »

Unconfirmed image of the crash site.

Unconfirmed alright, where is the snow

pfurey101

Sorry Chemical - you may as well give it a rest now.

Did you not see the effort and expense that was put into making a B727 fly by remote? Granted it wasn't fly by wire.

Don't give "them" (whoever they are) any sort of credit relative to any sort of ability for hacking into any sort of a aircraft and then controlling it remotely. It is not possible. I think there are 157 computers of all sorts on a Fly By Wire aircraft with mulitple manufacturers.

Start a conspiracy thread.

*Kol*

L1011 wrote: »

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.

It's unlikely that they will have performed the extension package on an aircraft of that age. Most likely the aircraft would be retired in the near future. That extended service goal package involves a lot of heavy maintenance actions which would probably not be economical to perform on such an old aircraft.

ProfessorPlum

NoelJ wrote: »

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

No it didn't.

Links please.

pfurey101

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Clear image of the tail here.

Compare to the actual tail

Nforce

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Clear image of the tail here.

Doesn't have the Germanwings tail logo?

fits

Those images look extremely fake to me.

ProfessorPlum

Nforce wrote: »

Doesn't have the Germanwings tail logo?

Doesn't look like an airbus tail at all.

Tippex

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Clear image of the tail here.

Not of the crash site
http://www.tineye.com/search/e9dcfee06e83aab585b151c7d2ec8683a0eb4176/

Bob24

Pictures published by local newspapers and reported as Genuine by French media:

http://www.laprovence.com/article/actualites/3326948/crash-dun-airbus-a320-au-vernet-150-morts-premieres-images-des-secours.html

http://www.ledauphine.com/haute-provence/2015/03/24/un-a320-s-ecrase-dans-la-zone-de-barcelonnette

fits

Why do politicians feel the need to announce that they will travel to crash site? Wont they just get in the way and divert efforts away from the recovery? (not that theres much to be done for the poor souls who perished now). Seems ridiculous to me

DubDani

„France Info“ as well as „La Provence“ are reporting that there might be a survivor, according to the rescue coordinator General David Galtier.

Peppa Pig

fits wrote: »

Those images look extremely fake to me.

They are

They are from this site

The wreckage of the U.S. Air Force T-43A which crashed on April 3 while carrying Commerce Secretary Ronald H. Brown and his delegation is scattered on a hillside approximately 3 kilometers north of the Dubrovnik Airport

sjb25

fits wrote: »

Why do politicians feel the need to announce that they will travel to crash site? Wont they just get in the way and divert efforts away from the recovery? (not that theres much to be done for the poor souls who perished now). Seems ridiculous to me

To make it look like they are in charge and sorting it out in reality they will be doing notting except press conferences

L1011

*Kol* wrote: »

It's unlikely that they will have performed the extension package on an aircraft of that age. Most likely the aircraft would be retired in the near future. That extended service goal package involves a lot of heavy maintenance actions which would probably not be economical to perform on such an old aircraft.

The packages only exist due to people with aircraft that age wanting to keep them longer, though - LH and 4U are unlikely to have used the aircraft much more lightly than other A320 operators, the cycle count is in line with the age.

MoeJay

A few people asked about how long etc. an emergency descent would take...I'm not sure if it was answered...

For the A320:

"When in idle thrust, high speed and speed brake extended, the rate of descent is approximately 7 000 ft/min. To descend from FL 390 to FL 100, it takes approximately 4 min and 40 nm."

Chemical Byrne

Calina wrote: »

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 don't know the exact ins and outs of how it's done but this Teso guy has developed malware that he says is capable of attacking the navigation capabilities of the aircraft.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/465126/Missing-Malaysia-Airlines-plane-may-have-been-cyber-hijacked-using-mobile-phone


Of course politicians just turn up for the photo op and to get their mugs in the papers.

CathalDublin

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=94814106&postcount=178

Tenger

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

I don't know the exact ins and outs of how it's done but this Teso guy has developed malware that he says is capable of attacking the navigation capabilities of the aircraft.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/465126/Missing-Malaysia-Airlines-plane-may-have-been-cyber-hijacked-using-mobile-phone......

Move this conspiracy theory debate to the CT forum. Any more in relation to this 'experimental possibility' will result in an infraction and possibly a ban from A&A.

sjb25

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

I don't know the exact ins and outs of how it's done but this Teso guy has developed malware that he says is capable of attacking the navigation capabilities of the aircraft.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/465126/Missing-Malaysia-Airlines-plane-may-have-been-cyber-hijacked-using-mobile-phone


Of course politicians just turn up for the photo op and to get their mugs in the papers.

....

Chemical Byrne

Tenger wrote: »

Move this conspiracy theory debate to the CT forum. Any more in relation to this 'experimental possibility' will result in an infraction and possibly a ban from A&A.

Done
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057402563

ectoraige

fits wrote: »

Why do politicians feel the need to announce that they will travel to crash site? Wont they just get in the way and divert efforts away from the recovery? (not that theres much to be done for the poor souls who perished now). Seems ridiculous to me

To play devil's advocate, it's the one place they are most likely to receive accurate information, and to be able to query whether their interpretation of the information is correct. In critical incidents, information management becomes a major job, trying to maintain accuracy can be difficult. We saw an example already today when the initial report of a distress call was interpreted as having come from the crew. It turned out that it was a call made by ATC, but in the meantime the misinterpretation caused a lot of confusion.

The authorities look better the less confusion there is. That's why the politicians go there. And it looks good on their CV.

*Kol*

L1011 wrote: »

The packages only exist due to people with aircraft that age wanting to keep them longer, though - LH and 4U are unlikely to have used the aircraft much more lightly than other A320 operators, the cycle count is in line with the age.

The package actually exists because there were operators reaching the limit of validity early because their utilisation was different to the original 1.25 FH: 1 FC that the limit of validity figures of 48,000 FC and 60,000 FH are based on. For example an operator with a utilisation ratio of 3:1 would reach the FH limit after only 20,000 FC.

JCX BXC

The desent was slow, nothing too crazy. It started near Marseille, just a few minutes after reaching the crusing altitude of 38,000ft. Strange they didn't try to divert to Marseille. Something in my head is telling me that the crash was intentional on someone's half.

Amirani

ectoraige wrote: »

The authorities look better the less confusion there is. That's why the politicians go there. And it looks good on their CV.

Agreed. They'd also be slated by many if they didn't go.