Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Germanwings A320 Crash

Options
1…6791112…62

Comments

  • Options
    #242
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,903 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Well sadly the plane has crashed, seems all aboard are now dead. RIP.

    I don't want the investigations to show pilot error or rogue pilots or whatever. I don't want hijack or bombs.

    In fact I don't want anything for the sake of aviation and passengers. But that's not possible now. Something caused it, and if it turns out to be systems failure or the like, well we can learn from that for the future.

    Hypoxia is looking likely to me. Maybe the oxygen masks for the FD didn't work, or couldn't be applied quickly enough. Don't know, but it's scary anyway no matter whether you are pax or professional. How and why does sudden decompression happen anyway? Systems?

    Sad day for the families of all concerned. And a worrying day for all of those who fly these birds and those who take a plane regularly and never have a problem.


  • Options
    #243
    mayotom
    Registered Users Posts: 742 ✭✭✭mayotom


    flazio wrote: »
    Which control room would be in charge of the alpen airspace that the flight was operating in and is this available on live ATC ?

    I think its Weetabix.... The Area comes under Marseille FIR


  • Options
    #244
    cml387
    Registered Users Posts: 8,379 ✭✭✭cml387


    I would not be putting too much into the lack of comms from the cockpit.

    Aviate, navigate, communicate .

    If they had a serious malfunction or structural issue they'd try to fly the aircraft and troubleshoot first.


  • Options
    #245
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    Hypoxia is looking likely to me
    I'd say it is unlikely, given what we currently know (which isn't much really).


  • Options
    #246
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,903 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    murphaph wrote: »
    I'd say it is unlikely, given what we currently know (which isn't much really).

    Well if not that, and they were awake and in control, why did they not divert to one of the many nearby airports instead of heading into the Alps?

    Sorry, it's impossible not to speculate on events I know nothing about. But am interested just the same.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #247
    cml387
    Registered Users Posts: 8,379 ✭✭✭cml387


    murphaph wrote: »
    I'd say it is unlikely, given what we currently know (which isn't much really).

    The problem with the hypoxia hypothesis is that in the case of Helios (and the Aer Lingus frighteningly similar incident some years previous to that) the plane was never properly pressurized from takeoff. In that case the onset was subtle and not noticed by the crew.

    A sudden depressurisation at 38,000 is far from subtle. The crew would have been on oxygen immediately. So now you need depressurisation + a crew oxygen failure. It's possible but unlikely.


  • Options
    #248
    MoyVilla9
    Registered Users Posts: 1,072 ✭✭✭MoyVilla9


    Why does people think hypoxia is the case? It wouldn't bring the plane down, the plane would just keep on flying until it ran out of fuel.


  • Options
    #249
    JCX BXC
    Registered Users Posts: 18,114 ✭✭✭✭JCX BXC


    RTE News's had a man on reporting Hypoxia as a likely cause.


  • Options
    #250
    Calina
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    MoyVilla9 wrote: »
    Why does people think hypoxia is the case? It wouldn't bring the plane down, the plane would just keep on flying until it ran out of fuel.

    The plane did also start descending and found a mountain in its way.

    It is possible - and I am open to comment on this - that the pilots may have an hipoxia issue and also, there is some other technical issue with the plane causing it to reduce altitude.

    Most accidents are not single cause accidents; they are a collection of events which on their own might be inocuous, or fixable, but which, altogether, cause a different and more catastrophic sequence of events.

    I doubt there's a single point of failure here.


  • Options
    #251
    mickdw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,281 ✭✭✭✭mickdw


    MoyVilla9 wrote: »
    Why does people think hypoxia is the case? It wouldn't bring the plane down, the plane would just keep on flying until it ran out of fuel.

    Rapid decompression, crew would send plane into a dive to 12000 ft or so. I guess if the crew were suffering effects of this, it is possible that the aircraft was flown straight into the mountain instead of levelling off at safe height.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #252
    fits
    Registered Users Posts: 13,268 ✭✭✭✭fits


    If it was hypoxia at least it would have been a fairly peaceful end for those on board. Those rescuers have a terrible job, it must be awful up there.


  • Options
    #253
    kona
    Registered Users Posts: 7,525 ✭✭✭kona


    Carnacalla wrote: »
    RTE News's had a man on reporting Hypoxia as a likely cause.

    He also said you put masks on other people first.

    Probably come out with some incoherent rambling about radar beams next.


  • Options
    #254
    cml387
    Registered Users Posts: 8,379 ✭✭✭cml387


    fits wrote: »
    If it was hypoxia at least it would have been a fairly peaceful end for those on board.

    I'm afraid not. For the sake of argument f it was depressurisation, the masks would have dropped in the cabin. The oxygen lasts for about 15 minutes.
    All the passengers would have been fully conscious.


  • Options
    #255
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,903 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Carnacalla wrote: »
    RTE News's had a man on reporting Hypoxia as a likely cause.


    There is an alarm isn't there, when sudden decompression happens and then oxygen masks drop down? What if that wasn't working properly. Apologies, speculation from me again...

    It's another very sad and incomprehensible aviation disaster.


  • Options
    #256
    kona
    Registered Users Posts: 7,525 ✭✭✭kona


    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    There is an alarm isn't there, when sudden decompression happens and then oxygen masks drop down? What if that wasn't working properly. Apologies, speculation from me again...

    It's another very sad and incomprehensible aviation disaster.

    If the aircraft is configured incorrectley before take off , there wouldn't be a alarm, just like Helios.
    Crews are trained to spot the signs of hypoxia.


  • Options
    #257
    space2ground1
    Registered Users Posts: 501 ✭✭✭space2ground1


    That RTE expert who said masks go on children first is live in studio next. I hope he clarifies that error.


  • Options
    #258
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,903 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    space2ground1 wrote: »
    That RTE expert who said masks go on children first is live in studio next. I hope he clarifies that error.

    Yeah, put your own mask on first, and then your kids. As if that will be adhered to in a panic situation though, most want to help their kids first.

    Always listen to the safety briefing!


  • Options
    #259
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,838 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    space2ground1 wrote: »
    That RTE expert who said masks go on children first is live in studio next. I hope he clarifies that error.

    "expert"

    Rather like the one claiming that the 24kts taxiing speed was an actual airspeed a while ago, or the ones quoting -14000fpm as if it was a valid, sustained reading.


  • Options
    #260
    martinsvi
    Registered Users Posts: 1,729 ✭✭✭martinsvi


    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    There is an alarm isn't there, when sudden decompression happens and then oxygen masks drop down? What if that wasn't working properly. Apologies, speculation from me again...

    It's another very sad and incomprehensible aviation disaster.

    rapid decompression is both visible (sudden mist) and definitely audible (laud bang followed by hissing noise).. hypoxia theory has absolutely no evidence to back it up. All we know is the plane levelled off at 6800ft (according to Avherald) before the impact. If both crew were incapacitated, who levelled out the plane?

    they might as well been stuck troubleshooting something, loosing complete situational awareness - at that time cloud base was slightly below them as well as some scattered/broken well above them.. they were in between clouds, possibly not visual with on-coming terrain. Loosing situational awareness is much more frequent than hypoxia, on this note alone I would give hypoxia a rest until at least some evidence can back it up..


  • Options
    #261
    Nforce
    Registered Users Posts: 2,924 ✭✭✭Nforce


    martinsvi wrote: »
    All we know is the plane levelled off at 6800ft (according to Avherald) before the impact. If both crew were incapacitated, who levelled out the plane?


    It also dropped in airspeed (around 100kts)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #262
    MoeJay
    Registered Users Posts: 491 ✭✭MoeJay


    kona wrote: »
    If the aircraft is configured incorrectley before take off , there wouldn't be a alarm, just like Helios.
    Crews are trained to spot the signs of hypoxia.

    Not so, the alarm will sound (on the 737) if configured incorrectly. It's the same horn as the take-off configuration warning and was mis-identified by the Helios crew.

    The A320 will generate an EXCESS CAB ALT even if configured incorrectly and the cabin climbs past 9550'.


  • Options
    #263
    SpaceTime
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,088 ✭✭✭SpaceTime


    Could the fly by wire systems have leveled it off if the pilots were incapacitated ?


  • Options
    #264
    OzCam
    Registered Users Posts: 2,045 ✭✭✭OzCam


    space2ground1 wrote: »
    That RTE expert who said masks go on children first is live in studio next. I hope he clarifies that error.

    He did. First thing he said when Bryan Dobson opened a discussion with him this evening.


  • Options
    #265
    andy_g
    Registered Users Posts: 7,559 ✭✭✭andy_g


    cml387 wrote: »
    I'm afraid not. For the sake of argument f it was depressurisation, the masks would have dropped in the cabin. The oxygen lasts for about 15 minutes.
    All the passengers would have been fully conscious.

    Just to clear this up and my post wont have speculation.

    The Pax o2 masks will automatically drop on Cab Alt of 10000ft. However on some airline configs these may only be dropped from the flight deck.

    Now if there was a fire onboard it would explain why no o2 mask deployment. At the moment we have no factual information regarding the flight in question.


  • Options
    #266
    Chemical Byrne
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,311 ✭✭✭Chemical Byrne


    What about engine failure? Perhaps the fuel lines got clogged with ice, I remember that being the cause of a failure a while back.

    I wonder are they taking seriously the possibility of rogue crew member(s)? I wonder what the background of the flight crew is? Remember for MH370 the authorities probed the crews background after the disappearance to see if they had connections to any terror groups. I think in this case though it's unlikely as if it were the case the plane would have been directed to populated areas and not entered a slow descent to slap into a mountain. They are probably checking behind the scenes anyway I suppose.

    Also given the extreme dispersal of the debris, a mid air explosion might be a possibility. Catalonia has a history of violent separatist terrorist movements - possibly a resurgence of Terra Lliure?

    The extreme dispersal of the remains will maker recovery and identification a slow and grisly job. Dealing with wildlife and crows will be a nightmare to control,


  • Options
    #267
    martinsvi
    Registered Users Posts: 1,729 ✭✭✭martinsvi


    Chemical Byrne wrote: »
    What about engine failure? Perhaps the fuel lines got clogged with ice, I remember that being the cause of a failure a while back.

    then you glide it... 400kts ground speed and 3.3k fpm vertical is not how you glide the plane
    Chemical Byrne wrote: »
    I wonder are they taking seriously the possibility of rogue crew member(s)?

    Pilot factor is always examined, just because they don't talk about that publicly doesn't mean they're not looking into it.


  • Options
    #268
    wretcheddomain
    Registered Users Posts: 3,094 ✭✭✭wretcheddomain


    There's been about 30 different theories at this stage - some more probable than others. The problem is that even an improbable event could have caused this crash - or even something that hasn't yet caused a crash in aviation history.

    In this sense, throwing up theories is a complete and utter waste of time. The only people who have the ability to form a 'theory' at this stage are the investigators who will be on the ground and in possession of the black box and flight data recorders.

    Aside from them - and only them - I won't be listening to any more hypothetical garbage, whether it comes from the 'experts' on Sky News or individuals on this forum.


  • Options
    #269
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,903 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    wretcheddomain wrote: »
    There's been about 30 different theories at this stage - some more probable than others. The problem is that even an improbable event could have caused this crash - or even something that hasn't yet caused a crash in aviation history.

    In this sense, throwing up theories is a complete and utter waste of time. The only people who have the ability to form a 'theory' at this stage are the investigators who will be on the ground and in possession of the black box and flight data recorders.

    Aside from them - and only them - I won't be listening to any more hypothetical garbage, whether it comes from the 'experts' on Sky News or individuals on this forum.

    Off you go then, and leave the speculation and interest in this to others on the forum. The thread has not been locked YET.

    Free choice, and you are taking it. All the best now.


  • Options
    #270
    smurfjed
    Registered Users Posts: 10,047 ✭✭✭✭smurfjed


    Perhaps the fuel lines got clogged with ice, I remember that being the cause of a failure a while back
    Yep but that flight operated across Russia for many hours with extremely cold temperatures. This flight was over a nice warm part of Europe!
    I also assume that you know how aircraft fuel is heated?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #271
    mickdw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,281 ✭✭✭✭mickdw


    wretcheddomain wrote: »
    There's been about 30 different theories at this stage - some more probable than others. The problem is that even an improbable event could have caused this crash - or even something that hasn't yet caused a crash in aviation history.

    In this sense, throwing up theories is a complete and utter waste of time. The only people who have the ability to form a 'theory' at this stage are the investigators who will be on the ground and in possession of the black box and flight data recorders.

    Aside from them - and only them - I won't be listening to any more hypothetical garbage, whether it comes from the 'experts' on Sky News or individuals on this forum.

    Well we do know some facts and I don't see the issue with discussing the crash in relation to these facts.
    We know that it remained on course.
    We know that there was no radio contact from crew.
    We have access to altitude and airspeed which show a relatively controlled decent.

    Plenty room for sensible discussion there imo.


Advertisement