Germanwings A320 Crash

flazio · 24-03-2015 3:55pm

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

lintdrummer · 24-03-2015 3:55pm

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 · 24-03-2015 3:55pm

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 · 24-03-2015 3:56pm

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 · 24-03-2015 3:57pm

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

Calina · 24-03-2015 3:59pm

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 · 24-03-2015 3:59pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:00pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:00pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:04pm

For more accurate information rather then all the media speculations

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

Tugboats · 24-03-2015 4:06pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:06pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:08pm

[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 · 24-03-2015 4:08pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:09pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:09pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:11pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:11pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:12pm

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

DubDani · 24-03-2015 4:14pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:14pm

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* · 24-03-2015 4:16pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:19pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:19pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:20pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:23pm

Clear image of the tail here.

NoelJ · 24-03-2015 4:23pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:23pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:23pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:25pm

*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.

pfurey101 · 24-03-2015 4:25pm

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

Actually it doesnt look like the Germanwings tail.

radar0976 · 24-03-2015 4:26pm

Unconfirmed image of the crash site.

martinsvi · 24-03-2015 4:26pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:26pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:27pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:30pm

radar0976 wrote: »

Unconfirmed image of the crash site.

Unconfirmed alright, where is the snow

pfurey101 · 24-03-2015 4:33pm

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* · 24-03-2015 4:37pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:39pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:40pm

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Clear image of the tail here.

Compare to the actual tail

D-AIPX-Germanwings-Airbus-A320-200_PlanespottersNet_572655.jpg

Nforce · 24-03-2015 4:41pm

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Clear image of the tail here.

Doesn't have the Germanwings tail logo?

fits · 24-03-2015 4:41pm

Those images look extremely fake to me.

ProfessorPlum · 24-03-2015 4:42pm

Nforce wrote: »

Doesn't have the Germanwings tail logo?

Doesn't look like an airbus tail at all.

Tippex · 24-03-2015 4:46pm

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Clear image of the tail here.

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

Bob24 · 24-03-2015 4:47pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:47pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:48pm

„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 · 24-03-2015 4:48pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:51pm

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 · 24-03-2015 4:55pm

*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.

Germanwings A320 Crash

Comments