Mass murder and suicide on flight 9525

[MsAnn]

Another suicide by an airline pilot. Speechless. May they rest in peace.

http://news.yahoo.com/official-1-pilot-locked-crash-plane-cockpit-072049706.html?clear-cache

[RA1]

This seems to be the consensus at the moment. I heard one news report this morning say, "He was not a known terrorist". What? How many known terrorists are pilot employees of airlines?

I don't get suicide/murders. If you are that unhappy, just go somewhere and off yourself. Don't involve innocent people.

Another "problem" is touched upon in the above article. The SIC apparently had just over 600 hours flying experience. That is "nothing" by comparison. The US recently mandated at least 1500 hours + the ATP license to be an SIC on Part 121 carriers (the airlines). That is a lot more experience + proven proficiency but still not necessarily the complete answer.

Best regards,

RA1

[MsAnn]

I don't get suicide/murders. If you are that unhappy, just go somewhere and off yourself. Don't involve innocent people.

Best regards,

RA1

Certainly agree, and perhaps then we should consider removing the word suicide, since in this case at least, it was clearly mass murder. How do airlines if at all, scan more thoroughly for psychological problems?

[RA1]

US airlines put pilot potential hires through a basic battery of tests. They prefer for them to be well adjusted citizens. Years ago they used the Stanine test. They probably use a variation these days. Of course, the problem is those who are intent on gaming the system.

Pilots have to be pretty single minded to achieve very much in their careers. The experience and training necessary is expensive and time consuming. The hours are often "crazy" and go to 7 days a week. This is hard on relationships. Pilots are required to give up a lot but not their sanity or so I hope. Of course, mine left many years ago and I hardly miss it anymore.

As you know, a pilot determined to crash can do it. Remember EgyptAir? Fortunately this is not a problem with a large percentage of participants.

Best regards,

RA1

[Guest CharliePS]

Whenever something like this happens, there are immediate calls for all sorts of measures that will somehow eliminate the possibility that it could happen again. One focus right now seems to be on mandating two people in the cockpit at all times. But one pilot intent on crashing the plane could easily disable the other person, or both could be in cahoots for some ideological reason. No matter how much screening is done (and almost everyone questioned so far claims that there was absolutely nothing about the Germanwings co-pilot to suggest that there was anything about him that would make anyone suspicious), there will be persons whose motivations and inclinations will be inscrutable, even in hindsight.

[MsAnn]

Charlie I agree with you in part, except that certainly another person in the cockpit might be able to deter someone intent on committing mass murder. We don't know for sure, but it is something that should be considered at the very least. often times calls for measure to prevent a recurring accident will produce a safety measure that is actually beneficial. I think it behooves us to at least explore those options, as now we find out the Lufthansa does not require psychological testing on an ongoing basis, perhaps that is an area that should be explored also.

In the end nothing is fool proof, but we should at least create as many safety nets as possible.

[RA1]

I think it impossible to legislate preventing criminal acts. Yes, some who are afraid of various results of breaking the law will comply but those determined to kill others or themselves will likely succeed, sooner or later. Some airlines do have a procedure to have another in the cockpit when one pilot leaves. If for no other reason, it provides for opening the "fortress" door in the case of incapacitation of a remaining pilot.

As stated above, nothing is fool proof. I suggest that no one become unduly worried about dying on an airliner. The odds are 11 million to 1. One should avoid tempting a lightening strike during a thunderstorm, which is much more likely to kill one. Certainly, one should never drive or ride in an automobile, if one is wishing to avoid the "odds".

Best regards,

RA1

[MsAnn]

As stated above, nothing is fool proof. I suggest that no one become unduly worried about dying on an airliner. The odds are 11 million to 1. One should avoid tempting a lightening strike during a thunderstorm, which is much more likely to kill one. Certainly, one should never drive or ride in an automobile, if one is wishing to avoid the "odds".

Best regards,

RA1

Isn't something like 90 thousand plus flights daily and 8-13 thousand flights are flying at any one time. I'd fly long before I got in a car and attempted to drive any distance.

This video is 6 years old, but I think the point is still made. I also found it interesting to see the concentration of flights in the US and in Europe as night turns to day.

[RA1]

Commerce at work.

Best regards,

RA1

[Suckrates]

While all the arguments and suggestions for control are valid. I have always believed that when it's your time, it's your time, even if it seems like someone else has decided it for you. There is often no rhyme or reason as to WHY things happen and to Whom, so you have to believe that its being destined by some higher power.

It's gotten me thru all the tragedy and heartache thats occurred in my life.

[RA1]

I agree but do not necessarily wish to go when it is another's time.

Best regards,

RA1