Germanwings 4U9525 Airbus crash in French Alps

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

Reuters has more on the distress call, an issue which has been causing confusion, with even Germanwings saying it was unsure whether one had been made, as it had received conflicting accounts. The news agency has spoken to the French aviation regulator, which seems to have contributed to the uncertainty:

Germanwings jetliner that crashed in the French Alps on Tuesday did not issue a distress call during its rapid descent, France’s aviation regulator said.

“The aircraft did not itself make a distress call but it was the combination of the loss of radio contact and the aircraft’s descent which led the controller to implement the distress phase,” a spokesman for the DGAC authority said.

The “distress” phase is the third and most serious of three stages of alerts used to help coordinate rescue efforts when an aircraft is considered in difficulty.

Earlier, the DGAC had said the aircraft issued a distress call at 1047 local time (0947 GMT) while descending from 38,000 feet to 5,000 feet.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2015/mar/24/germanwings-airbus-a 320-crashes-in-french-alps-live-updates

[TonyGosling]

Cut price airline indeed
Bear in mind this article doesn't cite the flights allegedly cancelled
Nuff said

Several Germanwings flights cancelled after crew refused to fly
MARCH 24, 2015
(Justin Huggler) Several Germanwings flights were cancelled on Tuesday after their crews refused to fly, as it emerged that the aircraft which crashed in the French Alps had been grounded for an hour for repairs the day before the accident.

Pilots and cabin crew refused to fly over concerns the crash may have been linked to a repair to the nose-wheel landing doors on Monday, according to an unconfirmed report in Spiegel magazine.

Lufthansa denied that there was any link between the repair and the cancelled flights.

Crews were refusing to fly for “personal reasons”, a spokesman for the airline group said.

http://govtslaves.info/several-germanwings-flights-cancelled-after-cre w-refused-to-fly/

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

Some suicide!
What nationality was he?
Trying to make a political point that died with him?

[TonyGosling]

Germanwings Plane Crash Throws Spotlight on Cockpit Security
Before 9/11, most cockpit doors used relatively low-tech latches http://www.wsj.com/articles/germanwings-crash-throws-spotlight-on-cock pit-security-1427377457
The crash reignited a debate over protecting an aircraft’s cockpit and the role of the reinforced doors that became the centerpiece of efforts to bolster aviation security after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

[scienceplease 2]

[TonyGosling]

Hmmmmmmm

[TonyGosling]

Of Germanwings A320 cockpit super-locks and missing 911 hijackers
Why have we got super-locks on cockpit doors which enable cabin crew for the first time to point a plane load of people at the ground and kill them all


11. Is There Positive Evidence That No Hijackers Were on the Planes?
http://davidraygriffin.com/articles/was-america-attacked-by-muslims-on -911/

At this point, defenders of the official story might argue: The fact that some of the men labeled hijackers were still alive after 9/11 shows only that the FBI list contained some errors; it does not prove that there were no al-Qaeda hijackers on board. And although the previous points do undermine the evidence for such hijackers, absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence.

Evidence of absence, however, is implicit in the prior points in two ways. First, the lack of Arab names on the Pentagon autopsy report and on any of the issued passenger manifests does suggest the absence of al-Qaeda operatives. Second, if al-Qaeda hijackers really were on the flights, why was evidence to prove this fact fabricated?

Beyond those two points, moreover, there is a feature of the reported events that contradicts the claim that hijackers broke into the pilots’ cabins. This feature can be introduced by reference to Conan Doyle’s short story “Silver Blaze,” which is about a famous race horse that had disappeared the night before a big race. Although the local Scotland Yard detective believed that Silver Blaze had been stolen by an intruder, Sherlock Holmes brought up “the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.” When the inspector pointed out that “[t]he dog did nothing in the night-time,” Holmes replied: “That was the curious incident.”105 Had there really been an intruder, in other words, the dog would have barked. This has become known as the case of “the dog that didn’t bark.”

A similar curious incident occurred on each of the four flights. In the event of a hijacking, pilots are trained to enter the standard hijack code (7500) into their transponders to alert controllers on the ground. Using the transponder to send a code is called “squawking.” One of the big puzzles about 9/11 was why none of the pilots squawked the hijack code.
CNN provided a good treatment of this issue, saying with regard to the first flight:

Flight 11 was hijacked apparently by knife-wielding men. Airline pilots are trained to handle such situations by keeping calm, complying with requests, and if possible, dialing in an emergency four digit code on a device called a transponder. . . . The action takes seconds, but it appears no such code was entered.106

The crucial issue was indicated by the phrase “if possible”: Would it have been possible for the pilots of Flight 11 to have performed this action? A positive answer was suggested by CNN’s next statement:

[I]n the cabin, a frantic flight attendant managed to use a phone to call American Airlines Command Center in Dallas. She reported the trouble. And according to “The Christian Science Monitor,” a pilot apparently keyed the microphone, transmitting a cockpit conversation.107

If there was time for both of those actions to be taken, there would have been time for one of the pilots to enter the four-digit hijack code.

That would have been all the more true of the pilots on United Flight 93, given the (purported) tapes from this flight. A reporter at the Moussaoui trial, where these tapes had been played, wrote:

In those tapes, the pilots shouted as hijackers broke into the cockpit. “Mayday! Mayday! Mayday!” a pilot screamed in the first tape. In the second tape, 30 seconds later, a pilot shouted: “Mayday! Get out of here! Get out of here!”108

According to these tapes, therefore, the pilots were still alive and coherent 30 seconds after realizing that hijackers were breaking into the cockpit. And yet in all that time, neither of them did the most important thing they had been trained to do­turn the transponder to 7500.

In addition to the four pilots on Flights 11 and 93, furthermore, the four pilots on Flights 175 and 77 failed to do this as well.
In “Silver Blaze,” the absence of an intruder was shown by the dog that didn’t bark. On 9/11, the absence of hijackers was shown by the pilots who didn’t squawk.

[outsider]

'More Hard Proof Germanwings Crash is a Hoax':
http://nodisinfo.com/more-hard-proof-germanwings-crash-is-a-hoax/

'Regarding Germanwings, there can be no other possibility other than the fact that this was a fake, that is a staged crash. It cannot be real. There were purportedly 150 passengers on-board. Where are they, and/or where are their body parts? It would be a macabre scene. Why is no one reacting to it?

It was stated, here, that by no means does the crash scene represent an entire plane. It was also stated that there was no inferno, no blackening, no char: no spotty fires and/or billowing smoke. Such a jet would have exploded on impact. Where is the expected fire-related damage? Where was the necessary smolder? Is there only this, and that’s it?

Just whitish-appearing smoke, no fire, from a pyrotechnic artificially placed charge? Where is the burning jet fuel, with its black, acrid smoke?

The question was raised, “Where are the virtually indestructible titanium-based engines? This was an Airbus 320. The engines used on such planes are considerable:
http://img2.timeinc.net/people/i/2015/news/150406/germanwings-800.jpg
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRF4Liz5fp8Jmcsd_ rLU0NT7rp2FaiDUC55Mdj57xpLE62Qpxhz '

'How are these the same? It’s like 911 all over again, mere planted engine components, likely not even from the type of plane as advertised....'

(See link for pics).

[scienceplease 2]

Some new revealing details...

"the pilot the automatic pilot to put the plane into a descent and then repeatedly during the descent adjusted the automatic pilot to speed up the plane."

This doesn't seem to ring true. The autopilot is not something you can casually fiddle with in this way - at least that's my understanding. Are there any pilots out there?

"The mountain rescue officer who found the data recorder, Alice Coldefy, described Friday the unexpected discovery in a spot that had already been repeatedly searched. "I found a pile of clothes, we were searching it, we were moving them downhill and while doing this I discovered a box. The color of the box was the same as the gravel... So-called black boxes are actually orange, but this one had burned up in the crash and blended with the dark earth covering the area, known to local guides as "the black lands." "I didn't realize I had found it and I wasn't thinking it was possible to find it among all this debris," she said."

The black box was burnt but the clothes were not and found in a spot that had already been repeatedly searched!?

Mountain officers and trained dogs are continuing to search the site. When the terrain is fully cleared of body parts and belongings, a private company will take out the large airplane debris.

Unlike MH17 - no bodies parts shown in any video. What "large airplane debris"!?

Full article below...

[scienceplease 2]

Why is a flight from Barcelona to Düsseldorf flying over the Alps? I thought airlines were cost conscious?



http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/03/24/world/europe/germanwings -plane-crash-map.html[/img]

[petros]

The report of the crash was announced on this forum here: http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=22683

The likelihood of this event being staged or the information coming to us via the mainstream media is inconsistent with the available evidence. The story sounds highly improbable. The pilot leaving the cockpit very early in the flight, why would he need to do that?

It's been pointed out that the low cost airline was flying over the alps rather than a more cost effective direct route here: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/03/24/world/europe/germanwings -plane-crash-map.html

The crash site looks like dumps garbage as a opposed to a typical crash of a plane of that size. Unburned cloths and small craps remain but I have not seen

Engines
Wings
Tail
Seats
Luggage
Landing gear

Please provide links to this thread if they exist!

Close up of "wreckage"
1) http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/28/germanwings-rescue-worker -interview-recovery-49525

2) http://i2.wp.com/www.biznews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/2015-03-29 T114910Z_1826379999_LR2EB3T0WTNJK_RTRMADP_3_FRANCE-CRASH.jpg

Here is what a plane crash, although no two crashes will be alike with greater and lesser degrees of destruction but it helps to know how much debris there should be:

August 14, 2013, UPS Airlines Flight 1354
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2392891/Birmingham-Alabama-UPS -cargo-plane-crash-Two-pilots-killed-field-close-airport.html

2010, Airblue Flight 202 - Airbus A321-231
http://www.arabiansupplychain.com/article-4657-latest-pics-black-box-f ound-for-airblue-crash/

There is the hoax of the hoax mobile phone footage. I wonder if this is a planted story to divert people casually researching the hoax to find a bogus story rather than find a genuine analysis of the alleged crash.

http://rt.com/news/245797-germanwings-plane-crash-video/
http://www.ibtimes.co.in/hoax-germanwings-crash-video-fake-say-french- officials-627803

Then there is the campaign to of Andreas Lubitz friend's that say he was framed to cover up mechanical failure.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3019273/Friends-Germanwings-cr ash-pilot-say-framed-Lufthansa-cover-mechanical-failings-Google-Maps-b lur-former-home-stop-people-looking-up.html

Some researchers on youtube are saying there is more than one Lubitz used in the photographs of him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMBnEB6tLKA
And others that crisis actor are being used fro the victims friends and families.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFfaYXVFtEY

And also there is the anomalous passenger linked to the pentagon defence contract: http://m.boozallen.com/media-center/press-releases/2013/03/Booz-to-pro vide-specialized-scientific-research#sthash.UVCsb3NP.uxfs

Her name is Yvonne Selke and she is linked with a $315 million contract with McLean, VA – Booz Allen Hamilton today announced it received a $315 million single award contract to support the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency’s (NGA) InnoVision Directorate. Booz Allen will provide specialized scientific and technical research and development subject matter expertise to all facets of the InnoVision Future Solutions Program (IFSP) through Nov. 2017. IFSP provides support to perform path-breaking scientific research and transitions innovative concepts and capabilities required to solve the Intelligence Community and Department of Defense’s most complex problems. Additionally, IFSP explores emerging scientific capabilities and opportunities such as high-performance computing or Big Data, and surveillance, in high-threat environments.

Her daughter has also become the poster child victim for the crash. http://www.people.com/article/emily-selke-american-plane-crash-victim- remembered

Motives for this probable hoax seem to be more screening for flight crew and promoting pilotless planes, but also promoting fear as usual.
http://www.travelpulse.com/news/airlines/would-you-fly-on-a-plane-with -no-pilot.html


[/list]

[fish5133]

Close to the Hedron Collider at Cern.

[scienceplease 2]

[TonyGosling]

Germanwings crash: victims' relatives say Lufthansa should have stopped pilot flying
http://theguardianuk.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/germanwings-crash-victims- relatives-say.html


Relatives of the people killed when German pilot Andreas Lubitz crashed a passenger jet into a French mountainside say Lufthansa should have done more to stop him flying after he was diagnosed with mental health problems.


Victims’ families say the French accident report released on Sunday failed to answer why Lubitz, who had been referred to a psychiatric clinic two weeks before the tragedy last March, was able to hide his illness from his employers.


And they are angry that doctors, who confirmed Lubitz had “shown symptoms suggesting a psychotic depressive episode” just weeks before the crash, refused to speak to investigators, citing patient confidentiality.


Related: The mystery of flight 9525: a locked door, a silent pilot and a secret history of illness


Lubitz locked the flight captain out of the cockpit and put the plane into a controlled descent over the French Alps, killing all 150 people onboard. Germanwings and Lufthansa strongly deny wrongdoing, saying Lubitz was certified to fly.


In its 87-page final report into the tragedy, the French crash investigation agency, the Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses (BEA), found that they could have done nothing to stop Lubitz.


“No action could have been taken by the authorities and/or his employer to prevent him from flying that day, because they were informed by neither the co-pilot himself, nor by anyone else, such as a physician, a colleague or family member,” it said.


The BEA’s report revealed that a private doctor had recommended Lubitz be admitted to a psychiatric hospital a fortnight before the crash.


The 27-year-old had also been signed off work sick by two doctors and given anti-depressives. Neither medic informed Lufthansa that he was not fit to fly.


Lawyers for victims’ relatives said they were “really upset” and failed to understand how Lubitz had retained his pilot’s license.


In a meeting with passengers’ families before the report’s release, BEA said investigators would have liked to talk to the doctors who treated Lubitz to understand why he acted as he did.


“They wanted to understand why a young pilot with a supposedly nice family would want to commit suicide,” said Robert Tansill Oliver, whose son Robert Oliver Calvo died in the crash, leaving a wife and two children.










Robert Tansill Oliver (right) and Maribel Calvo, the parents of Robert Oliver Calvo, who was killed in the Germanwings crash. Photograph: Hernan Munoz/AP

“They wanted to find out why he did what he did, the root causes. Everyone in the auditorium was asking the same question, ‘Why did these German doctors refuse to talk to you?’”


Detailed medical records about Lubitz had suggested he had seen 41 doctors – many of them eye specialists – in five years, seven in the month before the crash. The doctors who treated him refused to speak to the inquiry team, as did members of Lubitz’s family.


“It is likely that breaching medical confidentiality was perceived by these doctors as presenting more risks, in particular for themselves, than not reporting the co-pilot to authorities,” the BEA stated.


Jürgen Fischenich, whose son Sven, 33, died in the crash, said he and other families were still waiting for an apology from Lufthansa for failing to keep a pilot with a history of mental health problems out of the cockpit. “When something happens in a company, the person at the top is responsible, even if he wasn’t directly involved himself,” Fischenich said. “They need to apologise at least,” he told the Associated Press.


He added: “Without the negligence on Lufthansa’s part, my son wouldn’t have died like this. It wasn’t just an accident. This was a crash where Lufthansa’s safety mechanisms failed.”


Related: Andreas Lubitz: co-pilot of Germanwings flight 4U9525 – profile


German lawyer Elmar Giemulla, who represents a number of victims’ families, agreed. He said: “They have to take care of their equipment and they have to ensure that their staff is able to fly an aircraft. And they didn’t meet that responsibility, it’s sad to say.”


In Bonn, Christof Wellens, a lawyer for some of the families, said the report did not answer relatives’ questions over “how it is possible that such an ill person gets a pilot’s license”.


Lawyers say the compensation offered by Lufthansa – about €25,000 (£19,000) for each victim – is too low. Wellens said his clients were launching legal action against the flying school in Phoenix, Arizona, owned by Lufthansa, where Lubitz trained, in the hope of winning a bigger payout.


“It was here he first stopped his pilot training for a while because of psychological problems. He should never have been allowed to return to them,” Wellens said.


Investigators recommended more frequent medical evaluations for all pilots showing any kind of psychological or psychiatric problems, however minor. The BEA said the medical secrecy rules must protect the patient, but should also take into account public safety, and that there should be greater support for pilots who have depression.


Markus Wahl, spokesman for the Cockpit union representing German pilots, said the BEA’s safety recommendations were a balanced package of measures and should be implemented in full.


However, Johann Reuss, of Germany’s air accident investigation agency, said it would be difficult to change the law regarding medical confidentiality. German doctors can be punished with a fine or up to a year in prison for breaching patient confidentiality.


The report confirmed that Lubitz had deliberately set the Airbus A320’s autopilot to carry out a controlled descent over the French Alps where it ploughed into a mountain, after locking the flight captain out of the cockpit.










Flowers left in front of a monument to the victims of the Germanwings crash. Photograph: Alberto Estevez/EPA

Flight recorder data showed that Lubitz was left alone at the controls of the Barcelona to Düsseldorf flight at 9.30am – 30 minutes after it had taken off. Half a minute later, Lubitz changed the altitude from a cruising height of 38,000ft to just 100ft and set the automatic pilot to descend. In the following seconds Lubitz changed the plane’s speed 10 times, according to the report.


He failed to respond to repeated calls from both civilian and military air traffic controllers and the crew of another aircraft.


He also ignored increasingly frantic signals at the door and cabin calls, and requests by flight captain Patrick Sondenheimer to open the door. The final moments of the flight recorder suggest someone tried to break down the cockpit door.


Flight data from the outbound flight to Barcelona earlier that morning suggested Lubitz had reduced the altitude from 35,000ft to 100ft for three seconds before returning it to the original setting.


“Actions on the autopilot system during the first flight of the day may be interpreted as a rehearsal for suicide,” reported investigators.


The BEA report stated that Lubitz’s professional level was judged to be “above standard” by his flight instructors and examiners.


“None of the pilots or instructors interviewed during the investigation, who flew with him in the months preceding the accident, indicated any concern about his attitude or behaviour during flights.”


Lubitz had been denied a medical certificate enabling him to fly in 2009 because of his depression and the medication he was taking to combat it. He was granted permission, with conditions, in July 2014, which was valid until August 2015.


Related: Germanwings memorial service: relatives of victims ‘united in pain’


The investigation revealed that Lubitz had begun suffering a “severe depressive episode without psychotic symptoms” in August 2008 and had made several “no suicide pacts” with his treating psychiatrist.


In February 2015, a private doctor diagnosed Lubitz with “psychosomatic and anxiety disorders” and referred him to a psychotherapist and psychiatrist.


On 9 March, another private doctor gave Lubitz a sick leave certificate. It was not forwarded to Germanwings. The following day, the first private doctor referred the pilot to a psychiatric hospital for treatment for a possible psychosis. The same doctor gave Lubitz a 19-day sick leave certificate on 12 March. It was not sent to Germanwings.


The BEA’s report said “the limited medical and personal data available to the safety investigation did not make it possible for an unambiguous psychiatric diagnosis to be made. In particular an interview with the co-pilot’s relatives and his private physicians was impossible, as they exercised their right to refuse to be interviewed.


“On the day of the accident, the pilot was still suffering from a psychiatric disorder, which was possibly a psychotic depressive episode and was taking psychotropic medication. This made him unfit to fly,” the BEA report states.


Rémi Jouty, BEA director, said the report’s recommendations addressed weaknesses in the existing security measures, but that it was impossible to make them “100% watertight”.


Asked about possible modifications to the cockpit door to avoid a flight commander or pilot being locked out, Jouty added: “The concept of the door [security] is to protect the cockpit against intrusion from the cabin. We consider with the still-present terrorist threat we should not change that idea.


“We cannot claim that all this will always stop a person wishing to commit suicide … the history of air accidents has proven otherwise.”


The father of Paul Bramley, 28, one of three Britons to die in the crash, criticised Germanwings and its parent company Lufthansa for not keeping Lubitz out of the cockpit.


“He was seen 41 times by different doctors. If they had said something my son and everyone on that flight would still be alive,” Philip Bramley, 60, told the Sunday Mirror. “But it’s my view that the airline is at fault. They should be more diligent about who they employ and have more safeguards to stop people slipping through the net.”