What the aviation experts and professional associations undoubtedly know, but the broader public in general does not, is that a known malfunction in a cockpit computer on the A320 family of planes could initiate a controlled descent like that Lubitz is accused of having intentionally brought about and, furthermore, that so long as the computer is running, the pilot or pilots would not be able to override it.
Including Germanwings 9525, no less than three planes of the same type have either crashed or narrowly escaped doing so in the just the last four months. According to published reports, both of the others suffered a computer malfunction.
* * * * * * * *
Finally, Arnoux has noted that if in fact the pilot was locked out of the cockpit, as the prosecutor has suggested, he ought to have been able to gain entry by using an emergency code – unless, that is, the co-pilot intentionally chose to deny entry by using a switch on the control panel. Even in the latter case, however, the emergency code ought to have set off an alarm in the cockpit. But the reconstruction of the last minutes of the flight, as ostensibly based on the cockpit recording, makes no mention of any such alarm.
http://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/the-trouble-with-germanwings-flight-9525/
This scenario reminds me of what the US Navy did following the turret explosion on USS Iowa (BB-61) in 1989. The Navy decided that the explosion had been caused by a crew member, ignoring the distinct possibility that an overram of the powder bags into the gun had occurred as it was being loaded and that the overram might have caused the explosion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Iowa_turret_explosion
It's always easier to blame the dead (who cannot defend themselves) than it is to find and fix the real cause.
No comments:
Post a Comment