Germanwings A320: Will such a tragedy ever happen again Watch

ShotsFired-9941
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
As per latest report, it's claimed that the co-pilot intentionally locked everyone out from getting into the pit and the set course to crash the flight.

Now some people have dismissed this as a one in a billion tragedy hence shouldn't be dwelt upon excessively. But personally think this is a new frontier for terrorists and precautions should be taken to make sure this doesn't happen in the future...
0
reply
Chlorophile
  • Study Helper
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
(Original post by ShotsFired-9941)
As per latest report, it's claimed that the co-pilot intentionally locked everyone out from getting into the pit and the set course to crash the flight.

Now some people have dismissed this as a one in a billion tragedy hence shouldn't be dwelt upon excessively. But personally think this is a new frontier for terrorists and precautions should be taken to make sure this doesn't happen in the future...
Firstly, the investigators have specifically said that this is not a terrorist incident. Secondly, the reason why this happened in the first place was because of anti-terrorism safety precautions. I really don't know what you want to be done.
1
reply
username1494226
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 years ago
#3
Sadly I think yes is the answer. It will happen again. It's happened a number of times in the past and this is another one of those tragic incidents unfolding again
0
reply
ShotsFired-9941
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#4
(Original post by Chlorophile)
Firstly, the investigators have specifically said that this is not a terrorist incident. Secondly, the reason why this happened in the first place was because of anti-terrorism safety precautions. I really don't know what you want to be done.
Damn the point of this thread was to ensure how such an incident never happen again...

This kind of scenario may sound absurd but it could be that terrorists have blackmailed him saying if you don't crash the plane we will destroy each everyone you ever loved so better do this... or something like that.

I have no air-plane experience so was hoping to read some posts from aviation students brainstorming ideas and whatnot.
0
reply
Chlorophile
  • Study Helper
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
(Original post by ShotsFired-9941)
Damn the point of this thread was to ensure how such an incident never happen again...

This kind of scenario may sound absurd but it could be that terrorists have blackmailed him saying if you don't crash the plane we will destroy each everyone you ever loved so better do this... or something like that.

I have no air-plane experience so was hoping to read some posts from aviation students brainstorming ideas and whatnot.
Occam's razor: the hypothesis that requires the fewest assumptions is probably the correct one. Since we have absolutely zero evidence that suggests he's being blackmailed by terrorists, that's not a reasonable hypothesis to make. There's nothing we can do until the investigation is carried out fully, speculation is not going to help us. The important thing to understand is that the system that allowed this to take place is a security measure. Without that security measure, it would be relatively easy for a passenger to forcibly take over the cockpit, putting the plane at a much greater risk than the incredibly tiny chance that a pilot - who undergo very stringent psychological tests - goes insane.
0
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
(Original post by ShotsFired-9941)
As per latest report, it's claimed that the co-pilot intentionally locked everyone out from getting into the pit and the set course to crash the flight.

Now some people have dismissed this as a one in a billion tragedy hence shouldn't be dwelt upon excessively. But personally think this is a new frontier for terrorists and precautions should be taken to make sure this doesn't happen in the future...
No.

Because as a result of this, a new rule will almost definitely be introduced (lots of airlines have already put it in place voluntarily) that means there has to be two people on the flightdeck at all times.

There being two people on the same crew who both want to commit suicide is an astronomically rare possibility.
0
reply
Shabalala
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 years ago
#7
If one of the pilots need to take a break or to go to the toilet then a member of the flight crew should have to be in the cabin at all times until the other pilot gets back this would make it extremely unlikely that this type of thing would happen again, yes the safety precaution barring the pilot from reentering partially caused this but the safety precaution is a good one and could well save lives in the future.
0
reply
ShotsFired-9941
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#8
(Original post by Drewski)
No.

Because as a result of this, a new rule will almost definitely be introduced (lots of airlines have already put it in place voluntarily) that means there has to be two people on the flightdeck at all times.

There being two people on the same crew who both want to commit suicide is an astronomically rare possibility.
What if one of the co-pilot overpowers the other and then set course for a kamikaze?

I think some sort of an override should be placed on the door
0
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report 4 years ago
#9
(Original post by ShotsFired-9941)
What if one of the co-pilot overpowers the other and then set course for a kamikaze?

I think some sort of an override should be placed on the door
Place an override on the door and then hijackers have access to the cockpit.

The likelihood of one rogue pilot being able to overpower the other, cabin crew and passengers is next to nil.
0
reply
username457532
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
(Original post by ShotsFired-9941)
Damn the point of this thread was to ensure how such an incident never happen again...

This kind of scenario may sound absurd but it could be that terrorists have blackmailed him saying if you don't crash the plane we will destroy each everyone you ever loved so better do this... or something like that.

I have no air-plane experience so was hoping to read some posts from aviation students brainstorming ideas and whatnot.
Normally terrorist groups claim responsibility for terrorist attacks. They need to show their power and what will happen if they're not listened to. No group or individual has claimed responsibility for this crash so it's unlikely one was responsible.
0
reply
potatomaker
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
(Original post by Chlorophile)
Occam's razor: the hypothesis that requires the fewest assumptions is probably the correct one. Since we have absolutely zero evidence that suggests he's being blackmailed by terrorists, that's not a reasonable hypothesis to make. There's nothing we can do until the investigation is carried out fully, speculation is not going to help us. The important thing to understand is that the system that allowed this to take place is a security measure. Without that security measure, it would be relatively easy for a passenger to forcibly take over the cockpit, putting the plane at a much greater risk than the incredibly tiny chance that a pilot - who undergo very stringent psychological tests - goes insane.
no the reason this occurred was a lack of precautions, this specific airline lacks a two in the cockpit system, almost all other airlines require two people in the cockpit at once, whether a pilot or crew member. It was the airlines fault
0
reply
Chlorophile
  • Study Helper
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
(Original post by potatomaker)
no the reason this occurred was a lack of precautions, this specific airline lacks a two in the cockpit system, almost all other airlines require two people in the cockpit at once, whether a pilot or crew member. It was the airlines fault
What you're saying isn't entirely correct. From what I've read, having two pilots in the cockpit is only commonplace in the US, it isn't common practice in Europe. It is so easy to point fingers and lay blame in hindsight, it's called hindsight bias, but there really was absolutely no way someone could have reasonably predicted anything like this would happen.
0
reply
Observatory
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
(Original post by Chlorophile)
Firstly, the investigators have specifically said that this is not a terrorist incident.
I'm not sure how they can know this, since they have also said they have not found any statement by the Co-Pilot explaining his motivations. At most they can conclude that it might not be a terrorist incident.
0
reply
Chlorophile
  • Study Helper
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by Observatory)
I'm not sure how they can know this, since they have also said they have not found any statement by the Co-Pilot explaining his motivations. At most they can conclude that it might not be a terrorist incident.
They have said "they are not treating it as a terrorist incident". Obviously they can't say with 100% certainty that it's not but they've not been given any reason to suspect that it is terrorism related. And to be perfectly honest, I don't see how it people could think it's a terrorist incident. The plane crashed in an incredibly remote area - if their aim was to cause maximum damage, they would have flown it into a city or something. The perpetrator doesn't appear to have any kind of links with extremism - once again, if it was terrorist, you'd have thought that someone would have made a message. It's sort of pointless if you don't.
0
reply
Observatory
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
(Original post by Chlorophile)
They have said "they are not treating it as a terrorist incident". Obviously they can't say with 100% certainty that it's not but they've not been given any reason to suspect that it is terrorism related.
They've also not been given any reason to suspect any other motivation. No suicide note. So what this really means is, "We think terrorism is not necessarily more likely than any other possible cause.", not "The chance of terrorism being the cause is ~0%.".

I think the jury is still out on why this happened and I would give terrorism better than 5:1 odds.
0
reply
Chlorophile
  • Study Helper
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
(Original post by Observatory)
They've also not been given any reason to suspect any other motivation. No suicide note. So what this really means is, "We think terrorism is not necessarily more likely than any other possible cause.", not "The chance of terrorism being the cause is ~0%.".

I think the jury is still out on why this happened and I would give terrorism better than 5:1 odds.
Look at the edit I made above. You might as well blame it on him being possessed by demons or being part of a voodoo death cult - there's no reason to suspect that either. I don't see how you can think it's terrorism when there's literally zero reason to think it's terrorism. Nobody has been terrorised to think anything because no kind of motive or message has been released.
0
reply
Andrew657Thomas
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 years ago
#17
BBC News posted today about how the guy was treated for depression. I really dislike the fact that someone that was ''heavily depressive'' was still in a job which people look up to, to be trustworthy and responsible of so many lives. Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32081681
0
reply
Observatory
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 years ago
#18
(Original post by Chlorophile)
Look at the edit I made above. You might as well blame it on him being possessed by demons or being part of a voodoo death cult - there's no reason to suspect that either. I don't see how you can think it's terrorism when there's literally zero reason to think it's terrorism. Nobody has been terrorised to think anything because no kind of motive or message has been released.
He may well be part of a voodoo death cult. Blaming it on demons is much less sensible than blaming it on terrorism because terrorist attacks are well documented and have a clear mechanism. An apparently rational person deciding to commit suicide by murdering a large number of defenceless strangers is not obviously more likely to me than that person having ideological motivation for murdering those people.
0
reply
Chlorophile
  • Study Helper
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 years ago
#19
(Original post by Observatory)
He may well be part of a voodoo death cult. Blaming it on demons is much less sensible than blaming it on terrorism because terrorist attacks are well documented and have a clear mechanism. An apparently rational person deciding to commit suicide by murdering a large number of defenceless strangers is not obviously more likely to me than that person having ideological motivation for murdering those people.
If this were a terrorist incident, he would be trying to make a statement. Absolutely no statement has been made. If this is a terrorist incident, it doesn't appear to be a particularly effective one at the moment since nobody's been told who they're meant to be scared of. It just doesn't make sense. The possibility exists but a 5:1 chance? I don't know what the cause is as much of you but there's no reason at the moment with the current evidence to think that it's terrorism more than anything else.
0
reply
Observatory
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#20
Report 4 years ago
#20
(Original post by Chlorophile)
If this were a terrorist incident, he would be trying to make a statement. Absolutely no statement has been made. If this is a terrorist incident, it doesn't appear to be a particularly effective one at the moment since nobody's been told who they're meant to be scared of. It just doesn't make sense. The possibility exists but a 5:1 chance? I don't know what the cause is as much of you but there's no reason at the moment with the current evidence to think that it's terrorism more than anything else.
It's also strange for people to commit suicide without leaving a note and to do so while causing a lot of damage to strangers and to do so while apparently normally conducting a difficult technical job (clearly the captain didn't suspect anything was wrong because he left the co-pilot in control of the aircraft).

The entire incident is strange, I just don't see the reason why to strike terrorism off the list of possible causes. Once it became clear that the crash was deliberate it shot close to the top of the list, if not the top. In the absence of specific evidence pointing at a different cause, I don't see why it doesn't stay there.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Why wouldn't you turn to teachers if you were being bullied?

They might tell my parents (11)
6.15%
They might tell the bully (18)
10.06%
I don't think they'd understand (30)
16.76%
It might lead to more bullying (69)
38.55%
There's nothing they could do (51)
28.49%

Watched Threads

View All