WhackyWill Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 What's really disturbing is the fact that it wasn't a dive to kill everyone immediately, but a gradual descent into hell. I think that's what a lot of people struggle to comprehend. We don't even know if it was depression yet: The minimal amount of info we have could mean he'd been diagnosed with cancer or something equally serious, and he just couldn't cope with that news. I'm not saying that's what I believe, just that we cannot assume depression at this point. You can assume he was "bonkers" to kill 149 people and himself. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 That's a dangerous assumption to make. That's why people struggle to understand mental health problems in general, with the assumption that someone must be completely deranged to do things like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shenley Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 What's really disturbing is the fact that it wasn't a dive to kill everyone immediately, but a gradual descent into hell. I think that's what a lot of people struggle to comprehend. We don't even know if it was depression yet: The minimal amount of info we have could mean he'd been diagnosed with cancer or something equally serious, and he just couldn't cope with that news. I'm not saying that's what I believe, just that we cannot assume depression at this point. I 'think' you will find that with the current fly-by-wire aircraft a pilot cannot just 'dive' the aircraft into the ground. It won't let you. So the decent aspect he dialled in was the the steepest the plane would allow him do so, close to if not the actual emergency decent parameters. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhackyWill Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 That's a dangerous assumption to make. That's why people struggle to understand mental health problems in general, with the assumption that someone must be completely deranged to do things like this. Well he certainly wasn't sane.. (whatever that means..!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 Again, that's the wrong assumption to make. He may well have been perfectly sane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilogikal1 Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 What's really disturbing is the fact that it wasn't a dive to kill everyone immediately, but a gradual descent into hell. I think that's what a lot of people struggle to comprehend. We don't even know if it was depression yet: The minimal amount of info we have could mean he'd been diagnosed with cancer or something equally serious, and he just couldn't cope with that news. I'm not saying that's what I believe, just that we cannot assume depression at this point. I agree with this, but... If the airline was aware that he'd been medically signed off work and acted upon that, he wouldn't have been in the cockpit at all, regardless of his motives. That said, I appreciate that even if (and that's still a big if with today's journalism!) what has thus far been reported is accurate it's still far from the full story at this point and other flaws in the system may present themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spursmaddave Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 Again, that's the wrong assumption to make. He may well have been perfectly sane. I wouldn't bother trying to explain Dan... Pot and kettle of you ask me 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 (edited) @Ilogikal: Agreed, but how many other people hide injuries or illnesses from their bosses every single day? I bet he wasn't even the only pilot still flying today when they've been signed off. Edited March 28, 2015 by Ekona Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaydnH Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 (edited) Wendy, control of the aircraft from the ground never took off due to fears about it being hacked and aircraft crashed on purpose. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not, tbh. If one person broke into the technology for one plane, they could concievebly crash all the planes in the air, all at once before anyone knew it had gone turbo. I've been thinking about this, and there's no way I'd get on a plane that could be taken over from the ground, it's far too easy to hack any system, especially considering the kind of software in play will be old but trusted, not the latest patch level. However, the autopilots these days (well for the past 20+ years) are good enough to take off, fly to airport X and land itself, so what's to stop the plane saying "hey, I'm gonna hit a mountain/building in NY, let's not do that!". Sure there may be times when a plane actually needs to make an emergency landing, but a system where the pilots can only overide the autopilot's safety measures with approval/authentication from ground control could be implemented easily with no risk of being able to take over the plane from the ground. Maybe with a backup of if ground control is out of contact then both pilots must enter a personal code to overide. I'm not sure how often autopilots fail, if at all, but if that's an issue then having 3 autopilots with a matching system (pilot A & B agree, C disagrees, go with A+B ) could be an option, albeit at a cost. Edited March 31, 2015 by HaydnH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.