Airbus A320 Crashes in Alps

Glaucus · 27 Mar 2015 at 21:47

mattyg said:
Hang on.

I wrote since 1999 suicidal pilots have killed more passengers than terrorists.

Then it gets thrown back that it pre dates the 9/11 changes. Well it will do I said 1999 which is before 2001.

?

Why discount those killed in the ground, no reason to do it.
And yes since 1999, so you are including 13 years when rules where in place to massively discourage hijackings and therefore skewing the results even more.
No, jumping to 2001 is even worse as you are only including dates after massive procedural changes to discourage hijackings. And therefore your suggestion that the procedures has caused more deaths is laughably stupid with the data you've provided.

mattyg · 27 Mar 2015 at 21:54

Woah hang on. Where did I suggest that the procedures have caused more deaths.

I wrote "since 1999 suicidal pilots have killed more passengers than terrorists" and somehow you've managed to read " Since 1999 and after they introduced the safety door terrorists haven't bothered but now were being overun by suicidal pilots."

Glaucus · 27 Mar 2015 at 21:55

mattyg said:
Woah hang on. Where did I suggest that the procedures have caused more deaths.

I wrote "since 1999 suicidal pilots have killed more passengers than terrorists" and somehow you've managed to read " Since 1999 and after they introduced the safety door terrorists haven't bothered but now were being overun by suicidal pilots."

So what were you trying to imply?
Or was it just a stupid statement from start to finish, with no meaning.

Jokester · 27 Mar 2015 at 21:57

I can't see how you can ignore people on the ground, suicidal pilots can kill them as well!

mattyg · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:08

Glaucus said:
So what were you trying to imply?
Or was it just a stupid statement from start to finish, with no meaning.

I wasn't trying to imply anything. Not every post on a forum is there to imply something.

I picked up on a comment made on another forum. Which made me go looking at some data regarding whether we should go back to an open FD. And what effect the precautions that we have now have had on terrorists MO's.

Is it airport security that has stopped terrorists taking over aircraft or is it the locked door, Or is it both. And whether or not we are likely to see a rise in pilot suicides as a result of them being able to lock themselves inside the FD when previously they may have been tackled and overpowered.

The comment was just that, a comment. I'm sure if you go through the thread many posts have been made with no real meaning. In fact the forum, Especially GD will be full of them.

The reinforced door has been thought of within the industry as a knee jerk reaction to 9/11 without proper thought. What it is creating now is an issue with lone suicidal pilots being able to take down a aircraft without a fight.

Glaucus · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:09

A totally silly comment.
Why exclude ground deaths, zero reason for it.

Why compare the number of deaths in the first place, what's the point, there's always a point when comparing numbers, others why compare them.

Air port security is still pretty lax, plenty of people have got banned items on bored. It is impossible to say why hijacks have decreased. It's like a lot of reasons, including airport security, locked cabin doors, better radar/intercept protocols, better intelligence, more focus on resources on war zones for terrorists groups, etc.
Which again was my point it's impossible to compare the numbers after these procedures changed.

Suicidal pilots is also nothing new,

Destination · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:11

mattyg said:
Hang on.

I wrote since 1999 suicidal pilots have killed more passengers than terrorists.
Is that better?

Yes, but suicidal pilots haven't taken out two massive building in the middle of a busy city, killing more than 3000.
So what you are saying is regurgitated nonsense.
It excludes thousands of associated deaths for no good reason.

Not many died due to gangland stabbings and shootings at Auschwitz or to suicidal pilots, yet many died there.

Xordium · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:11

Because a fight in a cockpit will always end with a good outcome and some determined person would never actually plan for that contingency.

VoG · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:12

Werewolf said:
As examples how many autopilots are programmed to find an out of service airfrield, do a visual approach and landing when the engines have all run out of fuel?
A situation that was thought to be impossible before it happened, but the pilot of the jet had fortunately got a lot of experience in gliders and was able to combine his knowledge of the aircraft, knowledge of gliders and history of the area he was flying over to work out how to get a passenger jet down relatively safely (IIRC they managed to repair it enough that it flew on to a functioning airport within a week).

Ahhhh the Gimli Glider, you have a good memory, & it's the perfect example of why no matter how sophisticated the software solution is, it cannot trump the hands on approach of an experienced, knowledgeable, human pilot.

There will allways be that unthinkable scenario that makes an experienced pilot sweat, but completely stumps a computer.

mattyg · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:12

Jokester said:
I can't see how you can ignore people on the ground, suicidal pilots can kill them as well!

I wasn't ignoring People on the ground though I was talking about Passengers. And only passengers.

Just like we are discussing terrorists taking over an aircraft not terrorists full stop.

Xordium · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:13

mattyg said:
I wasn't ignoring People on the ground though I was talking about Passengers. And only passengers.

Just like we are discussing terrorists taking over an aircraft not terrorists full stop.

Oh ok then no passengers have died in the air in the past year because of suicidal pilots ...

Destination · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:14

Xordium said:
Because a fight in a cockpit will always end with a good outcome and some determined person would never actually plan for that contingency.

While they might or might not, flicking a switch opens the door, and that's the sole task or purpose of a second person in such a situation.
You could as easily incapacitate a pilot sitting beside you with a frying pan to the face, as wait for him to leave the hit whoever replaces him.
They can't plan for everything, but it makes good sense as half the airlines already seemed to be doing to have two live bodies in there at all times.

-edit It is also a cheap and quick solution to a now realised situation.

mattyg · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:15

Hikari Kisugi said:
Yes, but suicidal pilots haven't taken out two massive building in the middle of a busy city, killing more than 3000.
So what you are saying is regurgitated nonsense.
It excludes thousands of associated deaths for no good reason.

Not many died due to gangland stabbings and shootings at Auschwitz or to suicidal pilots, yet many died there.

Depends if you want to get pedantic and get a little personal.

Can you explain to me who flew the planes into the two massive buildings if they weren't pilots.

two can play at being pedantic

Xordium · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:16

Hikari Kisugi said:
It is also a cheap and quick solution to a now realised situation.

It is and this is all about mitigating risk but there will always be risk and there will always be incidents. There is nothing we can do about that. And I would wager without locked doors you'd have had plenty of Jihadists doing copycats reruns of 9/11 that would have caused far more damage than the unfortunate events we now see.

Jokester · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:16

Is it possible to dig a hole all the way to Australia?

Destination · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:17

mattyg said:
Depends if you want to get pedantic and get a little personal.

Can you explain to me who flew the planes into the two massive buildings if they weren't pilots.

two can play at being pedantic

Well while you are being pedantic you might also be displaying a little idiocy in the eyes of those reading your posts.
You continue as long as you feel comfortable.
I'll keep watching.

Xordium · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:17

Jokester said:
Is it possible to dig a hole all the way to Australia?

Nope, because the centre of the world is full of dinosaurs and a great big ocean.

Destination · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:18

Xordium said:
It is and this is all about mitigating risk but there will always be risk and there will always be incidents. There is nothing we can do about that. And I would wager without locked doors you'd have had plenty of Jihadists doing copycats reruns of 9/11 that would have caused far more damage than the unfortunate events we now see.

Indeed, I agree.
But remember, they still wouldn't have done as much damage to 'passengers' as suicidal pilots......

mattyg · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:18

Xordium said:
It is and this is all about mitigating risk but there will always be risk and there will always be incidents. There is nothing we can do about that. And I would wager without locked doors you'd have had plenty of Jihadists doing copycats reruns of 9/11 that would have caused far more damage than the unfortunate events we now see.

I agree 100% Thats why I've said the reinforced door is a good idea, its just been implemented as a knee jerk reaction and could be improved on.

ianh · 27 Mar 2015 at 22:18

Don't worry MattG, I understand your point and your statement is factually correct but people here won't just won't let go once they start an argument.