Plane crash in French Alps
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-03-2015, 06:52 PM
RE: Plane crash in French Alps
Isnt it ironic how a safety mechanism that is meant to protect passengers played a big role in killing the passengers?

[Image: RPYH95t.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-03-2015, 06:53 PM
RE: Plane crash in French Alps
The co pilot should really have a way to override the lock...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-03-2015, 06:54 PM
RE: Plane crash in French Alps
(26-03-2015 06:52 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(26-03-2015 06:51 PM)Chas Wrote:  The chemtrail dispensing nozzles were clogged so the co-pilot had to crash the plane to distribute the chemicals as widely as possible because the mission couldn't be allowed to fail. The science doesn't lie.

^ this guy knows the score.

The crash had to be at high speed and a shallow angle to maximize the spray pattern.
The math doesn't lie.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-03-2015, 07:27 PM
RE: Plane crash in French Alps
(26-03-2015 06:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(26-03-2015 06:52 PM)cjlr Wrote:  ^ this guy knows the score.

The crash had to be at high speed and a shallow angle to maximize the spray pattern.
The math doesn't lie.

So NPR had a reporter in the guy's home town today, and no one had a clue what his "deal" was that motivated the act. The only thing they can think of is it's related to the "break" in his training regimen when he was training for Lufthansa, and they're not releasing his personnel records now. Eventually they will have to.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-03-2015, 07:45 PM
RE: Plane crash in French Alps
Shouldn't have had the fish.





Too soon?

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2015, 01:08 AM
RE: Plane crash in French Alps
One more nail in the coffin of the human piloted airliner.

When you consider that well over 99% of all airline flights are not just successful but incident free, and that when incidents do occur the crew does not always save the day, or is, as here, THE monkeywrench, there's no good reason to expose the flying public to human fallibility, and at high salary expense personally aboard every airplane.

All the world's flights could be safely overseen by, say, a few dozen pilot/engineers who would handle, from a ground station and satellite repeaters for global coverage, the rare glitch that inflight monitoring equipment would pick up amongst the thousands of flights aloft at any given moment.

Yes, of course, such a system would produce crashes that could only have occurred by such a system, but I venture that the passenger casualty rate per seat mile would drop overall. And that, after all, is the second most important objective of airline flying, the first being able to misdirect baggage the furthest distance away from where it was supposed to go.

The biggest hurdle is bandwidth: transmitting all the essential telemetry in real time for all those flights. But that's a lot easier hurdle to surmount than trying to keep a system failsafe with fallible humanity still moving levers that machines can operate more competently. Or keep it failsafe from fickle human emotion and delusion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Airportkid's post
27-03-2015, 05:56 AM
RE: Plane crash in French Alps
(27-03-2015 01:08 AM)Airportkid Wrote:  One more nail in the coffin of the human piloted airliner.

When you consider that well over 99% of all airline flights are not just successful but incident free, and that when incidents do occur the crew does not always save the day, or is, as here, THE monkeywrench, there's no good reason to expose the flying public to human fallibility, and at high salary expense personally aboard every airplane.

All the world's flights could be safely overseen by, say, a few dozen pilot/engineers who would handle, from a ground station and satellite repeaters for global coverage, the rare glitch that inflight monitoring equipment would pick up amongst the thousands of flights aloft at any given moment.

Yes, of course, such a system would produce crashes that could only have occurred by such a system, but I venture that the passenger casualty rate per seat mile would drop overall. And that, after all, is the second most important objective of airline flying, the first being able to misdirect baggage the furthest distance away from where it was supposed to go.

The biggest hurdle is bandwidth: transmitting all the essential telemetry in real time for all those flights. But that's a lot easier hurdle to surmount than trying to keep a system failsafe with fallible humanity still moving levers that machines can operate more competently. Or keep it failsafe from fickle human emotion and delusion.

Really, really, really bad idea......

What you're proposing would make terrorism against airliners EASIER and SAFER for terrorists....

Think what's going to happen when you "hack the system" and cause it to "crash" -- pun intended...

The ONLY way to make flying 100 percent safe??? Leave it to the birds....

Flying is STILL one of the safest activities there is --- more people die every DAY driving - than die every YEAR flying...

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes onlinebiker's post
27-03-2015, 06:16 AM
RE: Plane crash in French Alps
One thing I've noticed missing in all this...

The co-pilot Andreas Lubitz -- What religion was he?

I did note that his mother was the organist in a Protestant church-- but the denomination wasn't mentioned.....

If the guy had been a Muslim or an atheist - ya think that might have gotten mentioned???????

Howcome we don't see the headline ---


Radical Christian Terrorism attacks German Airliner!

???

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2015, 06:36 AM
RE: Plane crash in French Alps
(27-03-2015 01:08 AM)Airportkid Wrote:  One more nail in the coffin of the human piloted airliner.

When you consider that well over 99% of all airline flights are not just successful but incident free, and that when incidents do occur the crew does not always save the day, or is, as here, THE monkeywrench, there's no good reason to expose the flying public to human fallibility, and at high salary expense personally aboard every airplane.

All the world's flights could be safely overseen by, say, a few dozen pilot/engineers who would handle, from a ground station and satellite repeaters for global coverage, the rare glitch that inflight monitoring equipment would pick up amongst the thousands of flights aloft at any given moment.

Yes, of course, such a system would produce crashes that could only have occurred by such a system, but I venture that the passenger casualty rate per seat mile would drop overall. And that, after all, is the second most important objective of airline flying, the first being able to misdirect baggage the furthest distance away from where it was supposed to go.

The biggest hurdle is bandwidth: transmitting all the essential telemetry in real time for all those flights. But that's a lot easier hurdle to surmount than trying to keep a system failsafe with fallible humanity still moving levers that machines can operate more competently. Or keep it failsafe from fickle human emotion and delusion.

That is a bad idea and would leave airplanes more open to hijackings because instead of terrorists having to physically take over a plane, all they would have to do is jump on a computer and hack the systems. Airplane crashes, though what may seem like a common occurrence now and days are actually rare and airplane travel is one of the safest. Nothing is perfect and you cannot make it perfect so why change something that is already working pretty well just because of a couple rare occurrences? Also humans have better and faster reactions than computers, in the seconds it would take for a signal from the control room to reach the airplane, a human pilot could already start performing a life saving maneuver because I can guarantee you a human could probably react a it faster than a signal reaching the aircraft. Also there is a chance the systems could fail and if there is no pilot to take over then there's no chance to save the plane and if it were not for actions of great pilots, there would be more deadly crashes.

"If you keep trying to better yourself that's enough for me. We don't decide which hand we are dealt in life, but we make the decision to play it or fold it" - Nishi Karano Kaze
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2015, 06:49 AM
RE: Plane crash in French Alps
(27-03-2015 06:16 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  One thing I've noticed missing in all this...

The co-pilot Andreas Lubitz -- What religion was he?

I did note that his mother was the organist in a Protestant church-- but the denomination wasn't mentioned.....

If the guy had been a Muslim or an atheist - ya think that might have gotten mentioned???????

Howcome we don't see the headline ---


Radical Christian Terrorism attacks German Airliner!

???

I'm leaning towards a more modern problem. Like, he was sexually frustrated or had some credit card debt or something.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: