The Germanwings crash in France

[zangtang]

'ladies and gentleman we are about to hit the ground'

[Twyla LaSarc]

Just because I can't help but think of this incident. It likely has nothing to do with what went on, but it is another perspective, nonetheless.

A few years ago a male relative of my husband descended quite quickly into madness. In a matter of weeks, he started having religious fixations and odd behavior. He was no longer living near family who had known him in the past and his roomates, who had only known him for periods of months before the incident thought him changed but were not alarmed enough to think he needed help.

One day while driving, Jesus spoke to him and told him (at the top of a hill, no less) to let go of the steering wheel. He woke up at the bottom of the hill after having damaged something like 6 cars, totalling 2 others plus his own. His experience of 'Jesus' was apparently quite convincing, as he related it later- he saw a radiant light, heard 'His' voice and experienced the greatest personal peace and joy he had ever known as he was letting go of the wheel. He was later diagnosed with manic/depression among other things.

He takes his meds and has recovered enough to go back to his job (which is nothing like flying a plane).

'Psychological care' can mean things other than suicidal ideation.

[zangtang]

I cant say that wasn't neurochemical - but don't you feel maybe
some shitty little trickster demon somewhere is sniggering
'cyuk-cyuk....got away with it again.........' ?


cf/ John Keel's mothman 'phonecalls'

[82_28]

They keep repeating this inanity: "he can be heard breathing so we know he wasn't unconscious."

WHAT? Last I checked unconscious people are still breathing. So the only thing they can say is that he wasn't dead. Yet.

This is all very weird.

There you go being logical again. Don't you know that most reporters nowadays are idiots?

Fuck yeah, they're idiots. There was a fire down the street a month ago or so. So I went down to check out what was happening. The news crew was there from a station here and I watched the reporter for like five minutes put his make up on as he readied himself for breaking news zone. It was totally dystopian as he didn't givea fuck about the fire at all, but had to be ready for his "spot".

[Twyla LaSarc]

I cant say that wasn't neurochemical - but don't you feel maybe
some shitty little trickster demon somewhere is sniggering
'cyuk-cyuk....got away with it again.........' ?


cf/ John Keel's mothman 'phonecalls'

Oh yeah. Often.

[Byrne]

A UK Daily Mail article of 24th March 2015 which was edited to remove eye-witness references to 'fighter jets':





source: http://www.jimstone.is/a320crash.html

[Dradin Kastell]

.

Also worth noting that Andreas Lubitz had a total of approx. 600 flight hrs at the time he joined Germanwings; in contrast, my brother had over 5,000 miles at the time he was hired by his current employer (a regional airline based in the U.S.) as a co-pilot.

Couple clarifying points about flight hours: The U.S. FAA requires pilots to accumulate a minimum of 1500 flight hours before they can be considered for employment with any commercial airline.
Although my brother had 5000+ miles at the time of his employment, he accumulated those hours working for smaller 'puddle-jumper' airline companies (prior to that, he was flying Cessnas at a SkyDive facility).

Lufthansa (parent to Germanwings) apparently begins training would-be pilots with as little as zero flight hours (most EU airline regulations permit this), which in turn allows for co-pilots to begin flying commercially with far less total flying hours than their U.S. counterparts.

It might be fair to point out, though, that despite different demands placed on pilots and co-pilots, European airlines in general have a pretty similar safety record as American airlines do, and frequently top lists of the most safe airlines in the world. The difference to, say, Asian airlines is a lot more pronounced. Lufthansa itself has been frequently seen among the most safe airlines. Before this recent tragedy, the last Lufthansa (or subsidiary) accident causing a major loss of life (72 dead) took place over 40 years ago and the last fatal accident (two dead) over 20 year ago.

It is very possible, though, that as of late complacency over good safety records in the past and the perceived "need" to cut costs have combined to lead to "relaxing" safety regulations and thus made various accidents and dangerous incidents more likely in the future.

A UK Daily Mail article of 24th March 2015 which was edited to remove eye-witness references to 'fighter jets'

The French government has acknowledged that a Mirage fighter jet was scrambled to intercept the Germanwings plane after it could not be contacted. According to French sources, the Mirage took off from the Orange-Caritat Air Base, which seems to be about 100 km west from the crash site.

This from the Independent:

Ms Royal confirmed this morning that, soon after 10.30am, when the pilots had stopped responding by radio, the French military scrambled a Mirage jet fighter to investigate. This aircraft was seen by eye-witnesses following the doomed airliner as it skimmed the Alpine ridges before crashing into a sheer mountain-side. The pilot of the Mirage could, therefore, also possess crucial information on the Germanwings aircraft's behaviour.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 31891.html

And this from the Liberation:

Une source gouvernementale a confirmé à Libération que la dernière position de l’avion a été enregistrée à 10h41, et que le crash s’est produit juste après. L’Airbus ne volait alors plus qu’à 2 000 mètres d’altitude. Juste avant, à 10h30, une alerte a été déclenchée automatiquement par le contrôle au sol après 4 ou 5 appels restés sans réponse. Peu après, l’armée de l’air, alertée par l’aviation civile, a fait décoller un Mirage 2 000 de la base d’Orange pour aller au contact de l’Airbus. Mais, volant trop haut, il n’a pu le repérer. C'est un hélicoptère de la gendarmerie qui a découvert les débris.

http://www.liberation.fr/societe/2015/0 ... it_1227309

That is to say there is a plausible explanation for a fighter jet to be sighted in the area at the time. It would be interesting to know if those eye-witnesses really did say seeing fighter jets in plural instead of just one jet, though, or might it be just several witnesses reporting the same single jet.

EDIT: Does any other source besides the Jim Stone website mention the "Italian fighter jet issuing a mayday"? I tried Googling it, but so far all sites I have seen mentioning an Italian fighter in connection to the Germanwings crash just reference the Jim Stone site.

EDIT2: Found it on David Icke's forum:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Emergency...02663251824640

The Italian fighterjet is MM7168

Squawk 7700 reported at 10:35 CET at the same position where germanwings started sinking. It's the same time, too.

professional pilots network pprune reporting that MM7168 incident, too.

Looks very much like a collision.



The photo above mixes up japanese "peach aviation" flight number MM7168 (which is domestic in japan only) and italian military jet MM7168. the 7700 mayday squawk doesnt come from a peach aviation flight but from italian fighter jet MM7168 due to source "professional pilots network".

http://jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?regsearch=MM7168

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthre ... 1062445997

The location of this Italian AMX International AMX fighter would be about 500 km away from the Germanwings crash site, though - in north-eastern Italy, over the town of Tolmezzo, it seems from the map and the latitude and longitude reported on the screen grab. So despite what bluebirdgr is saying, the position is not the same. This is over 30 minutes away from the crash site at the plane's maximum speed which Wikipedia gives as 914 km/h.

The location of this Italian jet is consistent with the Italian Air Force unit (51º Stormo) operating such aircraft out of the Treviso-Istrana Air Base, under 100 km from where this emergency was declared.

[Belligerent Savant]

.

Thanks for the added context Dradin -- was about to comment on Byrne's Jimestone.is link and the reference to the fighter jets scrambling prior to the crash (or more precisely, that such allusions were 'scrubbed' from various initial media reports), but you've handled it more ably than I may have.

Here's some additional info Re: cockpit door, again from the Jimstone link; interpret as you deem fit:

Someone killed a big lie for me - the cockpit door!

Someone dredged this up from A320 user manuals, and it kills the official story.
A forward-opening hinge door separates the cockpit from the passenger compartment. It has three electric locking strikes, controlled by the flight crew. In normal conditions, when the door is closed, they remain locked. When there is a request to enter the cockpit, the flight crew can authorize entry by unlocking the door, that remains closed until it is pushed open.

When the flight crew does not respond to requests for entry, the door can also be unlocked by the cabin crew, by entering a two to seven-digit code (programmed by the airline) on the keypad, installed on the lateral side of the Forward Attendant Panel (FAP).

DEAR REMI, PLEASE ASSIST! WE NEED SOME MORE "TRUTH TELLING", PLEASE, WERE BOTH PILOTS SUICIDAL ALONG WITH EVERY STEWARDESS?

Here is my final statement regarding the Germanwings downing:

THE EXPERIENCED PILOT LEFT THE COCKPIT TO TRY TO FIND A TECHNICAL REASON FOR WHY THEY LOST CONTROL OF THE AIRCRAFT AFTER ENTERING FRENCH AIRSPACE AND THE REST IN THE PRESS ABOUT A SUICIDE PILOT IS A SCAMMING ZIO LIE. Understand that the French government now has to front every type of lie possible to bury the truth. They cannot accept responsibility for fulfilling this agenda, and did not expect to get caught. Lying is now their only option.
These lies are test run on public forums to see what will sell. When a lie is told that people go for, that is what gets published as "a new discovery". It will be important to not drift from the facts, which are set in bedrock. They are:

Irrefutable fact 1: A remote hijack recovery system was available, and was not used to recover this A320 even though it was obviously in distress. On the A320, a pilot is rendered completely disabled when this system is activated. On the 757/67 the pilot still has influence but has to fight like hell against it once activated. This was clearly discussed on the Boeing web site in pilots blogs, when I accidentally got into a secure area looking for answers after 911. There was lots of information I have not put into this report to keep it readable, but it was DETAILED, such as, the actual computer that is responsible for the remote option on the 757/67 is UNDER A FLOOR PANEL AT THE FRONT OF THE PASSENGER COMPARTMENT. That's classified info, and cold hard proof I really did do a great job on the Boeing web site for those who are in the know.

I am trying to be a little more clear here so the intelligence agencies realize that I really did get into a secure area and really do have accurate info, and maybe they will back off on the GOD DAMN MAIL CENSORSHIP. It is pointless, I will not be convinced to change this story, I know what I know and that is the end of it. Trolling and censoring simply can't cut it.

When I say France hijacked this airplane and ditched it for a reason, I am not puffing B.S. If a nutcase antidepressant pilot decided to whack the crew and passengers, the correct outcome would have been:THE PLANE DESCENDED TO 18,000 FEET AND AT THAT TIME GROUND CONTROL TOOK ACTION AND LANDED IT, PERIOD, END OF DISCUSSION

IF YOU CANNOT ACCEPT THE REMOTE TAKEOVER, YOU CANNOT DENY THE FOLLOWING ANYWAY:

A COMPLETELY ALONE Italian fighter jet issued a mayday call one minute before this Airbus went into it's descent while in view of it, and then returned to base. This is documented, but the reason for the mayday call has never been published, and I know why:
Because "SEVERAL" French fighter jets were in the area, on the edge of where this Italian fighter jet was allowed to go, taking over this airbus the second it entered French airspace, AND FOLLOWED IT ALL THE WAY TO THE CRASH SCENE. The Italian turned around after witnessing the remote takeover because he was not authorized to go into French airspace. How do we know this in irrefutable terms? Because witnesses on the ground saw these French fighter jets following this airbus all the way up until it crashed, and after the crash was a confirmed reality THEY BUGGED OUT RATHER THAN STAY AROUND AND ASSESS THE SITUATION.

The fact that these fighter jets got expunged from the ziopress SAYS IT ALL, but the Ziopress did the cleanup too late, people got screenshots of the news reports both before and after this, and these screenshots are below, on this page.

SO, If an Italian fighter jet issued a mayday which is EXTREMELY UNUSUAL, and immediately returned to base, AND "several" French fighter jets escorted this airbus into a mountain only to subsequently get expunged, THE AIRBUS PILOT LEFT THE COCKPIT TO TRY TO FIND A TECHNICAL REASON FOR WHY THEY LOST CONTROL OF THE AIRCRAFT AFTER ENTERING FRENCH AIRSPACE AND THE REST IN THE PRESS ABOUT A SUICIDE PILOT IS A SCAMMING ZIO LIE.

Due to a complete blackout of information in the mail boxes, this is probably as complete as this report can get. Frankly, it is already a death sentence to the credibility of the French government, so it is fine the way it is, READ IT AND WEEP, ARCHIVE AND POST!
My remote control claims are well founded:

As mentioned farther down this page, In 2002 I got proof the A320 has remote hijack recovery as a standard feature in all models when I "accidentally" got into a secure area of the Boeing web site where pilots were discussing the differences between aircraft from various manufacturers. They were discussing this remote hijack recovery system they all know exists and were questioning why it was not used to stop 911 because both the 757/767 had this system as well. When I say France crashed this airplane on purpose, I have a damn good reason to say so.
Dear Remi, as the plane had remote hijack recovery built in, why was that system not activated during the eight minutes during which the plane was in difficulty and without pilot communication? There was plenty of time to recognize that the plane was out of control and would crash without intervention. Why did you not activate the hijack recovery system? Perhaps you had a different agenda. Perhaps that system was instead being used to fulfill that agenda.

Next up from the liars: THE AGENDA. Lie#354: The suicide pilot Muslim tie-in to get support for that war in Yemen!
waiting, waiting, waiting . . . . .


An intentional pilot initiated crash is the only way out for the liars

UPDATE: Cockpit lock out story is a LIE. The manual override that keeps the cockpit door locked only lasts 5 minutes, per TV reports. That would leave 3 to 5 minutes to storm the cockpit and take at least some evasive or corrective action.

As I said right from the beginning, this crash was intentionally created via remote control, and the plane hit the mountain in perfect working condition. The investigators know this. I wondered what they would come up with to hide the fact that this was a government hit. And so, now, they are going to say one pilot locked the other out of the cockpit and then intentionally crashed the plane. Go figure, but here is Remi suggesting a pilot did it on purpose:

Remi Jouty, director of France's Bureau of Investigation and Analysis:

"So far, we don't have any evidence that points clearly to a technical explanation," the official said. "So we have to consider the possibility of deliberate human responsibility."

My response: DEAR REMI, YOU KNOW DAMN WELL THAT PLANE HAD REMOTE HIJACK RECOVERY BUILT IN, WHY NOT CONSIDER THE MISUSE OF THAT SYSTEM?

DEAR REMI, PERHAPS ONE OR BOTH PILOTS LEFT THE COCKPIT TO FIGURE OUT WHY THEY LOST CONTROL OF THE PLANE AFTER A REMOTE HIJACK. GOT A BETTER ANSWER? WHY THE SUICIDE PILOT RUSE?

The scenario given by Remi is a lie, the fighter jets say so. HERE IS THE CHECK MATE, AND THERE IS NO WAY OUT OF IT:

They might, in the end, say the fighter jets were there to see why the plane went into a descent. But if that be the case, fighter jets, which have very skilled pilots will fly upside down or along side a distressed jet to look in the cockpit and see what is going on. That did not happen, we have no word of this, yet THE FIGHTER JETS WERE THERE. If they were not there to assist the plane or find out what was going on with the pilots, they were there to destroy the plane, and the crash of a perfectly working plane proves it. There is no way out of this.

I do not know the source of the following quote, but evidently it came from a pilot. It first appeared on Barking Moonbat two days ago according to the Google time stamp, AND IT SAYS IT ALL:

"IF France finds the flight recorders, and IF they aren't mangled beyond use, and IF they make the actual contents public record, then I won't be at all surprised to find they didn't record a word of cockpit conversation nor a peep from the passenger cabin. I bet there won't be any records of any AirPhone usage, or any outgoing messages from any of the cell phones on board.
I think the plane was hacked. Brought down. A poison gas canister attached to the air system and triggered by the "seat belts" signal when the plane reached altitude. And exactly 30 minutes later, the engines were shut down. Either by programming or by remote control. And the computer flies the plane perfectly, like a glider in an 8 minute descent, right into an Alp.

I think looking at the passenger list could be very informative. This looks like a hit. A major hit, at the level of nation-states or the largest criminal cartels. Or a worldwide group of fanatics. So, who was on this flight?

Don't expect an honest answer. There are no honest governments."

As mentioned farther down this page, In 2002 I got proof the A320 has remote hijack recovery as a standard feature in all models when I "accidentally" got into a secure area of the Boeing web site where pilots were discussing the differences between aircraft from various manufacturers. They were discussing this remote hijack recovery system they all know exists and were questioning why it was not used to stop 911 because both the 757/767 had this system as well. When I say France crashed this airplane on purpose, I have a damn good reason to say so.

All relevant info regarding this crash, proving it was a government hit and nothing else is below.

Here is the scenario they decided to peddle

One pilot left the cockpit and could not get in. The other pilot was not responsive until the plane crashed. An arab type terror scenario has been implied, that the pilot in the cockpit suicide crashed the plane ON PURPOSE. PROBLEM. HUGE PROBLEM

HOW DOES THAT EXPLAIN THE FIGHTER JET ESCORTS THEY EXPUNGED FROM REPORTS, FIGHTER JETS THAT ARE CUTELY CAPTURED AND SHOWN REPORTED BELOW ON THIS VERY PAGE? If you have not seen this, scroll down to the captures

This was their "flight recorder discovery" and if you believe that line, I have a bag of moon rocks.

Bottom line? They know they are nailed and this is the only scenario they have other than a remote controlled crash that can possibly fit what happened - an autopilot disabling followed by a perfectly controlled power descent straignt into a mountain. Either they explain it this way, or the are FORCED TO ADMIT THIS WAS A REMOTE CONTROL WHACK JOB. FAT CHANCE THEY EVER WILL
If they try to back peddle from the "pilot crashed it on purpose" angle and just say the pilot passed out, that is a fail because autopilot was in control and even in the extremely likely event it was not in control, absent a pilot a plane will keep flying straight and level until it runs out of fuel. It will not go into a dive by itself.

The biggest problem they can never overcome is the fighter jets that followed it until it hit the mountain, and then, rather than assess the situation, they bugged out. THAT SAYS IT ALL, they cannot back track from that cold hard fact.

They really are stuck with the suicide crash option. Will people believe it? NOT IF THEY KNOW ABOUT THE FIGHTER JETS. ARCHIVE AND POST!

It looks to me like Germany paid some "holocaust reparations" with an airplane!

Germanwings downing a legitimate black op

This is easy to tell, because now there are many theories popping up to divert and distract. There is one new theory, however, that got my interest and may actually be a clue if it is legit. This theory is that the fighter jets shot the A320 right before impact with the mountain and it was smoking as it hit. This could be plausible for the following reason:
The A320 is a full fly by wire aircraft. If a pilot pushes a pedal or pulls a lever, it is not hooked up to the mechanics in any way whatsoever. And if this A320 was equipped with collision avoidance, this full fly by wire attribute most likely would not have allowed it to hit the mountain, most likely it would have pulled up on time and missed. If this is the case, then the fighter jets would have been needed to shoot the elevator portion of the tail flaps out, which are needed to make the aircraft pull up and if the tail is disabled, the collision avoidance would not have been able to stop the crash.

Absent the tail, the plane could still proceed at full throttle into the mountain and whatever debris came off the tail would most likely have simply followed the plane into the mountain and not left a separate debris path. This fits the eyewitness scenario quite well, and would explain the roaring sound people heard continue for several seconds, this could have easily been caused by a missile launch to blow the tail out.

Other scenarios, such as a laser brought it down are in my opinion just diversions, but I will certainly give the scenario of smoke coming from the aircraft after it was shot while approaching the mountain fair consideration. Fighter jets and collision avoidance disabling certainly fit that scenario.

After all

Why would the fighter jets be there to begin with, and then leave the scene immediately after a crash that would have been obvious to them? No aircraft, even an ultralight, would go unnoticed by a fighter jet designed to hunt and kill, THEY KNEW THAT CRASH HAPPENED, WHY DID THEY LEAVE THE SCENE IMMEDIATELY? If they did not cause it, it would have been their job to stick around, assess the situation and report back to the base what the situation was. They did not do this, BIG QUESTION: WHY NOT?

Mails being tampered with - if you are trying to get through with information and are not seeing it here, it is because it got blocked. I have found what might be a good mail provider and will try to circumvent this problem.
"It is inexplicable how such a thing could happen to a technically perfect aircraft with experienced, trained at Lufthansa pilots" - Lufthansa CEO Carsten Spohr
MY RESPONSE: IT IS NOT INEXPLICABLE, READ THE FOLLOWING:


New info on Germanwings crash

It has now been determined that the descent was a perfectly controlled full throttle dive of a perfectly working aircraft straight into the side of a mountain. And I know how it happened, details below.

Why no identifiable bodies? I got the answer:

Many people on the web are asking where the people are and how an airplane can just "vanish" into such tiny pieces. I have the answer. The crash was done in a way that caused the bodies to be erased so no person outside the controlled group of investigators could possibly identify anyone on the flight.
How do you cause bodies to vanish and an airplane to turn into such small pieces?

By having the crash occur at a very high speed. And this particular crash happened at 600 plus MPH.
A 600 plus MPH impact is proven by how badly the plane shredded. And 600 plus MPH crashes do not happen outside of willful intent.

Chris wrote:

About the remote control capabilities of the 757/767 aircraft, you are right. They were revolutionary aircraft, and Popular Science covered their release in detail in the early 1980's. In one of the many reports they did, they talked about how the aircraft were hijack proof and ground controllable. I cannot find anything on this now, it seems 911 has done away with history and the report that mentioned this is not on the web. Someone is going to have to dig through the basement to find it in print.

My response:

I had a subscription to Popular science at that time and remember this. Additionally, in 2002 I accidentally got into a secure area of the Boeing web site where pilots were posting about this system and how it had been removed from all the aircraft after 911. Those who had experience with airbus said the system was still in A320 aircraft because Airbus had not been compromised (their coding was more secure).
And this would explain why the fighter jets which accompanied this Germanwings flight all the way to it's death and then left the scene did not shoot it down, even though it is more than obvious they were either responsible for the crash or ordered to witness it. If erasing bodies and making them unidentifiable to all but a very controlled group of investigators was needed to conceal who was on that flight, remote controlling the aircraft into a mountain after a steep dive at full throttle would be the best way to do it, and now investigators at the scene have said the largest body part they have found is the size of a briefcase. Absolutely no one can be visually identified.

Normal plane crashes do not have such small debris and erased bodies because pilots slow the plane down and it crashes at around 200 mph, not 600 plus.

Beyond all doubt, the fighter aircraft were responsible for this crash and whoever ordered this crash wanted the bodies erased. This is why the fighter jets did not shoot the plane down even though they were clearly responsible for it's demise. If they had shot the plane, it would have fallen in large pieces and would have had the bodies be intact. By using remote to crash the plane after a full throttle dive, they ensured a perfect crash scene with obliteration of evidence.

This is why no communication with the pilots happened, they were totally blacked out even after the tower declared an emergency and made repeated attempts to contact the pilots long before the crash actually happened and received no response. This is highly unusual, if not completely unprecedented except for the other obvious government jobs, - 911 and flight 370.
They are testing conspiracies to see what will work to fool the public on forums and blogs right now, before releasing "what the black boxes said." The most prevalent theory for why the pilots were silent is slow depressurization blacked everyone out with no one noticing. This is bunk.

FOR THE RECORD: The plane peaked out at 38,000 feet, stayed there for ONE MINUTE, and then did it's death dive. That is not long enough to black out everyone from a loss of cabin pressure, or "slowly depressurize the cabin" and once the plane hit 25,000 feet, people would have woken up even if this theory is what happened. It is an obvious hoax theory. The plane was simply not high enough long enough for this theory to hold any water.

Unfiltered mail blurbs from mails that made it.

Hello, Jim. This info. ought to be good for a sarcastic comment vis-a-vis sep 11 - might want to consider the remnants look like confetti, but the plane in 5 side polygon was claimed it drove through multi-foot thick reinforced concrete walls in a row and 2 others punched through steel framed towers, too. Shouldn't we then see a 40 foot deep divot hole in the mountainside? tim
_____

Come back to you again with this. Check the flight path radar. At video 016 it is getting hazy (why?). At 019 you still see the big plane on the right of GWI/18G .... At 020 this plane is vanished. AWAKS could do that - you know that better tan me cause you are the specialist. Looks for me like a warning to Merkel concerning not following US instructions concerninbg WW III ..... Please check ....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7PYLmKg8jM

P.S.: The flight had been directed over the Alps, pretty far away from the direct route. There, where the plane came down, no French citizens could be hit.

_____

you asked the question Who was on the plane?

In the news moments ago they said that there have been two engineers of Delphi on board of this plane.

Maybe it might be a small piece of info but to get the full pic we need to put them all together.

______

March 24 2015

[Nordic]

This is only tangentially related to finding the actual cause of this disaster, but it's so good I had to share it.



http://youtu.be/aCREVmaRaeg

[elfismiles]

Doubts Intensify About Reports of a Video Made During Germanwings Flight’s Final Moments
By RICK GLADSTONE APRIL 1, 2015
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/02/world ... ments.html

But there has been no precise explanation from Paris Match and Bild, the European publications that exclusively reported the video’s existence, on how they were able to see it, how they can vouch for its provenance and why they do not have physical proof.

Doubts about the video’s authenticity intensified after the French police asserted that the reports about it were false and the French prosecutor leading the crash investigation said no videos were known to have been recovered so far from the wreckage.

Journalism ethics experts in the United States said Wednesday that the video story synthesized what they described as a confluence of disturbing trends shaping the news business in the 24/7 Internet age: reckless urgency, absence of healthy skepticism and disregard for the consequences to credibility if a story is wrong.

“There is this insatiable desire for instantaneous reporting,” said Jane E. Kirtley, director of the Silha Center for the Study of Media Ethics and Law at the University of Minnesota. “We tend to feed the beast in that way, by passing along this stuff before it’s been verified, simply because someone else has reported it. I find that really troubling.”

It is entirely possible that such a video exists, journalism ethicists said. But the public is at least entitled to a more detailed explanation of its veracity than has been forthcoming so far.

[brekin]

Something I don't understand is in this day in age why there aren't more fail safes. I think the crazy thing is one copilot was basically able to kill hundreds by simply telling the computer to change its cruising altitude from thousands of feet to 100 feet in seconds.

I'm not asking for a HAL to nit pick every decision a pilot makes but when the human input = death for all, why can't there be some sort of back up/contingency/alarm/count down alert/second pilot or home base sign off protocol?

Of course, talking to Mr. Google he found me an answer of sorts:

There are new calls from aviation experts to develop and deploy enhanced crash avoidance software that could take control of an aircraft away from a pilot and steer it to a safe altitude.

The technology would work in a similar fashion to crash avoidance technology already used in automobiles if a pilot is incapacitated or ignores audible warnings.
The idea is not new. In fact more than 10 years ago following 9/11, Airbus, the manufacturer of the doomed aircraft, was working to d‎evelop aircraft crash avoidance software with tech giant Honeywell -- in part to prevent jetliners from being flown into large buildings or mountains. But the project was ultimately scrapped.

Still, there's also a widespread view that the best way to understand what happened in this case is to understand Lubitz.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/02/europe/fr ... rash-main/

Yes, we need to solve the simple riddle why seemingly normal people suddenly are capable of killing. Because that is something that should be easy to work out fairly quickly. ??? Instead of transposing existing crash avoidance software to airplanes which are known to crash now and again.

I wonder why such a project was "ultimately scrapped" though? If you have planes which when they are not damaged and functioning correctly won't allow humans to crash them,
who would have a problem with that?

I mean what country or industry wouldn't want to "prevent jetliners from being flown into large buildings or mountains"?

[conniption]

Field McConnell on Germanwings Flight 9525 · Sunday Wire 3-29-2015

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpapRT8yJzs

Abel Danger
Published on Mar 29, 2015

Episode #78 – SUNDAY WIRE: ‘The Friendly Skies’, host Patrick Henningsen with guest Field McConnell

http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/03/29...

Thank you Patrick. I encourage listeners to follow the Sunday Wire and the 21st Century Wire website for outstanding research and intel.

"Sky News .. Andreas Lubitz: Profile Of Killer Co-Pilot [Yellow journalism at its finest - Shame on you Rupert and all who read with you!]


According to reports, the 27-year-old German took time out from training to be a pilot as he had suffered "burnout or depression". 06:41, UK, Saturday 28 March 2015 The co-pilot who deliberately crashed a plane in the French Alps with the loss of 150 lives had a history of depression, it has been reported.

The focus on Andreas Lubitz's mental health comes after a French prosecutor concluded the 27-year-old had deliberately [with no changes to his steady breathing] flown the Germanwings Airbus 320 into the mountainside killing all those on board."

http://www.abeldanger.net/2015/03/231...