+- The UK Babe Channels Forum (https://www.babeshows.co.uk)
+-- Forum: General (/forumdisplay.php?fid=19)
+--- Forum: All Other Subjects (/forumdisplay.php?fid=114)
+---- Forum: News Zone (/forumdisplay.php?fid=111)
+---- Thread: Airbus A320 - Flight 4U 9525 (/showthread.php?tid=64181)
RE: Airbus A320 - Flight 4U 9525 - Tractor boy - 26-03-2015 19:24
(26-03-2015 19:16 )SecretAgent Wrote: ^^
Doesn't need to be a pilot - just another crew member to make sure the door is not kept locked by the one pilot left in the cockpit. Many other airlines already do this.
This wouldn't eliminate the problem though, the third crew member could lock the door and incapacitate the second pilot. At the end of the day the airline and passengers lives are in the hands of the crew and nothing can change that, we just have to be thankful these incidents are very rare.
RE: Airbus A320 - Flight 4U 9525 - Scots Napoleon - 27-03-2015 02:31
(26-03-2015 15:54 )cosmonaut Wrote: If someone wanted to commit suicide I don't understand why he would need to take 149 other people with him. But then if the balance of his mind was disturbed he may not have been thinking in any rational manner.
Is it possible he was hoping that flying in to a mountain would prevent anyone knowing of his suicide? Because if they hadn't found the black box we would still be wondering what caused the crash.
RE: Airbus A320 - Flight 4U 9525 - 4waydiablo - 27-03-2015 08:05
(26-03-2015 19:24 )Tractor boy Wrote: This wouldn't eliminate the problem though, the third crew member could lock the door and incapacitate the second pilot.
So we need 3 crew members in the cockpit! Then if someone went rouge at least it would be 2 against 1.
RE: Airbus A320 - Flight 4U 9525 - Tractor boy - 27-03-2015 08:21
(27-03-2015 08:05 )4waydiablo Wrote:(26-03-2015 19:24 )Tractor boy Wrote: This wouldn't eliminate the problem though, the third crew member could lock the door and incapacitate the second pilot.
So we need 3 crew members in the cockpit! Then if someone went rouge at least it would be 2 against 1.
Not if one of them had left the cockpit to go to the toilet.
RE: Airbus A320 - Flight 4U 9525 - 4waydiablo - 27-03-2015 10:08
(27-03-2015 08:21 )Tractor boy Wrote: Not if one of them had left the cockpit to go to the toilet.
Your comment isn't logical.
With a rule of 3 people at all times, if one of them had left the cockpit to go to the toilet, someone else would have to step in to take that person's place. Otherwise the rule would be pointless. Just as the 2 in the cockpit rule would be pointless if it didn't work in that same way.
RE: Airbus A320 - Flight 4U 9525 - terence - 27-03-2015 10:47
^but the rule in question is 2 people in the cockpit at all times, not 3.
to put it simply, if there is only 2 pilots on the plane and one has to leave the cockpit for whatever reason, a crew member (flight attendant) would have to take his place. if there is three pilots on the plane then there should always be atleast 2 pilots in the cockpit.
RE: Airbus A320 - Flight 4U 9525 - 4waydiablo - 27-03-2015 11:55
I realise that's the rule, but according to Tractor Boy it won't eliminate the problem, because one person could overcome the other. That's why I said we need 3 crew members in the cockpit then. Because if someone went rouge at least there would be 2 others against him.
RE: Airbus A320 - Flight 4U 9525 - terence - 27-03-2015 12:15
ahh i get you, but how will three crew members fit into a cockpit with 2 seats? the truth is there's no way to be 100% safe. i think the current system is sufficient. this type of thing doesn't happen often.
RE: Airbus A320 - Flight 4U 9525 - Bandwagon - 27-03-2015 12:28
Well I know fuck all about how all this works but the part I find crazy is why the plane can't be remotely switched to auto-pilot from land if the plane is still fully operational and is clearly in some kind of trouble?
I'm sure someone can tell my why that doesn't happen but it would make sense after recent activities of the past few years etc.
RE: Airbus A320 - Flight 4U 9525 - CIA Snooper - 27-03-2015 13:35
(27-03-2015 12:28 )Bandwagon Wrote: I'm sure someone can tell my why that doesn't happen
It's because the airliners think that such a system could be hacked and it would lead to cyber hijacking, whereby terrorists could hijack flights without even having to get on board the plane. So remote control systems would make things more dangerous than they are now.