Shocking Development In Germanwings Crash - Pilot Locked Out

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

 

 

 

One addition I'd like to see is cameras installed in the flightdeck (maybe the cabin as well) that feed into the recorders. Surely in this day and age they can do that.  Its one thing to hear whats going on, but seeing it would help as well and leave no question as to what the pilots are doing.

 

That will never happen... pilots wont go for it and really when you think of it ... it wouldnt help anything in this case.

 

Would you agree to have a camera watching you work?

 

Sure, why not.  I have cameras in my work place.  My management has the right to access my computer at any time and see exactly what I see, hears what I hear.  This isnt a big issue.  The union would bargain for cameras to be used in the same sense the voice recorder's are used - incidents.  Every word they say is recorded and there are processes for when they can speak and what they can say and Im sure pilots violate that from time to time but airlines arent pulling the voice recorders to use to discipline them.  If they valued cameras, it would not be a big issue to get them.

 

I think it would help.  For one it fills in blanks.  It gives you the opportunity to see the faces and expressions of the pilots.  It can show what a pilot was physically doing and not just what the data recorder recorded he was doing.  It can show medical issues, sleeping, distractions etc.  I think it's valuable.

 

 

Having access to your comp aint really the same thing IMO.

 

You would be ok with them putting a camera on your desk pointed right at you so they can watch you any time they want? Record you and watch it whenever they want?

 

And like i said a cockpit is a pretty small area... they could just cover it up if they wanted.... put a hat over it and its useless. 

 

Thats not even close to what I wrote though is it?

 

I dont do a job that requires a camera on me at my desk.  But one aspect of my job requires handling of large amounts of money and in that room there is a camera on me.  And it is monitored by security.

 

I dont believe airlines can pull the voice recorders and listen to them anytime they want to to discipline the pilots.  This would be the same thing.  Cameras there for the safety of the crew and passengers to be reviewed in the event of an incident.  And if it was set up the same as the flight recorders, it couldnt even be used to review something that happened mid-flight since it only records the final 30 minutes.  it's designed to help investigators when there is a major crash.  Ask investigators if they'd love to be able to plug in to a lap top and immediately hear AND see what happened during the final moments of the plane.

 

It's a no brainer, really.

 

 

Well i asked if you would be ok with a camera focused on you all day at work and then you answered me about them having acsess to your comp and being able to see what you see.

 

Im not arguing it with you im just saying what im hearing on CNN and pilots seem to say no.

 

And like i said they could just cover it up. How do you stop that?

 

You also mentioned airlines being able to see it at any time.  Im saying that's an easy solution since they cant access the voice recorder at any time as is.  Have the camera feeding the recorder.  Last 30-120 minutes of action and thats it.  Im sure there is some way in the security industry to make a camera resistant to being covered. 

[New_Earth_Mud]

 

 

 

 

 

 

One addition I'd like to see is cameras installed in the flightdeck (maybe the cabin as well) that feed into the recorders. Surely in this day and age they can do that.  Its one thing to hear whats going on, but seeing it would help as well and leave no question as to what the pilots are doing.

 

That will never happen... pilots wont go for it and really when you think of it ... it wouldnt help anything in this case.

 

Would you agree to have a camera watching you work?

 

Sure, why not.  I have cameras in my work place.  My management has the right to access my computer at any time and see exactly what I see, hears what I hear.  This isnt a big issue.  The union would bargain for cameras to be used in the same sense the voice recorder's are used - incidents.  Every word they say is recorded and there are processes for when they can speak and what they can say and Im sure pilots violate that from time to time but airlines arent pulling the voice recorders to use to discipline them.  If they valued cameras, it would not be a big issue to get them.

 

I think it would help.  For one it fills in blanks.  It gives you the opportunity to see the faces and expressions of the pilots.  It can show what a pilot was physically doing and not just what the data recorder recorded he was doing.  It can show medical issues, sleeping, distractions etc.  I think it's valuable.

 

 

Having access to your comp aint really the same thing IMO.

 

You would be ok with them putting a camera on your desk pointed right at you so they can watch you any time they want? Record you and watch it whenever they want?

 

And like i said a cockpit is a pretty small area... they could just cover it up if they wanted.... put a hat over it and its useless. 

 

Thats not even close to what I wrote though is it?

 

I dont do a job that requires a camera on me at my desk.  But one aspect of my job requires handling of large amounts of money and in that room there is a camera on me.  And it is monitored by security.

 

I dont believe airlines can pull the voice recorders and listen to them anytime they want to to discipline the pilots.  This would be the same thing.  Cameras there for the safety of the crew and passengers to be reviewed in the event of an incident.  And if it was set up the same as the flight recorders, it couldnt even be used to review something that happened mid-flight since it only records the final 30 minutes.  it's designed to help investigators when there is a major crash.  Ask investigators if they'd love to be able to plug in to a lap top and immediately hear AND see what happened during the final moments of the plane.

 

It's a no brainer, really.

 

 

Well i asked if you would be ok with a camera focused on you all day at work and then you answered me about them having acsess to your comp and being able to see what you see.

 

Im not arguing it with you im just saying what im hearing on CNN and pilots seem to say no.

 

And like i said they could just cover it up. How do you stop that?

 

You also mentioned airlines being able to see it at any time.  Im saying that's an easy solution since they cant access the voice recorder at any time as is.  Have the camera feeding the recorder.  Last 30-120 minutes of action and thats it.  Im sure there is some way in the security industry to make a camera resistant to being covered. 

 

 

I guess.

 

I just really dont see how it helps anything. Having a camera is not going to stop anything from happening or detour anyone from crashing a plane if thats what they are set out to do.

 

If they are going to spend billions on something it should be on something better then that. IMO.

 

My question would be this...  If this plane had a camera.... what would you learn from watching? They already know what the guy did, they dont know why he did it and he didnt talk. So what would a camera tell anyone?

[WBBFanWest]

And the point of the camera would be what exactly?  It's not going to prevent anything from happening and it doesn't appear that the investigators are having too much trouble figuring things out using just the voice recorder and later when they confirm it with the flight data recorder.. Again, if someone's going to do this, all the pictures in the world will not change anything.  Personally, I think that watching the last moments of terror before someone dies are something that no one should have to do unless there's a real good reason to have to do it.  Don't see that reason here.

 

What would be useful is being able to track aircraft the are outside radar coverage so we never have to have another Korean Air Flight 902 or Air France Flight 447

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One addition I'd like to see is cameras installed in the flightdeck (maybe the cabin as well) that feed into the recorders. Surely in this day and age they can do that.  Its one thing to hear whats going on, but seeing it would help as well and leave no question as to what the pilots are doing.

 

That will never happen... pilots wont go for it and really when you think of it ... it wouldnt help anything in this case.

 

Would you agree to have a camera watching you work?

 

Sure, why not.  I have cameras in my work place.  My management has the right to access my computer at any time and see exactly what I see, hears what I hear.  This isnt a big issue.  The union would bargain for cameras to be used in the same sense the voice recorder's are used - incidents.  Every word they say is recorded and there are processes for when they can speak and what they can say and Im sure pilots violate that from time to time but airlines arent pulling the voice recorders to use to discipline them.  If they valued cameras, it would not be a big issue to get them.

 

I think it would help.  For one it fills in blanks.  It gives you the opportunity to see the faces and expressions of the pilots.  It can show what a pilot was physically doing and not just what the data recorder recorded he was doing.  It can show medical issues, sleeping, distractions etc.  I think it's valuable.

 

 

Having access to your comp aint really the same thing IMO.

 

You would be ok with them putting a camera on your desk pointed right at you so they can watch you any time they want? Record you and watch it whenever they want?

 

And like i said a cockpit is a pretty small area... they could just cover it up if they wanted.... put a hat over it and its useless. 

 

Thats not even close to what I wrote though is it?

 

I dont do a job that requires a camera on me at my desk.  But one aspect of my job requires handling of large amounts of money and in that room there is a camera on me.  And it is monitored by security.

 

I dont believe airlines can pull the voice recorders and listen to them anytime they want to to discipline the pilots.  This would be the same thing.  Cameras there for the safety of the crew and passengers to be reviewed in the event of an incident.  And if it was set up the same as the flight recorders, it couldnt even be used to review something that happened mid-flight since it only records the final 30 minutes.  it's designed to help investigators when there is a major crash.  Ask investigators if they'd love to be able to plug in to a lap top and immediately hear AND see what happened during the final moments of the plane.

 

It's a no brainer, really.

 

 

Well i asked if you would be ok with a camera focused on you all day at work and then you answered me about them having acsess to your comp and being able to see what you see.

 

Im not arguing it with you im just saying what im hearing on CNN and pilots seem to say no.

 

And like i said they could just cover it up. How do you stop that?

 

You also mentioned airlines being able to see it at any time.  Im saying that's an easy solution since they cant access the voice recorder at any time as is.  Have the camera feeding the recorder.  Last 30-120 minutes of action and thats it.  Im sure there is some way in the security industry to make a camera resistant to being covered. 

 

 

I guess.

 

I just really dont see how it helps anything. Having a camera is not going to stop anything from happening or detour anyone from crashing a plane if thats what they are set out to do.

 

If they are going to spend billions on something it should be on something better then that. IMO.

 

My question would be this...  If this plane had a camera.... what would you learn from watching? They already know what the guy did, they dont know why he did it and he didnt talk. So what would a camera tell anyone?

 

By that logic though, why do we have voice and data recorders?  They dont stop anyone from crashing a plane if they really want to.  But they do help tell us what happened and why.  A camera wouldnt just be valuable in cases of pilot action.  In cases of malfunction it can still show what the pilots were doing, how they reacted non-verbally to the situation and each other, body language, facial expressions.  This isnt a matter of "we never needed it before", its that technology didnt catch up.  Now there is no excuse.

[The Unknown Poster]

And the point of the camera would be what exactly?  It's not going to prevent anything from happening and it doesn't appear that the investigators are having too much trouble figuring things out using just the voice recorder and later when they confirm it with the flight data recorder.. Again, if someone's going to do this, all the pictures in the world will not change anything.  Personally, I think that watching the last moments of terror before someone dies are something that no one should have to do unless there's a real good reason to have to do it.  Don't see that reason here.

 

What would be useful is being able to track aircraft the are outside radar coverage so we never have to have another Korean Air Flight 902 or Air France Flight 447

In this case, the voice recorder captured steady breathing and the sound of someone trying to break down the door.  The data recorder captured input command to drop altitude.  A camera would confirm beyond all doubt that there was no medical issue.  Body language could tell them a lot. It's a tool.

[bigg jay]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One addition I'd like to see is cameras installed in the flightdeck (maybe the cabin as well) that feed into the recorders. Surely in this day and age they can do that.  Its one thing to hear whats going on, but seeing it would help as well and leave no question as to what the pilots are doing.

 

That will never happen... pilots wont go for it and really when you think of it ... it wouldnt help anything in this case.

 

Would you agree to have a camera watching you work?

 

Sure, why not.  I have cameras in my work place.  My management has the right to access my computer at any time and see exactly what I see, hears what I hear.  This isnt a big issue.  The union would bargain for cameras to be used in the same sense the voice recorder's are used - incidents.  Every word they say is recorded and there are processes for when they can speak and what they can say and Im sure pilots violate that from time to time but airlines arent pulling the voice recorders to use to discipline them.  If they valued cameras, it would not be a big issue to get them.

 

I think it would help.  For one it fills in blanks.  It gives you the opportunity to see the faces and expressions of the pilots.  It can show what a pilot was physically doing and not just what the data recorder recorded he was doing.  It can show medical issues, sleeping, distractions etc.  I think it's valuable.

 

 

Having access to your comp aint really the same thing IMO.

 

You would be ok with them putting a camera on your desk pointed right at you so they can watch you any time they want? Record you and watch it whenever they want?

 

And like i said a cockpit is a pretty small area... they could just cover it up if they wanted.... put a hat over it and its useless. 

 

Thats not even close to what I wrote though is it?

 

I dont do a job that requires a camera on me at my desk.  But one aspect of my job requires handling of large amounts of money and in that room there is a camera on me.  And it is monitored by security.

 

I dont believe airlines can pull the voice recorders and listen to them anytime they want to to discipline the pilots.  This would be the same thing.  Cameras there for the safety of the crew and passengers to be reviewed in the event of an incident.  And if it was set up the same as the flight recorders, it couldnt even be used to review something that happened mid-flight since it only records the final 30 minutes.  it's designed to help investigators when there is a major crash.  Ask investigators if they'd love to be able to plug in to a lap top and immediately hear AND see what happened during the final moments of the plane.

 

It's a no brainer, really.

 

 

Well i asked if you would be ok with a camera focused on you all day at work and then you answered me about them having acsess to your comp and being able to see what you see.

 

Im not arguing it with you im just saying what im hearing on CNN and pilots seem to say no.

 

And like i said they could just cover it up. How do you stop that?

 

You also mentioned airlines being able to see it at any time.  Im saying that's an easy solution since they cant access the voice recorder at any time as is.  Have the camera feeding the recorder.  Last 30-120 minutes of action and thats it.  Im sure there is some way in the security industry to make a camera resistant to being covered. 

 

 

I guess.

 

I just really dont see how it helps anything. Having a camera is not going to stop anything from happening or detour anyone from crashing a plane if thats what they are set out to do.

 

If they are going to spend billions on something it should be on something better then that. IMO.

 

My question would be this...  If this plane had a camera.... what would you learn from watching? They already know what the guy did, they dont know why he did it and he didnt talk. So what would a camera tell anyone?

 

By that logic though, why do we have voice and data recorders?  They dont stop anyone from crashing a plane if they really want to.  But they do help tell us what happened and why.  A camera wouldnt just be valuable in cases of pilot action.  In cases of malfunction it can still show what the pilots were doing, how they reacted non-verbally to the situation and each other, body language, facial expressions.  This isnt a matter of "we never needed it before", its that technology didnt catch up.  Now there is no excuse.

 

 

Took the words out of my mouth.  I would also add that just because the investigators seem to have pieced it together in this particular case without video, doesn't mean it wouldn't be a valuable tool for them to have in the future.

[The Unknown Poster]

if you watch Mayday there are many cases where investigators use the voice and data to guess at what the pilot was doing, or how he was reacting.

[New_Earth_Mud]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One addition I'd like to see is cameras installed in the flightdeck (maybe the cabin as well) that feed into the recorders. Surely in this day and age they can do that.  Its one thing to hear whats going on, but seeing it would help as well and leave no question as to what the pilots are doing.

 

That will never happen... pilots wont go for it and really when you think of it ... it wouldnt help anything in this case.

 

Would you agree to have a camera watching you work?

 

Sure, why not.  I have cameras in my work place.  My management has the right to access my computer at any time and see exactly what I see, hears what I hear.  This isnt a big issue.  The union would bargain for cameras to be used in the same sense the voice recorder's are used - incidents.  Every word they say is recorded and there are processes for when they can speak and what they can say and Im sure pilots violate that from time to time but airlines arent pulling the voice recorders to use to discipline them.  If they valued cameras, it would not be a big issue to get them.

 

I think it would help.  For one it fills in blanks.  It gives you the opportunity to see the faces and expressions of the pilots.  It can show what a pilot was physically doing and not just what the data recorder recorded he was doing.  It can show medical issues, sleeping, distractions etc.  I think it's valuable.

 

 

Having access to your comp aint really the same thing IMO.

 

You would be ok with them putting a camera on your desk pointed right at you so they can watch you any time they want? Record you and watch it whenever they want?

 

And like i said a cockpit is a pretty small area... they could just cover it up if they wanted.... put a hat over it and its useless. 

 

Thats not even close to what I wrote though is it?

 

I dont do a job that requires a camera on me at my desk.  But one aspect of my job requires handling of large amounts of money and in that room there is a camera on me.  And it is monitored by security.

 

I dont believe airlines can pull the voice recorders and listen to them anytime they want to to discipline the pilots.  This would be the same thing.  Cameras there for the safety of the crew and passengers to be reviewed in the event of an incident.  And if it was set up the same as the flight recorders, it couldnt even be used to review something that happened mid-flight since it only records the final 30 minutes.  it's designed to help investigators when there is a major crash.  Ask investigators if they'd love to be able to plug in to a lap top and immediately hear AND see what happened during the final moments of the plane.

 

It's a no brainer, really.

 

 

Well i asked if you would be ok with a camera focused on you all day at work and then you answered me about them having acsess to your comp and being able to see what you see.

 

Im not arguing it with you im just saying what im hearing on CNN and pilots seem to say no.

 

And like i said they could just cover it up. How do you stop that?

 

You also mentioned airlines being able to see it at any time.  Im saying that's an easy solution since they cant access the voice recorder at any time as is.  Have the camera feeding the recorder.  Last 30-120 minutes of action and thats it.  Im sure there is some way in the security industry to make a camera resistant to being covered. 

 

 

I guess.

 

I just really dont see how it helps anything. Having a camera is not going to stop anything from happening or detour anyone from crashing a plane if thats what they are set out to do.

 

If they are going to spend billions on something it should be on something better then that. IMO.

 

My question would be this...  If this plane had a camera.... what would you learn from watching? They already know what the guy did, they dont know why he did it and he didnt talk. So what would a camera tell anyone?

 

By that logic though, why do we have voice and data recorders?  They dont stop anyone from crashing a plane if they really want to.  But they do help tell us what happened and why.  A camera wouldnt just be valuable in cases of pilot action.  In cases of malfunction it can still show what the pilots were doing, how they reacted non-verbally to the situation and each other, body language, facial expressions.  This isnt a matter of "we never needed it before", its that technology didnt catch up.  Now there is no excuse.

 

 

Voice and data show and tell everything already. Dont need to see the expression on his face when hes flipping a switch i wouldnt think.

 

But eh maybe your right i dont know.....  I still say if a camera was there  it could just be covered up.

[WBBFanWest]

 

And the point of the camera would be what exactly?  It's not going to prevent anything from happening and it doesn't appear that the investigators are having too much trouble figuring things out using just the voice recorder and later when they confirm it with the flight data recorder.. Again, if someone's going to do this, all the pictures in the world will not change anything.  Personally, I think that watching the last moments of terror before someone dies are something that no one should have to do unless there's a real good reason to have to do it.  Don't see that reason here.

 

What would be useful is being able to track aircraft the are outside radar coverage so we never have to have another Korean Air Flight 902 or Air France Flight 447

In this case, the voice recorder captured steady breathing and the sound of someone trying to break down the door.  The data recorder captured input command to drop altitude.  A camera would confirm beyond all doubt that there was no medical issue.  Body language could tell them a lot. It's a tool.

 

So what doubt is there?  It seems to me that if they are prepared to make a pronouncement this quickly, there must be some pretty strong, to the point of overwhelming, evidence to support it.  It also appears to me that, for the most part, the only people who are calling for cameras are the people that don't actually do the investigating.  If air crash investigators and regulators really believed that cameras were important, they'd already be on the plane.  I'm pretty sure that no investigator is going to want to have to depend on a device that can be rendered useless with a post-it.

[Brandon]

As I said before... They have cameras on transit buses so why not planes?

[kelownabomberfan]

It won't be long now before the pilots are phased out. Too many planes going down still due mostly to human error. Or from what it looks like in this case, a seriously deranged pilot.

[WBBFanWest]

As I said before... They have cameras on transit buses so why not planes?

Ummm, because the purpose of the bus camera is to monitor the passengers and/or the interaction of the driver with them.  Neither of those is the issue with a cockpit cam.  Seeing that a lot of agencies use dash cams, I expect you'd think that these would be a good idea on planes too?

[WBBFanWest]

What we are seeing today is the "We have to be seen doing something" syndrome, because the alternative is to admit the truth: there really is nothing  that can be done to prevent this from happening.  So you have the "we need camera" and the "we need two people in the cockpit at all times" demands, neither of which actually do anything to fix this problem.  But at least it looks like someone's doing something.

[The Unknown Poster]

Do you really think there is no method to protect a camera from being covered up?  I suppose a pilot could carry a can of spray paint with him but it's doubtful.  it's just another tool.  Everyone thinks they should have better tracking but you could use the same argument and say "well if they really wanted it, it would be done".  Change happens slowly.  Also, in regards to covering the camera, pilots deliberately crashing the plane is still very rare.  So even if in those rare cases, the pilot covers the camera, that action in itself tells part of the story.  In the majority of crashes there would be no cause for covering the camera and thus the information gleaned would be useful.

 

Egypt Air was a case of one pilot crashing the plane but the outcome is still disputed.  Even though the data recorder shows contrary flight control inputs Egypt explains it away as a malfunction.  A camera would have shown exactly what the pilots were doing physically.  Remember, modern aircraft are fly-by-wire.  In fact, the Airbus in question this week doesnt even have a steering column anymore.  Thats why they refer to the co-pilot as "pushing the button" to descend.  When they make inputs, it's telling a computer to effect the air craft, it's not direct control anymore.  In that case you could potentially have doubt about the computer responding to what the pilot is commanding.  If the data recorder records what the computer does but the pilot think he's commanding something different, unless he vocalizes that for the voice recorder, there is nothing to SHOW us what actually it taking place on a flight deck.

[The Unknown Poster]

What we are seeing today is the "We have to be seen doing something" syndrome, because the alternative is to admit the truth: there really is nothing  that can be done to prevent this from happening.  So you have the "we need camera" and the "we need two people in the cockpit at all times" demands, neither of which actually do anything to fix this problem.  But at least it looks like someone's doing something.

This is flat wrong. 

 

How would a camera stop this?  It wouldnt.  No one is suggesting that.  A camera, like a voice and data recorder gives us a picture of what happened AFTER THE FACT.  Two people in the cockpit MIGHT help but quite honestly, not really.  Look at AirEgypt which I have references several times.  A pilot would have to physically overwhelm and subdue the co-pilot who's efforts would be in pushing, pulling, turning etc to crash the plane, all in a very tight area.  VERY difficult to stop a pilot from crashing a plane if thats what he wants to do.  The idea that one pilot should never be allowed to leave the flight deck is also somewhat ridiculous.  At this point, there is a far greater chance of some sort of malfunction occuring than a pilot deliberately crashing and yet pilots are allowed to leave the flight deck to use the bathroom or whatever reason.  if they dont require both pilots remain in the flight deck for the incidents that happen more frequently, why should they require it for the incidents that almost never happen?

 

The key is knowing beyond all doubt what happened.

[New_Earth_Mud]

 

What we are seeing today is the "We have to be seen doing something" syndrome, because the alternative is to admit the truth: there really is nothing  that can be done to prevent this from happening.  So you have the "we need camera" and the "we need two people in the cockpit at all times" demands, neither of which actually do anything to fix this problem.  But at least it looks like someone's doing something.

This is flat wrong. 

 

How would a camera stop this?  It wouldnt.  No one is suggesting that.  A camera, like a voice and data recorder gives us a picture of what happened AFTER THE FACT.  Two people in the cockpit MIGHT help but quite honestly, not really.  Look at AirEgypt which I have references several times.  A pilot would have to physically overwhelm and subdue the co-pilot who's efforts would be in pushing, pulling, turning etc to crash the plane, all in a very tight area.  VERY difficult to stop a pilot from crashing a plane if thats what he wants to do.  The idea that one pilot should never be allowed to leave the flight deck is also somewhat ridiculous.  At this point, there is a far greater chance of some sort of malfunction occuring than a pilot deliberately crashing and yet pilots are allowed to leave the flight deck to use the bathroom or whatever reason.  if they dont require both pilots remain in the flight deck for the incidents that happen more frequently, why should they require it for the incidents that almost never happen?

 

The key is knowing beyond all doubt what happened.

 

 

Watching all these experts and pilots and investigators and safety experts on CNN seem to all say cameras wont do much at all. Some think at some point you will see some install cameras but it wont be rushed to do.

 

I believe all USA airlines have a policy that 2 people must be in the flight deck at all times.

 

Dont have to cover a camera with spray paint...  jacket, hat, gum. band-aid all would work.  

[bigg jay]

Do you think someone who is intentionally bringing down a plane would give a s**t if the camera was covered?  Are they secretly hoping they survive crashing into the side of a mountain & need to cover their tracks?  I'm lost as to what you think the point of covering the camera would be.

 

Will cameras prevent this?  No but neither do voice & data recorders.  It would be another tool to potentially aid in the investigation, no more no less.

[The Unknown Poster]

Why would a pilot cover a camera when experiencing a major aircraft malfunction? He wouldn't. End of story.

[WBBFanWest]

Do you think someone who is intentionally bringing down a plane would give a s**t if the camera was covered?  Are they secretly hoping they survive crashing into the side of a mountain & need to cover their tracks?  I'm lost as to what you think the point of covering the camera would be.

 

Will cameras prevent this?  No but neither do voice & data recorders.  It would be another tool to potentially aid in the investigation, no more no less.

I'm all for giving investigators tools, but maybe it would be a better idea to have them tell us what they think would be useful and I don't think I've read or heard of the FAA or any other agency saying that they need to be put into place ASAP.  If they decide to use armchair investigators, then clearly, it's got to be cameras, lots and lots of cameras, and backup cameras for the main cameras, oh and body cameras too, one for each person.  Can never have enough video...

[The Unknown Poster]

Do you think someone who is intentionally bringing down a plane would give a s**t if the camera was covered? Are they secretly hoping they survive crashing into the side of a mountain & need to cover their tracks? I'm lost as to what you think the point of covering the camera would be.

Will cameras prevent this? No but neither do voice & data recorders. It would be another tool to potentially aid in the investigation, no more no less.

I'm all for giving investigators tools, but maybe it would be a better idea to have them tell us what they think would be useful and I don't think I've read or heard of the FAA or any other agency saying that they need to be put into place ASAP. If they decide to use armchair investigators, then clearly, it's got to be cameras, lots and lots of cameras, and backup cameras for the main cameras, oh and body cameras too, one for each person. Can never have enough video...

We don't need satellite gps in real time of planes either because I didnt hear anyone on cnn demand it.

[New_Earth_Mud]

 

Do you think someone who is intentionally bringing down a plane would give a s**t if the camera was covered?  Are they secretly hoping they survive crashing into the side of a mountain & need to cover their tracks?  I'm lost as to what you think the point of covering the camera would be.

 

Will cameras prevent this?  No but neither do voice & data recorders.  It would be another tool to potentially aid in the investigation, no more no less.

I'm all for giving investigators tools, but maybe it would be a better idea to have them tell us what they think would be useful and I don't think I've read or heard of the FAA or any other agency saying that they need to be put into place ASAP.  If they decide to use armchair investigators, then clearly, it's got to be cameras, lots and lots of cameras, and backup cameras for the main cameras, oh and body cameras too, one for each person.  Can never have enough video...

 

 

This  ^^^^

 

Not one investigator or really anyone has said a camera will do squat. It servers no real use to them and this is what they do.

 

Now if the camera was a live stream then it may do something but then as its been said it could just be covered up if they dont want anything seen.

 

From what ive seen today from all these experts is that what needs to be looked at is how to prevent these things that can happen. And a camera wont do that.

 

Something i think may be more of a use is ground to air contact at all times live from the flight deck and cabin. If billions are going to be spent then thats the first thing id look into. Again it wont prevent anything but if you really want to know exactly why and whats going on then thats the way to do it.  

[WBBFanWest]

 

 

Do you think someone who is intentionally bringing down a plane would give a s**t if the camera was covered? Are they secretly hoping they survive crashing into the side of a mountain & need to cover their tracks? I'm lost as to what you think the point of covering the camera would be.

Will cameras prevent this? No but neither do voice & data recorders. It would be another tool to potentially aid in the investigation, no more no less.

I'm all for giving investigators tools, but maybe it would be a better idea to have them tell us what they think would be useful and I don't think I've read or heard of the FAA or any other agency saying that they need to be put into place ASAP. If they decide to use armchair investigators, then clearly, it's got to be cameras, lots and lots of cameras, and backup cameras for the main cameras, oh and body cameras too, one for each person. Can never have enough video...

We don't need satellite gps in real time of planes either because I didnt hear anyone on cnn demand it.

 

Well as far as I know, all commercial planes use satellite gps.  What I think you are trying to say is that a lot of planes do not use real time satellite monitoring.  Some do, but not many because of the high cost of satellite communications.  There are some groups that are advocating installing the monitoring equipment in all aircraft but not activating it unless the plane's systems detect an issue or the crew turn it on.  The discussion continues.

[bigg jay]

 

Do you think someone who is intentionally bringing down a plane would give a s**t if the camera was covered?  Are they secretly hoping they survive crashing into the side of a mountain & need to cover their tracks?  I'm lost as to what you think the point of covering the camera would be.

 

Will cameras prevent this?  No but neither do voice & data recorders.  It would be another tool to potentially aid in the investigation, no more no less.

I'm all for giving investigators tools, but maybe it would be a better idea to have them tell us what they think would be useful and I don't think I've read or heard of the FAA or any other agency saying that they need to be put into place ASAP.  If they decide to use armchair investigators, then clearly, it's got to be cameras, lots and lots of cameras, and backup cameras for the main cameras, oh and body cameras too, one for each person.  Can never have enough video...

 

Yes, because that is exactly what is being suggested.  Tons of cameras & we want them installed yesterday.  

 

Oh by the way, the FAA recommended cameras 10 years ago as a post crash tool for investigators.  Some pilots objected due to privacy concerns.

 

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/news/surveillance/2005-09-20-faa-cameras-wireless_x.htm

[New_Earth_Mud]

Like this....

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-2894223/First-Air-installs-flight-tracking-designed-FLYHT-Aerospace-Solutions.html

[The Unknown Poster]

(CNN)Latest developments:

• 5:32 p.m. ET: Transponder data shows that the autopilot on Germanwings Flight 9525 was reprogrammed by someone in the cockpit to change the plane's altitude from 38,000 feet to 100 feet, according to Flightradar24, a website that tracks aviation data.

• 5:14 p.m. ET: Police searched Germanwings Flight 9525 co-pilot Andreas Lubitz's apartment in Dusseldorf, Germany, on Thursday, the city's police spokesman said in televised comments. A team of five investigators went "through the apartment looking for clues as to what the co-pilot's motivation might have been, if he did indeed bring the plane down," police spokesman Markus Niesczery said.