AIRBUS CONTRARIAN VIEW: DID ANDREAS LUBITZ HAVE DOUBTS ABOUT THE A320’S AIRWORTHINESS?

LUBITZa320As the Lubitz thing sounds increasingly conclusive, the evidence behind the conclusion looks increasingly flakey.

His girlfriend says he was planning something massive by which he’d be remembered. But she isn’t identified, her name ‘Maria’ is a not her real one….and the story’s in Bild. “It didn’t make much sense at the time, but now it does” she claims. Her boyfriend was a pilot and planning something horrific…but it didn’t make sense? Well, right then. But hold this thought: she told Bild, “He would wake in the night screaming ‘we’re going down, we’re going down’”.

The sick note looks odder and odder. While the German prosecutor followed his French colleague by mouthing off to the media yesterday about Lubitz “hiding his depression from his employer and colleagues”, the Dusseldorf Polizei contradicted their employer by refusing to say what the sick notes were about (or why Andreas had been to a hospital) but that they were “nothing to do with the decision [Lubitz] took”. Well if they aren’t germaine to the case, then why not tell us what they were for?

The Wall Street Journal takes a leap and asserts that the sick notes were from a psychiatrist; but the source is ‘a person familiar with the investigation’, which means it could be the A320’s designer, or Leutnant Schmidt from the Bremen vice squad. In the same piece, the Journal says ‘another person familiar with the investigation’ thinks Andreas didn’t have a terminal illness, while the Daily Mail says the notes were from doctors not psychiatrists, and although he was teased about being a gay former-steward, he shared his flat with the girlfriend who two days ago was a boyfriend, and if it was the girlfriend with whom he’d split up, why was she still at the flat?

A senior Lufthansa Director meanwhile says Lubitz had “slipped through the net with devastating consequences” – an odd thing to say for two reasons. First, all his co-workers said he was “happy and enjoying his career”; and second, the Director just landed Lufhansa squarely in the Dock to face 149 suits for causing the death of loved ones by negligence.

I’m trying to retain a balance here, but the sheer weight of contradictory information makes it almost a full-time job. This sort of thing often surrounds “media management” these days when very fat men in large boardrooms have things to hide. I still believe that by far the most likely solution is that Lubitz had lost his mental balance (it now seems he was taking medication, but we don’t know what for) and had made up his mind that the minute his colleague slipped out for a pee, he’d do the deed. But exactly why? And what deed?

I suspect what’s required here, for the time being, is to examine some of the motives behind the announcements:

1. Airbus is primarily a Franco-German-Spanish co-production. This might help explain the early appearance of the French, German and Spanish leaders at the scene. Its exports make a massive contribution to the eurozone economy, and it employs some 58,000 people. Significantly, Airbus pioneered fly-by-wire on its A320, and the A380 is the largest fbw aircraft in the world. Fbw basically means replacing the conventional manual flight controls of an aircraft with an electronic interface. In the light of this week’s disaster – and the 320 family’s history of controlled flight into terrain (see yesterday’s Slogpost) – this might explain why aircraft manufacturers – and airlines who bought large fleets off them – would rather face 149 lawsuits than doubts about the fbw auto systems that are now wired into Airbus planes’ DNA.

2. The rush to blame Lubitz is equalled only by the unwillingness to take into account the obvious motives for blaming pilot error. In December 1997, a Silk Air Boeing 737 flying from Jakarta, Indonesia, to Singapore suddenly dived vertically for more than 30,000 feet into a river and 97 people were killed. America’ National Transportation Safety Board investigated, concluding that the crash resulted from deliberate action by one of the pilots. The Indonesian Transportation Safety Committee said the evidence was inconclusive, and a private legal action in California tried to reverse the NTSB’s ruling – claiming that a mechanical flaw, inherent in the 737’s design, had caused the crash.

The crash of EgyptAir Flight 990 in October 1999 on a flight from New York to Cairo neared its desired cruise level, but then inexplicably dived vertically into the Atlantic near Nantucket Island, killing 217 people. The NTSB determined that the Egyptian captain had deliberately pointed the nose down and killed everyone on board. The NTSB’s verdict was disputed by the Egyptians, who also blamed a design flaw had been responsible.

In perhaps the most infamous case of all, the 1958 Munich air disaster that killed nine Manchester United players was persistently blamed on Captain Thain, a man later proven posthumously to be entirely innocent. The owners of Munich Airport had been clearly negligent in sweeping ice from the runway, but lied throughout five enquiries until eventually the evidence came to light.

3. Why would Andreas Lubitz – a man for whom flying had been everything since the age of seven – have nightmares about “going down”…unless he thought there was something wrong with the 320 series fbw system? And why – if his sole intent was the world’s most selfish suicide – would the radar track show he tried to level out towards the end of the dive? Far from trying to kill himself, was he trying to demonstrate something?

Without repeating myself too much, I think he meant to do what he did, but the why part remains a puzzle. The police, Luthansa and the Sovereign authorities have made strenuous efforts to be judge, jury and executioner in this case, laying the blame on depression and deceit by Andreas Lubitz. But they do seem somewhat vague when the questions get more probing. The greater likelihood is that the co-pilot coup de foudre verdict will emerge as the most likely: but the evidence is far from conclusive. Were I a young newshound on this one, I’d be asking whether Herr Lubitz had raised any doubt about the A320 fbw systems. On the outside possibility that he might have been a whistleblower, not a murderous suicide.

Yesterday at The Slog: Labour goes for broke in the Wishy-washy boredom stakes

70 thoughts on “AIRBUS CONTRARIAN VIEW: DID ANDREAS LUBITZ HAVE DOUBTS ABOUT THE A320’S AIRWORTHINESS?

  1. I have never known such a determined attempt to drive a “deranged killer” narrative, leaving all other theories aside. Yet the “facts” keep changing. The SOS from the plane, reported then denied. The fighter jet(s) described as escorting the plane by eyewitnesses, now expunged from the story. The initial reports that it was the captain in the cockpit, the co-pilot outside. The news that an axe wss used to try to break down the door – then news the only axe was in the civkpit.

    Like

  2. What’s contrarian about blaming Lubitz? It’s only what is being hammered into us by the mainstream media. I’ve only seen one article that even mentions the exercises held in the area by NATO airforces. Perhaps this is why “they do seem somewhat vague when the questions get more probing”?

    More to the point, has Lubitz made any public statements to this effect? Crashing a plane is not the best way of publicizing one’s ideas.

    Lubitz’s doubts would have been better expressed about cutbacks in maintenance – or about the poor state of French Air Traffic Control. What’s more, would have been better expressed through Twitter or Facebook. Getting past bureaucrats – be they in the industry or the media is not easy.

    Like

  3. Indeed….very mysterious…
    tell me..why would one ‘tear up a sick note’? Why not just bin it or leave it on the sideboard or whatever.
    There is too much literary fantasy in this story that has emerged very fast.
    Where is the data recorder? We are told that the black box was empty. Presumably they are writing data to suit the story elsewhere for later release.
    No, no no, this is not ringing very true.
    Understandably, one doesn’t want to frighten the flying public – but something is very wrong here – and imho this is cold war cyberwarfare in action.

    Like

  4. If you are correct Rob then this means that air travel is no longer viable. Therefore additionally true would be the need to conceal this fact at all costs as the economic implications of grounding all fly-by-wire aircraft would be terminal for the global economy.

    So maybe it is ALL about the muneeee as JW says..

    Like

  5. Try this, which to some will not ring true – but those with a little more perception may get the gist of what is being covered up.

    http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1852.htm

    Where it states

    And to how dangerous these Western war games can be to civilian airliners, this report continues, was evidenced on 3 March when, in an eerie pre-simulation to the demise yesterday of Germanwings Flight 9525, the US Air Force, while preparing for yesterday’s failed test over southern France, Lufthansa Flight LH1172, an Airbus A321 operating at a normal flight altitude, plummeted out of the sky in minutes, and as evidenced by its radar charts [ diagram not shown – you’ll have to visit the page to see this]

    To the explanation of Lufthansa Flight LH1172 plummeting towards earth in southern France barely a fortnight ago, we can further read from the Airliner Reporter article titled Catching a Lufthansa Airbus A321’s Rapid Descent Live which, in part, says:

    “There were a few moments where I thought I may have been watching a crash of some sort occur in real-time, from thousands of miles away. But thankfully, the pilots were just quick acting, and diverted to a nearby airport.

    Lufthansa confirmed to AirlineReporter.com that LH1172 had 151 passengers on board and the captain decided to stopover in Nantes (NTE), France, “due to a medical case (sick passenger).” They confirmed that there was no emergency requested and that the aircraft landed safely.”

    That is my own emphasis, by the way.

    Like

  6. Well, its quite simple. If its a case of FBW being unsafe and that being the cause of this crash, then you have to say that the stuff about the Captain being locked out of the cockpit is lies. For it to be aircraft malfunction both aircrew have to be present and correct, both have to be mislead by the instruments in some way and only realise at the last minute (and too late) that something was amiss. But if you accept the evidence of the voice recorder, and banging can be heard as the Captain attempts to break into the cockpit, having been locked out by the co-pilot, then it can’t be aircraft malfunction can it? Locked cockpit door = co-pilot culpability, for reasons unknown.

    For the crash to be anything other than co-pilot responsibility, you have to say that the voice recorder evidence is manufactured and all recorded therein never took place. Or that what we are told the voice recorder holds is not what it actually holds.

    Like

  7. Fly By Wire is a hell of a lot safer then the old hydro-mechanical system of hydraulic pipes and cables which were subject to both leaks, mechanical cable wear and corrosion. The old mechanical system was also much heavier. FBW pre dates Airbus and has its origins in military aircraft from the 1960’s in fact I think the first to make use of it was the Canadian Avro Arrow (which was subsequently cancelled). I can remember being introduced to its concept and workings in the Royal Navy in 1979 with the introduction of the Sea Harrier as a young apprentice. Even mechanical systems can suffer problems just look at the saga of Boeing’s the737’s hydraulic rudder actuator. As things stand I really cant see how Airbus can be blamed for this terrible tragedy.

    Like

  8. So one black box has no contents. Surely a budgetary/austerity measure by Lufthansa or a prevarication due to the contradictions in each recording. The BB that is found is explained by officials before anyone else can listen to it and explained for any later listener. So we have what amounts to an old radio drama where the audience is told what they are hearing so they can create the visual support in their minds. This found BB leaves the crash site and later appears with this recording. Any recording studio could make up a convincing recording of what Lufthansa wants you to hear. They have thousands of hours of each pilot snoring, talking about mundane operations, joking, saying things that can be put together with other statements because of the very high jet engine noise level on any such recording that would mask edits very easily. They could have hundreds pre made to explain mechanical defects they know about. Was this preemptive due to these issues becoming more regular due to a defect they can’t now fix without removing planes from service and going bankrupt? Is there a chance they chose this liability for a pilots actions instead of demonstrating that they knew about the inherent defects and chose to ignore them as a business decision?
    The Nederlanders can’t seem to figure out what happened to a Malaysinan airliner shot down over the Ukraine when they are in possession of both BB’s for almost a year. Credulity is stretched like taffy.

    Like

  9. there is of course case that system malfunction included the door release switch (seen mention of the Switch in a report) but no mention of any mechanical overide or lever on the cockpit side of the door ~ even it were possible to get to the lever either whilst in the seats or having to move out of them

    Like

  10. I might believe more a case of some EMC issues in the plane(s)
    Have seen cases in another industry where equipment to a previous version of the EMC Std suffered failure due to electronic “spikes” from equipment to the later Std

    Like

  11. i used to trust these flight recorder data announcements , nowadays i am so jaded being lied to 24/7 by tbtb if they told me they were lying i wouldn`t believe them. MH17!!! 298 poor souls murdered by western powers. false f**kin flag. again. here we are 5 days on and we have the full picture dont we? how long since mh 17. wheres the announcement .nothing.jaded.

    Like

  12. One might wonder if this aeroplane would have been shot down if it had changed course, with radio silence.
    Was the French Air Force scrambling to investigate?

    Like

  13. Timecode on a recording can be altered by creating a new recording and simply placing the analog information (voice, noise, etc.) over the new timecode. BB’s do have timecode by the way.

    Like

  14. The military are testing a plane jamming device. It either causes total system failure or allows the plane to be flown remotely. The plane then has to be crashed to cover up the evidence. Once it’s perfected, they can 9/11 the world if they want.

    If this comment vanishes, you will know this apparently insane theory might even possibly be true…and you will have entered the conspiracy at the heart of the twilight zone… Mwa haa haa.

    Like

  15. @ farmerbraun
    Even Hilary has been told to ‘shut it’.
    Remember…. in the NEW cold war…. actions speak louder than wordski

    Like

  16. Pingback: John Ward – Airbus Contrarian View : Did Andreas Lubitz Have Doubts About The A320’s Airworthiness?? – 28 March 2015 | Lucas 2012 Infos

  17. It’s the old saying about the tangled web. As with the Jihadi John nonsense, the security services are drip-feeding lies to the media, believing that by embellishing their falsehoods, they make it all more credible, when in fact the opposite is the case. Real life is never as certain as the tale about this pilot – but the psychopaths who are really behind this crash don’t have the empathy or humanity to see it.

    Like

  18. “Crashing a plane is not the best way of publicising one’s ideas” ? Is it not ? He wouldn’t be listened to if he were a whistleblower complaining of crap and dangerous workings on the plane. Two other points: why does letterpress not recognise the word ‘whistleblower’ as a noun? And ‘germaine’ was Michael’s brother (I think).

    Like

  19. Really!!!!!!!!!! The problem is with the A320? It’s all a giant cover up? The cockpit voice recorder which had the pilot in the seat saying absolutely NOTHING as the aircraft descended to destruction? No distress calls in the 8 minute decent? Just normal breathing? All of this is just a cover up. How about all the pilots listening in to the controller as he tried to make contact with the GermanWings flight are they part of the cover up too? Why are THEY not worried about flying the airbus? If the aircraft is so dangerous why haven’t any pilots union told their pilots to stop flying the airbus until the problems are sorted out? You need to drop this line of reasoning before you lose all credibility.

    Like

  20. The real point and tragedy of this story is not technical or mechanical failure its human behaviour. If what’s in the newspapers is to be believed this poor guy had a toxic cocktail of mental health, medical and emotional problems which he either managed to keep hidden from his employers or that his employers didn’t trouble themselves too much to finding out about despite the very obvious risk. He reportedly had depression, stress burn out, a chequered work attendance record and had just split up with his girlfriend. He was also receiving treatment for problems with his eyesight. Did the problems with his eyesight and its inevitable implication of losing his Commercial Pilots Licence finally flip him over the edge coming on top of all the other problems? Lufthansa one of the worlds so called premium airlines have some serious questions to answer. I hope they have good insurers because this is going to result in one hell of a legal/compensation claim.

    Like

  21. “The Nederlanders can’t seem to figure out what happened to a Malaysinan airliner shot down over the Ukraine when they are in possession of both BB’s for almost a year.”
    The Dutch know perfectly well what happened to MH17 from the BBs: plane flying along normally, then massive decompression and system failures. Crew talking normally, then boom followed by silence. What’s not to understand?

    Liked by 1 person

  22. As they have not yet found the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) which should reveal all the flying moves made by the co pilot, all this speculation is nothing more than that. In pre twitter-/blog-rule days air accident investigations were usually lengthy and thorough affairs. What we see here and elsewhere in the media hype-o-sphere is uninformed and unhelpful conjecture. People lost their lives and families are in terrible suffering, give it a break.

    Like

  23. “the media hype-o-sphere [ is] . . uninformed and unhelpful conjecture.”

    Unhelpful? It depends what your intent is . It may be extremely helpful.
    God forbid that the sheeple should ever learn the real truth.

    Now that WOULD lead to some really “terrible suffering”.

    Like

  24. frenchnews1online but that was the point of John first post,but unlike you he included the MSN,in omitting them & only including twitter & blogs insinuates it alright for them too speculate (& act has judge & jury)but not others,the air accident should investigate without fear or favour to form the truth the best they can.So these poor families can at least know the truth,i think & hope that is the motives behind everyone’s comments

    Like

  25. The cockpit voice recorder records the captain handing control to Lubitz then leaving the cockpit, he did not return but was heard asking to be let back into the cockpit then banging on the cockpit door.
    The settings in the Flight Management System are broadcast to Air Traffic Control, so that the level selected can be matched against what the aircraft was cleared to fly. The system broadcast that its cruise setting had been altered from 38,000ft to 100ft at a time that matched the captain being locked out of the cockpit. This was what made Air Traffic Control start raising the emergency level when they got no response from the aircraft. So it is without question that someone in the cockpit altered the cruise level of the aircraft to below the ground level. You can play guess the motives – but there is no doubt over these recorded facts.

    ALL modern airliners are fly by wire. The difference with Airbus is that they are fly by computer with the pilot telling the computer what is wanted and the computer actually doing the flying. Boeing aircraft can revert to direct manual coupling to hydraulic controls, Airbus aircraft do not have that capability.

    Like

  26. Still you have to admit that this neat little system has lots of additional possibilities.
    The co -pilot was breathing tranquilly you say?

    “Airliner irreversible-control anti-hijack system US 6845302 B2
    ABSTRACT:
    Directed toward universal commercial-airliner application as an air/ground-lifesaving function, this cost-effective retro-fitable system enables airliner-pilots to conveniently actuate an inconspicuous AIRCIA™/enable-switch,—thereby instantly disabling onboard flight-commands to render the airliner’s guidance-system irretrievably placed into total reliance upon its existing autopilot-system in RF-communication with encrypted remote ground/air-intercept personnel.

    Acting to virtually confound any criminal-attempt by a hijacker to commandeer an airliner, the airliner thus becomes flown only as directed by an authorized remote/flight-control station in cooperation with the airliner’s remotely-reprogrammed onboard avionics-system, automatically vectoring the airliner to land safely via the existing avionics/autopilot-system at a designated airport.

    The AIRCIA™-system is initially verified for flight-worthiness operation upon every routine preflight/check-list procedure, its master ECU/restore-switch being accessible externally of the aircraft-interior. Support-system options include SmartCard®-interfacing, and automatic is engagement of AIRCIA™-system in event of natural-cause pilot-incapacitation, and ATI (automatic/tranquil-Infusion) which introduces tranquilizing-gas into the airliner’s entire interior.”

    Like

  27. Bill old bean
    Do try and pay attention. I do not need to drop a line of reasoning that has stated in both pieces that I’m fairly sure Lubitz did cause the crash. I wrote the pieces to show:
    * Tabloid monster-creation and gross inaccuracy
    * The anomalies and the motives
    * The tenacity with which the authorities are out to depict Lubitz as a basket case…having passed him fit to fly
    * The still unsolved reason WHY he did it in this way. Depression and sexual orientation uncertainty don’t cut it, I’m afraid.

    IF Lubitz was a megalo headcase, then Lufthansa are guilty of gross dereliction and the system of flying fitness needs to be revisited.
    IF he was going off the rails, what caused the pressure? Ask any aircrew working for a budget airline, and I suspect that – in private – they will tell you.

    Like

  28. On the day of the crash, BBC radio fivelive briefly reported that flight crews around the world were refusing to board the same type of plane. I haven’t heard any more of this. The original story could have been false. Or it could have been suppressed.

    Like

  29. Mr Ward is asking us to believe that this fellow crashed the plane because he didn’t want planes to crash…. er

    Like

  30. Yes, having re-read the original article above, that in deed does seem to be the gist of it – Lubitz was a whistleblower who wasn’t listened to, so to publicise his concerns about aircraft safety he flew his plane (and passengers) into a mountain. Even if (and thats a huge if) he did have concerns about A320 safety, I think crashing one on purpose to prove his point would be classified as the actions of a grade A loon.

    Like

  31. Huge corporations do some pretty cold-blooded calculations when it comes to situations like this, & the bottom line is king.
    I recently read John Grisham’s novel, Gray Mountain, which shows how multinational corporations, especially those with foreign owners, care not a jot for either the human or environmental damage they do, when compared to the costs of working cleanly & ethically. Starting just after the Lehman Brothers crash, the novel focuses on strip mining for coal in the appalachian mountains.
    It also shows how huge corporations are effectively above the much-vaunted “environmental” laws & regulations.

    Like

  32. I had a quick look at this site, Gemma, & at first glance I’d say it’s like all sites, you have to double check.
    In one article, for example, Putin is portrayed as the aggressor in the Ukraine, which is plain NWO lies.
    May I recommend: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info
    Although Tom Feeny has not yet woken to the global warming/climate change scam, these are mostly articles by individuals that the MSM (Mass Sh1te Media) will not publish.

    Like

  33. @JD
    Tom Feeney has not “woken to the climate change/global warming scam” because there is no scam.
    The Earth is warming – numerous temperature records on land, sea and from satellites prove this. Natural cycles provide some variation in the short term (10-30 years), but the overall trend is up.
    The rate of warming is roughly consistent with the rate calculated by Arhenius nearly 150 years ago, when he studied the effects of decreasing and increasing the CO2 load in the atmosphere. The basic physics equations he established then have not significantly changed.
    IF there is a scam, it involves hundreds of thousands of people and covers a period of hundreds of years (going back to the weather records kept by medieval land owners and sea captains used in temperature reconstructions). Is this really what you are claiming?

    incidentally, I’m still unsure if your position is that a) there is NO warming, or b) that there IS warming but humans aren’t the cause, or c) there is warming caused by humans but it isn’t going to be a problem. Care to share which it is? Or is it all three depending on the circumstances, or whichever climate science denier you’ve last listened to?

    Like

  34. Pingback: A320: Controlled Flight Into Terrain? | Doomstead Diner

  35. Ian W one of the things I had to get used to in flying the 777 was that a computer was flying the aircraft even when the auto pilot was off and I was hand flying the plane. When I figured this out it made it really fun to fly. For example on long flights you hand fly the aircraft very little…. so if you are like me you like to want to hand fly as much as possible. However I also liked to watch the hedge rows go by leaving your beautiful shores out of Heathrow. In the 777 you could do both because if you put the aircraft in the attitude you wanted by hand the computer kept it there until you needed to change the attitude. So you could do both fly the aircraft precisely and look at the beautiful countryside……….sweet!

    Like

  36. Anyone remeber the Chinook travesty which took 17 years to exonerate the pilots?

    http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/public-sector/3291139/chinook-mull-of-kintyre-crash-pilots-exonerated-after-17-years/

    This incident will disapear from the news like the Malaysian flight MH370 and MH17 shot down by the Ukraine. In both cases Amerika knows exactly the who, why, what and how of their untimely demises.

    Amerika, the land of ‘truth’ telling when it suits their purpose.

    Like

  37. Mark, I don’t think the problem is in the hardware but more the software.

    FBW certainly does, in theory, trump the old mechanical systems for the reasons you have stated. The problems arise when your main computer reboots mid-flight or for some reason the system ‘hangs’. The early FBW systems were purely flight systems, but nowadays the on-board computers have to handle everything from flight control to playing the inflight movie. The code is becoming increasingly complex and with that complexity comes the specter of unintended consequences. There are of course multiple redundancy systems, but if they are all tied together and a fault is system-wide, then your billion dollar jet liner is suddenly a very heavy and uncontrollable glider.

    Like

  38. You mean the one where one of the passengers texted from Deago Garcia a few days after it vanished.Said ho hid his cellphone “up his butt”.

    Like

  39. Your correct…. The voice recorder evidence has been manufactured and placed at the crash seen. I can not believe the 2nd black box evaporated. That can only happen on the sun’s surface. Its harder to manufacture the fight data recordings, hence the 2nd black box disappeared and will not be found until or if they manufacture the numbers.

    Did you see how conveniently the fuser-large with the airplane number was nicely cut and left intact. What about the authorities claiming it was not a terror attack before any evidence was presented. Something very fishy with all this. We all know that the media will say whatever the government wants to depict. The real evidence is the sightings of smoke by spectators on the ground and a fighter jet spotted near the airplane.

    Using the non propaganda news I believe the military incorrectly shot it down when conducting exercise drills or made the airplane nose dive into the mountain via the electronic fly-by-wire equipment.

    What can we all do about it? Nothing….we all need to fly and the voice of someone that has no evidence to back up anything is just a loony that can be brushed to one side.

    I am sad for the passengers & crew and the family of the co-pilot. They have lost their lives for what?

    Happy flying…..

    Like

  40. Point of order,,,,,,a distress call was issued “Emergency Emergency”. This was prominent on all TV channels, but has now disappeared. What do you believe?

    Something does not add up….the voice recordings do not mention the “”Emergency Emergency” message……Another strange item. Its just to many….

    Like

  41. Mark, have you ever watched the Twilight Zone? This narrative could easily be shown as one episode. They might make it, its just so unbelievable.

    Like

  42. I don’t think there’s a grand conspiracy – I think parties with something to lose are keen to have a credible story, and fast. Maybe the guy did it, but the evidence is thin and the way the evidence is being fed (and lapped up) by the press is way too eager. Blame it all on the pilot, everyone agrees to a meaningless measure to prevent it happening again, the punters breath a sigh of relief and keep flying. On the flip-side, a pilot could crash a plane every Tuesday and the risk to travelers would still be statistically insignificant. Perceptions aren’t rational.

    Like

  43. Pingback: WHERE NEOLIBERALISM FAILS MOST: It encourages acceptance, and won’t address reality | Daily Patriot News

  44. Precisely. The most obvious sign of a lie is ‘information overload’. When people of average intelligence are trying to cover something up with a big lie they will typically provide too much information. They will answer questions that nobody asked, as their guilty conscience pushes them to try and cover all bases. Lubitz is innocent, and this was most likely a technical failure of the aircraft.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s