PLane carrying German passenger crashes in France

[Peter Lemkin]

Hmmmm.

Spokesman for the investigative team of Germanwings Airbus crash stated that information about written evidence being found during searches, published by British tabloids, is not true.

BERLIN (Sputnik) German police rejected media claims on Friday that they had found evidence proving that the co-pilot of the crashed Germanwings plane had planned his suicide. "Information about written evidence being found during searches, published today by British tabloids, is not true," a spokesman for the investigative team told reporters.

The spokesman added that the police had gathered evidence in the home of the co-pilot, which will be further investigated, though refrained from providing further details.

The Airbus A320 of Lufthansa's low-cost airline Germanwings crashed in the French Alps on Tuesday. There were 150 people on board the plane, including 6 crew and 144 passengers. There are no survivors. On Thursday, a French prosecutor asserted that according to data from the aircraft's first black box, the captain left the cockpit to visit the toilet, and the co-pilot then locked the captain out.

The co-pilot is said to have showed no signs of panic and is deemed to have been conscious while he was alone in the cockpit. The prosecutor said that the passengers were unaware of the situation on board until the very last minute.

Lufthansa CEO Carsten Spohr said later on Thursday the company believed the plane crash was deliberate. He added that Germanwings pilots did not undergo regular psychological evaluations and only took a psychological test during training.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150327/1...z3VdeGv88Z

It makes you wonder why the British press ran with that story. I also don't think he committed suicide. I seem to remember from an earlier post that his breathing was even throughout, according to the recording from the black box. I really doubt this would be the case if he were contemplating suicide. But if it wasn't suicide or planned then why lock the pilot out? Why slowly loose height and ram straight into the mountainside?

The whole event is truly strange.

A remote hijacking is the only thing that makes sense to me. If the co-pilot pre-planned this then how did he know that the pilot would leave the cockpit at all during the flight? Barcelona to Dusseldorf is only a couple of hours. Would a pilot always leave the cockpit at least one during a flight this short? I don't know, but it seems like a strange thing to rely upon. Plus there is the matter of the even breathing, the lack of a suicide note, the (apparent) lack of any kind of motive for taking 100+ people with him.

Very troubling.

Sorry, but your logic is not necessarily logical. You make the invalid assumption that he was intent on carrying it out on THAT flight. He could well have had this in mind to do whenever the right opportunity came about - even had been waiting for the right moment for weeks. While there is some talk about his suggesting to the pilot that he'd take care of things and it was OK to go to the toilet [before the pilot suggesting same] - this is not fully confirmed and doesn't matter. He might just wait for another flight [he likely had about 6+ per week] until someone finally left him alone, be it the next day or next week or next month. (there are also ways a copilot can crash a plane - though not as easy nor surefire - when the pilot is right next to him.) He may have only wanted to do so when alone and was willing to wait. It may well turn out differently than the now semi-official version, but I see nothing illogical with the version now in play - seemingly pushed forward by pressure from airlines to calm the public fears about flying and pilots. As for motive, if true, the underlying depression + high need to achieve being thwarted by loosing his vision could = this odd way to end things and harm others (or not care about the others). Again, too early to tell, but I don't think the version offered is way out of the ballpark of possibility either - just not proven; more assumed from what evidence we've been told [which may or may not be all the evidence we need]. There will be more evidence for sure - one can always doubt whether it is trustworthy, as you are - and there are times to do that with some plane crashes, surely. I can name other flights I'm highly skeptical of the official conclusions for. The official conclusions on this one are NOT YET in, despite the press and prosecutor making everyone think so. I'm pretty agnostic on this one. But, sometimes a cigar is only a cigar. I'm not going to argue the standard storyline - but to me it is as logical as remote take over of the craft - and seems to have much more evidence for it than remote take-over AT THIS POINT. It was supposedly both heard and visually seen the pilot knocking, then pounding and shouting; then finally cursing and using a fire axe or crowbar to force his way back in. The breathing misses the point - even if what we are led to believe about it is so. If we are being lied to, then yes, a radically different scenario would make a better fit. I don't feel we've heard all the evidence yet - in fact we have heard mostly 'leaks', not evidence. They don't lie about EVERY crash. Yes, they certainly seem to about some! You can read all kinds of back and forth here - all almost 150 forum pages of it: http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/55865...e-141.html