In summary, the report reveals that Andreas Lubitz, taking advantage of the absence of the commander in the cockpit, took the controls of the aircraft and modified flight parameters to lower the plane to get it crashed. He blocked the door of the cockpit and ignored the 11 calls from air traffic control in three different frequencies, as well as calls and knocks on the door of the passenger cabin.
The co-pilot was in a state of medical leave and just a few days earlier a doctor had recommended Lubitz a treatment in the hospital. However, neither this nor other sick leave recommendations were referred to Germanwings and no doctor reported Lubitz state, so neither the company nor the authorities could take any action to prevent him fly on the day of the accident.
"Following the report, debates and questions on aviation security are flamed up"
On the other hand, the relatives of the victims claimed that the legal changes are necessary to improve the system while asking that appropriate measures must have been taken to ensure that companies comply with the obligation to have efficient mechanisms to control their employees. Furthermore, medical professionals are calling for clear rules to find a balance between patient privacy and public safety.
The report cited possible reasons that could have led the First Officer Lubitz to hide his medical state from the company: the fear of losing its accreditation and flying license as a professional pilot and the possible economic consequences.
Although this case is very particular, It should be taken into account that the poor working conditions and the continuing pressure on the crew in some cases by the airlines, may have direct effects on the security of operations and hence passengers.
It is recalled that only two days after the fatal accident had happened, the University of Ghent (Belgium) denounced a study "anomalies in the aviation business" at the request of the European Commission. This report showed that an alarming number of pilots are flying on the low-cost airlines, who are not directly connected with the company. In most cases, these economically dependent airlines rely on the crew support from third parties or their parent companies to avoid paying taxes or social security of their workers.
These practices contribute to the distortion of the aviation market's competitive advantage. The report determines that the business model of the airlines should be reviewed essentially in terms of the safety of operations.
The study also points out the immense importance of the selection processes and training. A comprehensive selection process, Improving the education of pilots, focusing on awareness of mental health during training, recognition of problems with peers and mechanisms for reporting them are considered as vital instruments to prevent future accidents.
What is not in doubt is that the sector should study more and better measures to identify all factors that lead to an accident and ensure flight safety, not only the technical factors but also the human factor.
The co-pilot was in a state of medical leave and just a few days earlier a doctor had recommended Lubitz a treatment in the hospital. However, neither this nor other sick leave recommendations were referred to Germanwings and no doctor reported Lubitz state, so neither the company nor the authorities could take any action to prevent him fly on the day of the accident.
"Following the report, debates and questions on aviation security are flamed up"
On the other hand, the relatives of the victims claimed that the legal changes are necessary to improve the system while asking that appropriate measures must have been taken to ensure that companies comply with the obligation to have efficient mechanisms to control their employees. Furthermore, medical professionals are calling for clear rules to find a balance between patient privacy and public safety.
The report cited possible reasons that could have led the First Officer Lubitz to hide his medical state from the company: the fear of losing its accreditation and flying license as a professional pilot and the possible economic consequences.
Although this case is very particular, It should be taken into account that the poor working conditions and the continuing pressure on the crew in some cases by the airlines, may have direct effects on the security of operations and hence passengers.
It is recalled that only two days after the fatal accident had happened, the University of Ghent (Belgium) denounced a study "anomalies in the aviation business" at the request of the European Commission. This report showed that an alarming number of pilots are flying on the low-cost airlines, who are not directly connected with the company. In most cases, these economically dependent airlines rely on the crew support from third parties or their parent companies to avoid paying taxes or social security of their workers.
These practices contribute to the distortion of the aviation market's competitive advantage. The report determines that the business model of the airlines should be reviewed essentially in terms of the safety of operations.
The study also points out the immense importance of the selection processes and training. A comprehensive selection process, Improving the education of pilots, focusing on awareness of mental health during training, recognition of problems with peers and mechanisms for reporting them are considered as vital instruments to prevent future accidents.
What is not in doubt is that the sector should study more and better measures to identify all factors that lead to an accident and ensure flight safety, not only the technical factors but also the human factor.
