Germanwings flight 4U9525 crash in Southern France

[panopticon]

Good post Harley.

There are a few inconsistencies in the mainstream story.

How can the passengers be heard screaming from the cockpit voice recorder?
How was the co-pilots breathing heard on the cockpit voice recorder?
Why did the co-pilots breathing not change?
What were the reported explosions heard by witnesses (described by some as sounding like avalanches) prior to the main explosion/impact?
Why are there leaks & statements from the French prosecutor and safety agency?

It has also been alleged that mobile phone footage has been recovered which shows the passenger cabin in the moments prior to the plane crashing.

These alone lead me to think that there is more to the story of flight 9525 than we know.

Again, I go back to money, control and power...

From this it seems to me that the narrative is being controlled/constructed by vested interests.

Why else would this suicide narrative (especially if it actually is true) have been constructed and agreed to so rapidly?

-- Pan

Posted by Harley (here)
Ever since the first reports of this airliner's crash the media has been generating MASS AMOUNTS OF (DIS)INFORMATION.

Please read below and THEN come to your own EDUCATED conclusions.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The BEA (Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses pour la sécurité de l'aviation civile) is the French authority responsible for safety investigations into accidents or incidents in civil aviation.

The safety investigation, whose sole objective is to prevent future accidents and incidents, includes the gathering and analysis of information, the drawing of conclusions, including the determination of cause(s) and/or contributing factors and, when appropriate, the making of safety recommendations (European Regulation 996/2010 article 2 part 14).

The identification of causes does not imply the assignment of fault or the determination of administrative, civil or criminal liability (European Regulation 996/2010 article 2 part 04).

Organisation of Safety Investigations

[Highlighted Text]

"In accordance with international agreements [...]"

"Only those able to contribute to its progress are associated with the investigation."

"According to the law, they are subject to professional secrecy [...]"

"[...] discussions that are indispensable to its progress cannot be made public."

"As long as it is not finished, the BEA refuses to speculate on any scenarios for the accident that bring no understanding of the causes and thus improve safety and can only further disturb the families of the victims and public opinion."

"Right at the beginning of the investigation, safety investigators from the BEA’s counterparts, assisted by experts, are associated with its conduct."

[Full Text]

The BEA duty room is the contact point to declare an accident or a serious incident. This declaration, also called a « notification » allows the BEA to gather initial information and to take the necessary steps to initiate the investigation.

Rapidly, an Investigator-in-charge (IIC), responsible for the conduct of the investigation, is appointed. His mission is to lead the investigation from notification until the production of the final report. According to the circumstances of the event, the IIC may call in other investigators to create working groups.

When the event occurs abroad and involves France in accordance with the provisions of Annex 13 [Legal Context] the State where the event has occurred must « notify » the BEA so that an investigator, known as an Accredited Representative, can be nominated. He is the official correspondent of the Investigator-in-Charge for the State of Occurrence.

In accordance with international agreements, representatives of the State of Registry of the airline (in the case of an accident to a foreign airline that occurs on French territory), representatives of the State of Manufacture or Design of the aeroplane and some onboard equipment or even States with a large number of citizens who are victims, are associated with the safety investigation directed by the Investigator-in-charge (IIC). They can be accompanied, at the request of the IIC and under his control, by experts from the manufacturer of the aeroplane or the airline involved.

Only those able to contribute to its progress are associated with the investigation. According to the law, they are subject to professional secrecy, since confidential or non validated information is exchanged during the course of the investigation and discussions that are indispensable to its progress cannot be made public.

The safety investigation into a public transport accident is a complex process, even when the flight recorders are available, since, given the high level of safety that is reached in public transport in advanced countries, an accident necessarily results from a chain of causes in which each event is highly unlikely. All possible factors must be reviewed: the weather, the preparation of the flight, air traffic control, the condition of the aeroplane, the pilots’ qualifications, the organisation of the airline, etc., all of which requires considerable work in seeking out information from all of those involved.

A large-scale investigation lasts two years on average, rarely less, sometimes much longer. As long as it is not finished, the BEA refuses to speculate on any scenarios for the accident that bring no understanding of the causes and thus improve safety and can only further disturb the families of the victims and public opinion.

Right at the beginning of the investigation, safety investigators from the BEA’s counterparts, assisted by experts, are associated with its conduct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If the above is not self-explanatory,
If you still cannot see what's going on here,
Then I cannot help you.

[turiya]

Back to CERN for a Moment...

Germanwings, CERN and Gravimetric Distortions

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Ga2KWPo6BuI

Published on April 2 2015

CERN: CRASH COURSE

When Ground Zero first began in 1995, the subject of secret government projects dealing in electromagnetic frequency control, and the force multiplying of energy upon the ionosphere and magnetosphere was still in its infancy.

These projects spawned a great number of conspiracy theories dealing with electromagnetic resonant induction and mass population control methods. The HAARP Project along with the Montauk collider and Brookhaven collider seem to be the targeted facilities in every case dealing with Electro Magnetic experimentation, weather and earthquake force multipliers, time travel, and mass behavioral control methods.

Brookhaven Labs supercollider named one of the giant magnets “Phenix” (sic) which is ironic when you consider that nearby Montauk was the location of Project Phoenix and Phoenix II projects respectively.

Many are aware of the Philadelphia Experiment at Montauk which was allegedly the precursor to the unified field testing that we hear about at CERN and the Higgs Boson findings.

Furthermore it is also an interesting footnote when other strange coincidences show up and you have to stop and pause for thought.

The Brookhaven RHIC (Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider) was the first machine in the world capable of colliding heavy ions, which are atoms which have had their outer cloud of electrons removed.

In the area of Montauk and near the Brookhaven RHIC there were at one time reports of various plane disasters that occurred while these facilities were operating.

One of the planes that went down in the air corridor near Brookhaven was Swissair Flight 111. The plane left from New York and started reporting problems soon after the plane went down Sept. 2, 1998. After the black boxes were recovered it was interesting to note that both tapes went blank before the plane crashed. As if they had been erased or shut off. Out of the 229 people who perished two of them were important figures at Brookhaven National Labs.

Dr. Klaus Kinder-Geiger, was a top physicist at the Nuclear Theory Group at the Brookhaven National Laboratory. Kinder-Geiger was working on a computerized model of large nuclei at high energies. Dr. Per Spanne also died in the crash. He was known as a pioneer in the field of microbeam radiation therapy and diagnostic X-rays. Spanne, from Sweden was also a guest researcher at the Brookhaven laboratory.

Another crash shrouded in elusive mystery is of Course TWA Flight 800.

Anytime there is discussion that is critical of the 40 million dollars that was spent for the investigation of TWA flight 800, there seems to be an immediate dismissal of any other possibility of the cause. It is dismissed as conspiracy theory and investigative journalists are written off as crackpot theorists even though the synchronicities that exist are just to good to overlook.

For example Brookhaven Labs coincidentally was mentioned in the London times after the initial reports of a ball of light raced up towards the jet before it went down. A CIA Data System II satellite positioned over the Brookhaven National Laboratory allegedly showed that a glowing object raced up to the TWA jet, passing it, then changing course and smashing into it.

Many would say later that it was a missile could it have been electromagnetic energy balls being released from the earth? Or from a lab? Or a clandestine electromagnetic facility known for dabbling in space-time manipulation like the allegedly abandoned Montauk’s Camp Hero?

There were several witnesses who claimed that they saw what appeared to be a ball of light that brought down TWA Flight 800. If you believe a missile brought the plane down then any theory that even smacks of electromagnetic balls of light would probably not sway you. However, theoretically speaking, magnetic rips in space time can create a ripple or wormhole effect which could cause bright flashes that could ignite fuel causing a plane to explode. Some will say it’s improbable, but not impossible.

Brookhaven Labs even stated in a press release that John Marburger, Brookhaven’s director, set up a committee of physicists to investigate whether the project could go disastrously wrong. We reported that in the process that small black holes could be made and that it could suck in surrounding matter. Professor Bob Jaffe, director of the Center for Theoretical Physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said he believed the risk was tiny but could not be ruled out.

BNL confirmed that there had been discussion over the possibility of perturbations in the universe.

The fear that anything surrounding the facility could disappear without a trace or the chance of a catastrophe happening is according to officials “highly unlikely.”

However if a small black hole was created in a supercollider we would not want to be there when it happens. Even microscopic black holes can grow exponentially, eventually obliterating Earth. Once again the officials stress that the danger is minimal.

On the day of the Downing of the John F. Kennedy Junior’s Piper Saratoga Plane Ground Zero Reported that the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at Brookhaven had been test fired and ever since, strange reports have come from that area.

There were documented reports of green flashes of light and pilots reported seeing bright flashes that they had to look away from because of the intensity of the arc.

Later Egypt Air 990 crashed in the same general area near Brookhaven.

Doesn’t this sound Familiar?

On Friday March 13th, 2015 CERN announced that it would fire the Atlas stream in preparation for a test on 15th. Just prior to the test NASA launched its Magnetospheric Multi-scale (MMS) mission, where 4 identical space craft were sent into space to study ‘magnetic reconnection’ when magnetic fields lines from the Sun cross paths with Earth releasing bursts of energy toward the ground.

These bursts of energy sometimes create sky quakes or huge bursts of energy that double back on Earth. It was speculated that these stateliest were conveniently fired into space to monitor CERN’s Large Hadron Collider effects on the magnetic field.

CERN announced that it was pulling back its double power tests until sometime in May to avoid possible overload of the magnets.

The Gravity Field and Steady-State Ocean Circulation Explorer (Goce) was launched in March 2009. It flies pole to pole at an altitude of just 254.9km — the lowest orbit of any research satellite in operation today.

The spacecraft carries three pairs of precision-built platinum blocks inside its gradiometer instrument that can sense fantastically small accelerations.

This extraordinary performance allows it to map the almost imperceptible differences in the pull exerted by the mass of the planet from one place to the next — from the great mountain ranges to the deepest ocean trenches. Just getting it to work has tested the best minds in Europe.

The information it has sent sounds like something out of a science fiction TV show like Star Trek and it is now challenging a lot of the ideas we have about the surface of the planet and how we view magnetic influences, gravimetric and geological data.

It is important to point this out because theoretically with all of the experiments we have been doing with both the ionosphere and the magnetosphere, there is a slight chance that there are from time to time invisible highly magnetically charged energy ribbons that can cause severe gravimetric distortions in certain areas of the earth.

If we were to map the earth in a way that showed gravity and magnetic fluctuations, the perfect spheroid of Earth we are used to seeing would look more like a misshapen potato. The planet earth does not have the same gravity pull equally on its surface. This is the trick gravity plays on Earth because the space rock on which we live is not a perfect sphere and its interior mass is not evenly distributed.

The magnetic core can at times move about inside the earth creating all kinds of anomalous activity that theoretically can be manipulated by the Large Hadron Collider at CERN in Geneva.

In 1995, geophysicist Markus Gurk completed a study [See Article 1] where he theorized that the Alps, an extensive mountain range in Europe, had areas deep underneath the mountains of highly charged electric currents that flowed through what is called a “crustal conductor.”

Applying Hypothetical Event Analysis it is proposed that a spatial decoupling of the induction processes with depth and a conductivity anomaly is presumably due to the northward indentation by the Adriatic plate.

Based on the available seismic, gravimetric and geologic data from the past years, our understanding of the deep structure of the Central Alps has to be revised. It is quite probable that gravimetric distortion waves are possible over the mountain range and that an energy ribbon (electromagnetic lightning) could be responsible for these distortions.

It is also interesting to note that GOCE has also detected the same anomalies over the Himalayas, South-East Asia, the Andes mountain range, and in Antarctica.

Keep in mind that these gravimetric events are rare. However if we were to somehow find a correlation between gravimetric distortions, magnetic and particle physics experiments at CERN and the creation of a wormhole or Nexus ribbon over the Alps this would make a compelling argument as to how an Airbus operated by Lufthansa’s Germanwings budget airline crashed into a mountainside in the French Alps on Tuesday, killing all 150 people on board including 16 schoolchildren. Germanwings confirmed its flight 4U 9525 from Barcelona to Dusseldorf went down with 144 passengers and six crew on board.

Is there a possibility that CERN and the tests at the LHC are somehow triggering more gravimetric distortion waves and are they traveling thousands of miles when the magnets at CERN are at full power?

Many argue that the collider would have minimal effect at low power, however in the quest for the Higgs Boson particle the collider fired at approximately 7 trillion volts. It is now being reported that by June or later the collider will use a side step process to top off its power at 17 trillion volts.

When the Germanwings airbus crashed, on Tuesday the 24th of March CERN was firing test streams at the particle collider and was at low power. During the test firing CERN metaphorically blew a tire with an unexpected short-circuit in the wiring of one of the vital magnets abruptly shut down the operation.

Engineers had been expected to start on Wednesday pumping proton beams in opposite directions all the way round the two 17-mile underground tubes in the LHC. These were the first low power tests since CERN closed down for the past two years for maintenance.

That would have been the prelude to the start of particle collisions in late May at twice the power of those in the LHC’s first run from 2010-2013.

Hopes for the second run lie in breaking out of what it known as the Standard Model of how the universe works at the level of elementary particles, and into “New Physics.”

That includes searching for the dark matter that makes up about 96 percent of the stuff of the universe but can only be detected by its influence on visible matter around it.

CERN scientists expressed disappointment at the last-minute problem, in just one of the underground machine’s eight sectors, which have been rewired and checked thoroughly during the closedown. But the research center’s director general, Rolf Heuer, played down its significance.

“All the signs are good for a great run,” he said in a statement. “In the grand scheme of things, a few weeks delay in humankind’s quest to understand our universe is little more than the blink of an eye.”

It is also a sick coincidence that if anything goes wrong with the tests earth could be destroyed in the blink of an eye. If the Germanwings crash is connected, then we can see just what minimal power can do to aggravate gravimetric distortion waves in the Alps.

Questions need answers. Why did the plane JUST fall out of the sky for 8 minutes? How does the White House know that terrorism wasn’t involved? Stories running in The Mirror and Daily Mail now call out an electrical fault on the plane as a possible cause.

While it is true that A-320 went down over 125 miles away from CERN, if this crash had anything to do with CERN, the field the LHC would cast 20,000+ feet in the air would be much different than at the surface.

That is why we must also include the conductive crust theory that may exist under the Alps and how an electrified Nexus could form and move quickly through the area cutting everything in its path like piano wire.

You don’t mess with the geomagnetic fields in an area that is believed to be erratic in the first place.

We are aware that correlation is not causation.

When evidence seems to be so convoluted and nebulous it seems only natural to start coming up with the improbable. You need to remember that improbable does not always mean that it is out of the realm of possibility.

Tonight, Clyde brings back Anthony Patch to discuss the recent technical problems at CERN and the possibility that the recent airplane crash in the Alps was caused by the Large Hadron Collider.

Anthony Patch
Clyde Lewis of Ground Zero Radio
Ground Zero Radio Podcasts Link: https://soundcloud.com/groundzeromedia
Geophysicist Marcus Gurk pdf: http://www.terrapub.co.jp/journals/E...0/51101023.pdf
End Times Matrix News video Link: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSX...poXoR4QaBlGLVQ

________________________ADD EDIT________________________

Magnetic distortion of GDS transfer functions:
An example from the Penninic Alps of Eastern Switzerland
revealing a crustal conductor
by Marcus Gurk

Abstract

We carried out sixty-four MT and GDS soundings in the eastern Swiss Alps to obtain information on the electrical conductivity distribution. One of the main findings is an anomalous directional behaviour of the real induction arrows over the entire period range (T = 1–300; s) on the Bündnerschiefer. The Bündnerschiefer occurs between the crystalline Aar and Gotthard massives to the North and the crystalline Penninic nappes (Adula, Tambo, Suretta) to the South within the investigation area. The sediments form an elongated eastwards plunging ramp with a possible conductive link to the Northern Swiss Permo-carboniferous trough (Molasse basin). We consider electric currents induced in various local and regional conductive structures and leaking into the Bündnerschiefer as possible causes for the observed effect upon the electromagnetic field. Applying Hypothetical Event Analysis (HEA) we find a spatial decoupling of the induction processes with depth and a conductivity anomaly presumably due to the northward indentation by the Adriatic plate.
SOURCE

________________________END EDIT________________________

[Slorri]

It should be obvious to anyone that the officials are lying.
Look at this guy, making up excuses for how and why they found this FDR (again).
Every word he uses, and his body language, are indications of lies.

It was burnt, and it was buried. How did that happen. Did it burn in the air? Or did someone bury it after it was burnt on the ground?

This is a disgrace.

URGENT Crash de Germanwings : la deuxième boîte noire confirme une action volontaire du copilote (enquêteurs)

[Cidersomerset]

Good post Harley.

There are a few inconsistencies in the mainstream story.

How can the passengers be heard screaming from the cockpit voice recorder?
How was the co-pilots breathing heard on the cockpit voice recorder?
Why did the co-pilots breathing not change?
What were the reported explosions heard by witnesses (described by some as sounding like avalanches) prior to the main explosion/impact?
Why are there leaks & statements from the French prosecutor and safety agency?

This is a interesting interview and Field brings up some
interesting points , they may have been touched on
before in other articles as I have not been following
this thread as I have been busy on others.

But they do discuss some of pans questions particularly
the breathing .....


The Richie Allen Show on Davidicke.com: Field McConnell
– ‘Pilots Are Not Buying The Andreas Lubitz Story. It Doesn’t Add Up’

new Friday 3rd April 2015 at 10:41 By David Icke

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=7OcR7HZIIRI

Published on 2 Apr 2015


Please Support The Show – http://richieallenshow.com/donate/

[Slorri]

Field McConnell contradicts completely the French pilot, who said you can't hear any breathing, and this guy simulates exaggerated breathing.

[Hervé]

From the BEA site:


Accident d'un Airbus A320-211 immatriculé D-AIPX, vol GWI18G, survenu le 24 mars 2015

INFORMATION DU 3 AVRIL 2015

L’enregistreur de paramètres de vol de l’avion (FDR, Flight Data Recorder) a été acheminé vers les locaux du BEA hier dans la soirée. Les équipes du BEA ont débuté les opérations d’ouverture dès son arrivée.

Une première lecture fait apparaître que le pilote présent dans le cockpit a utilisé le pilote automatique pour engager l’avion en descente vers une altitude de 100 ft, puis, à plusieurs reprises au cours de la descente, le pilote a modifié le réglage du pilote automatique pour augmenter la vitesse de l’avion en descente.

Les travaux continuent pour établir le déroulement factuel précis du vol.

=================================================

INFORMATION April 3, 2015

The recorder of the aircraft flight data (FDR, Flight Data Recorder) was sent to the local BEA yesterday evening. BEA teams began opening operations immediately upon arrival.

A first reading shows that the pilot in the cockpit used the autopilot to engage the aircraft descent down to an altitude of 100 ft and, on several occasions during the descent, the pilot changed the autopilot setting to increase the speed of the descending plane.

Work is on-going in order to determine the accurate, factual progression of the flight.

==================================================

Can anyone help me (non pilot, sorry) explain why the plane's (ground)speed didn't increase even though it was descending with almost 4000 fpm?

Airbrakes.

Lastly:

Originally Posted by MsCaptain
emjanssen: How do they know the FO started the descent without data from the FDR?
This is one thing that is troubling me as well.

This conclusion can reasonably be made by cross matching the timestamps of the ADB mode-s "selected altitude" messages with the timing of the sounds of someone pushing FMC buttons on the CVR.

09:30:52Z.386 MCP/FMC ALT: 38000 ft QNH: 1006.0 hPa
09:30:52Z.567 T,3c6618,43.122208,5.676482,38000,GWI18G
09:30:53Z.036 T,3c6618,43.122894,5.676993,38000,GWI18G
09:30:53Z.546 T,3c6618,43.124271,5.678166,38000,GWI18G
09:30:54Z.083 MCP/FMC ALT: 13008 ft QNH: 1006.0 hPa
09:30:54Z.096 T,3c6618,43.125295,5.678689,38000,GWI18G
09:30:54Z.676 T,3c6618,43.125961,5.679421,38000,GWI18G
09:30:55Z.156 T,3c6618,43.127157,5.680259,38000,GWI18G
09:30:55Z.397 MCP/FMC ALT: 96 ft QNH: 1006.0 hPa

[data from ATC radar pings]

[Hervé]

Posted by panopticon (here)
[...]
There are a few inconsistencies in the mainstream story.

How can the passengers be heard screaming from the cockpit voice recorder?
How was the co-pilots breathing heard on the cockpit voice recorder?
[...]

I have been digging around:

On modern CVRs, pilot headset microphones are HOT microphones -- they are always on (whether the PTT button is pressed or not) and are always recorded on the CVR.

Breathing can be heard on these hot channels.

On these CVRs, four channels are assigned:

Channel 1: Captain HOT microphone
Channel 2: FO HOT microphone
Channel 3. Cockpit Area Microphone (CAM)
Channel 4: Public Address

Per regulations, large turbine aircraft installed after October 1991 must use hot microphones. CVRs on older aircraft must be retrofitted to comply with the new requirements by April, 2012.

... and:

A little bit of filtering and amplification would surely give you the breathing.

Correct and, when analyzing sound, a spectrum analyzer give a 'visual picture' of frequencies of interest.

Example:

Cockpit background noise will have it's own frequency plot.
Aural alarms will have it's own frequency plot.
Electrical seat movement will have it's own frequency plot.
Someone banging cockpit will have own plot.
Breathing thru Full face mask will have it's own frequency plot.

A spectrum analyzer can differentiate all these.

For the other points... your guess as good as mine...

[Cidersomerset]

Field McConnell contradicts completely the French pilot, who said you can't hear any breathing, and this guy simulates exaggerated breathing.

Field said you cannot hear the pilot breathing as there is a switch to turn it off.
He was breathing to give you an example of what you would hear if the pilot
did not turn off the microphone. If that is BS fair enough but he seems to
believe what he is trying to say.

[panopticon]

Posted by Hervé (here)
I have been digging around:

On modern CVRs, pilot headset microphones are HOT microphones -- they are always on (whether the PTT button is pressed or not) and are always recorded on the CVR.

Breathing can be heard on these hot channels.

On these CVRs, four channels are assigned:

Channel 1: Captain HOT microphone
Channel 2: FO HOT microphone
Channel 3. Cockpit Area Microphone (CAM)
Channel 4: Public Address

Per regulations, large turbine aircraft installed after October 1991 must use hot microphones. CVRs on older aircraft must be retrofitted to comply with the new requirements by April, 2012.

... and:

A little bit of filtering and amplification would surely give you the breathing.

Correct and, when analyzing sound, a spectrum analyzer give a 'visual picture' of frequencies of interest.

Example:

Cockpit background noise will have it's own frequency plot.
Aural alarms will have it's own frequency plot.
Electrical seat movement will have it's own frequency plot.
Someone banging cockpit will have own plot.
Breathing thru Full face mask will have it's own frequency plot.

A spectrum analyzer can differentiate all these.

For the other points... your guess as good as mine...

I'd done a similar thing and went looking...

Given I've not been actively following this I thought I'd best have a look at the likelihood audio would be picked up on a cockpit mic and given the modern propensity to film everything and post it on social media it didn't take long...

I spent a bit of time watching recordings done from the flight deck of the Airbus A320 to gauge noise level.

It appears that the earlier comment someone made about not being able to hear in the cockpit may have been incorrect.

While there is some noise it is clear that pilots (and passenger in the cockpit) are able to hear each other quite clearly in normal conditions.

Maybe this changes when the plane is lower and in bad weather (though the below landing at Milan airport in turbulence doesn't seem to show much difference) but given that on the day of the Germanwings crash this wasn't a factor I feel comfortable in saying that the cockpit voice recorder would have picked up the co-pilots breathing if he had the headset on (it depends on the microphones sensitivity and where it was placed as to whether it would if it was taken off his head). Also, rightly or wrongly, I assumed that the CVR would record all cockpit audio and couldn't be turned off (as a safety feature if nothing else). I know, "never assume", but I did so thought I'd say.

Below is the best recording I came across with interaction between the passenger and pilots inflight (there are parts with music interspersed between discussion):

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=kYBd4I2MhFs

Here are a few others I watched:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=aYjYwRh0B9E

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=jYh5M89BDUo

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=2bVsw-ysdW0

As a side note I noticed that the headsets seem to be wired (just an observation).

So, given all this it seems at least possible that if the reports are accurate his breathing could be heard on the recording. In addition I think that an axe hitting the security door would also be picked up clearly by the in cabin mic/s.

-- Pan

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by panopticon (here)
In addition I think that an axe hitting the security door would also be picked up clearly by the in cabin mic/s.

As pointed out by Rebekah Roth in this long discussion of this crash: http://archives2015.gcnlive.com/Arch...ur/0401152.mp3, the crash ax is inside the cockpit.

[araucaria]

The French pilot claimed 18 years experience with the Airbus, which would include the oldest models when they were still fairly new. It is not clear to me why an individual pilot would contradict the public prosecutor if he were not at least speaking his own truth.

As regards the public prosecutor, this week’s edition of Le Canard Enchaîné (serious investigative reporting) carries an article, “Le crash du patron du BEA”, saying that the head of the BEA, Rémi Jouty, was questioned by the police, who wanted to be the first to hear about the contents of the flight recorder. Apparently both the gendarmes and the public prosecutor, Brice Robin, got their info from the press. Jouty admitted to making a copy of the sound track, but that he gave it not to the press, but to his government ministry (Ecology), something confirmed by a government source. Robin was not satisfied with this, because Jouty had signed an agreement with the Ministry of Justice whereby this type of information was to be forwarded directly to the competent judicial authority, in this case Robin himself. After threatening to take the matter very seriously with a preliminary investigation into this breach of secrecy, things were eventually smoothed out.

The question is why violate a protocol signed by oneself only last September, and why was the matter swept under the carpet? It would seem that this was a special case, maybe unforeseen back then, that the press leak was officially sanctioned, and that this was the safest and surest way of making that happen. The question then becomes, why would the French government want to breach its own protocol in this outrageous manner? I doubt if the intention was to spawn an industry of mad copilot speculation, although that outcome would have been foreseen as well. It may have been looking further down the process of trawling through lightweight theories about tiffs with girlfriends, substance abuse, failing eyesight etc., and even all of the above, to finding a real explanation to the recorded dispute with the pilot. The bottom line so far is that we have a qualified European pilot working for a reputable European airline on a scheduled internal European flight inexplicably going crazy and using some highly automated technology to override that same technology – a highly unusual situation brought out in the open in equally abnormal circumstances.

[panopticon]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by panopticon (here)
In addition I think that an axe hitting the security door would also be picked up clearly by the in cabin mic/s.

As pointed out by Rebekah Roth in this long discussion of this crash: http://archives2015.gcnlive.com/Arch...ur/0401152.mp3, the crash ax is inside the cockpit.

Thanks Paul.

I'd missed that pearl.

It seemed a bit strange, in the post-911 paranoia, for an axe to be lying around in a plane...

-- Pan

Addendum

From Washington Post:

Reports: Desperate pilot used ax on locked cockpit door of doomed plane
...
The reports, in French and German media outlets, could not be independently verified. Typically, however, the ax is located inside the cockpit of an A320, pilots familiar with the aircraft said, and it was unclear how the locked-out pilot would have had access to the tool.

Source

[araucaria]

There is now a debate underway over the possible need to breach medical secrecy under certain circumstances in order to save lives. This should not be necessary since we have a procedure in place, namely occupational medicine, whereby a doctor simply declares an employee fit or unfit for work without having to reveal personal details. It may well be that this process needs tightening up for airline pilots, with more frequent and more stringent checkups; also we probably need to provide better alternatives for workers who become unfit to do their job so as to remove the incentive to cheat, but the basic principle of medical secrecy should not be needlessly undermined.
http://www.liberation.fr/societe/201...s-vies_1234528

[Roisin]

I also think they should do a more in-depth evaluation of co-pilot's who are still in their 20's because even though 25 is the age most people reach full maturity, there are plenty out there who take a bit longer to reach that. For example, many exceptional/gifted males mature at a slightly slower pace than their peer's. This co-pilot was in that category and was at the top of his class in flight school too.

But having said this, I still do not trust the information reported in the news about this co-pilot .... and the crash.

[araucaria]

Posted by turiya (here)
Back to CERN for a Moment...

Any CERN involvement (re #162) would have to explain how the aircraft behaved exactly as it would have done had it been in Uninterruptible Autopilot mode, i.e. a machine-controlled descent/landing sequence designed to foil all terrorists except a pilot. It would be more likely for interference of the kind suggested to provoke unexpected damage of some sort rather than trigger a special routine that operated perfectly smoothly. When lightning hits your home electrics, it is liable to blow some household appliance; it is not going to select a dishwasher cycle and start it off.

[Carmody]

Posted by Cidersomerset (here)

Field McConnell contradicts completely the French pilot, who said you can't hear any breathing, and this guy simulates exaggerated breathing.

Field said you cannot hear the pilot breathing as there is a switch to turn it off.
He was breathing to give you an example of what you would hear if the pilot
did not turn off the microphone. If that is BS fair enough but he seems to
believe what he is trying to say.

This goes back to the scenario that the noise levels an an airbus A320, are very high. The static continual noise levels are very high.

With this particular plane, the cockpit crew wear their headsets at all times (like all others do) but, importantly, that they apparently have a 'threshold' activated microphone/recording/transmit system due to the continual noise. This is what is stated about Airbus A320's as this whole story began.

That the signal, the voice signal is not recorded until a specific level of sound is encountered and then it begins recording or transmitting/sharing/etc.

Many helicopters use a similar system, due to extremely high ambient noise levels in the cockpit.

The cockpit crew is probably required to set their microphone distance from their face and then set the turn-on, turn-off threshold sensitivity for their microphone, each time they fly. This is probably part of normal procedure. In such a case, it is probably unlikely that the system would be able to catch any normal breathing pattern from anyone in the cockpit, OR hear any noise that is far away from the microphone.

The co-pilot would probably have to go against their trained procedure or against their learned pattern and turn down the microphone threshold so it captures all signal, so that it would be on all the time.

You can probably find Airbus A320 videos on youtube that illustrate this thing I speak of, this noise level vs threshold of the individual microphones. When working with such a system people usually learn to stretch out the very first sound component of the first word they speak, so the microphone has a chance to turn on, and they don't 'clip' the beginning of the given spoken word.

[Carmody]

Another possibility, regarding speculation....we are dealing with possibly a breakaway civilization on the US side of this story.

Then we get to the Europeans breaking ranks.

We have aerospace manufacturers in the USA who also make military and commercial aircraft. That these groups are also supposedly inside the core technology of the breakaway civilization, in a large way.

We have, in the 'Euro Theater', Airbus.... who comes originally... from a consortium of aerospace manufacturers. Who 'may' also be involved on the inside of that breakaway civilization, or involved in their own craft designs. They too may be trying to underwrite their own clandestine advanced space efforts via the mechanism of inflated fiats and derivatives in the euro theater... as a form of personal effort and also redundancy in effort.

But, along comes this lack of desire to fight anther euro war.... and then the breaking of ranks.

The hidden hand is inordinately fond of killing multiple birds with one stone, stones that come out of nowhere, and are difficult to pin down in all ways. For an observer or the one on the defensive after the given act....No stable origin point, no stable singularity in suspected target, no stable outcome/unfoldings. That's the way they roll.

[Hervé]

Posted by Hervé (here)
Boeing Honeywell Uninterruptible Autopilot
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Boeing Honeywell Uninterruptible Autopilot is a set of sub-routines aimed at defeating attempts at aircraft hijacking by removing electrical power from an aircraft's flight deck, and irrevocably passing pilot authority to the autopilot and navigational computer for an automated landing at a safe airfield that can deal effectively with the incident.

History
In 2005, avionics supplier, Honeywell, was reported to be talking to both Boeing and Airbus about fitting a device aimed at preventing a 9/11-style hijack. On 16 April 2003, Honeywell filed patent US7475851 B2, Method and apparatus for preventing an unauthorized flight of an aircraft. Airbus and BAE Systems, had been working on the project with Honeywell. Development sped up after the September 11, 2001 attacks.[1][2]

----------------------------------------------

A mechanical reason wouldn't prevent seasoned pilot from flying on the green light from their mechanics.

Hacking of their targeted air travel company fly-by-wire controls by unknown entities would...

Posted by Hervé (here)
Let's see...

The emergency was declared by the guys monitoring the flight when they got no responses from the pilots... that would have gotten fighter jets to scramble from the closest air force base or any flying jets close by.

What fails to make sense is this (see post # 42): why wasn't that fail-safe procedure engaged for a definitely hijacked airplane, be it heart attack or suicidal impulse?

That plane wasn't remotely controlled to counter a hijack... therefore, that counter-hijack system is totally useless, or... totally effective in crashing targeted planes!

Getting back to the above, from:

SCAPEGOAT: Is Germanwings Pilot Andreas Lubitz Being ‘Framed’ for French Alps Crash?

April 5, 2015 By Shawn Helton 21st Century Wire

[...]

‘Uninterruptible’ Flight Control
It’s important to once again mention 21WIRE’s lengthy investigation into the history of avionics, following the questionable vanishing of Malaysian flight MH370, and the downing of MH17.

After extensively examining both the unprecedented disappearance of MH370 and the subsequent downing of MH17, certain details came to light regarding the history of the remote autopilot function installed within Boeing commercial airliners.

The Boeing 777 along with other Boeing and Airbus models, can in fact be flown remotely through the use of independent embedded hardware, software and satellite communications system. Once this advanced system is engaged, it can disallow any pilot or potential hijacker from controlling a plane, as the rooted set-up uses digital signals that communicate with air traffic control, satellite links, as well as other government entities operating a central control hun (located in the United States) for the remainder of a flight’s journey.

This technology is known as the Boeing Honeywell ‘Uninterruptible’ Autopilot System, also refered to as BHUAP or BUAP.

IMAGE: The United States patent and schematics for the Boeing Honeywell Uninterruptible Autopilot dated November, 28th 2006 (Photo flightglobal.com).

On December 4th of 2006, it was announced that Boeing had won a patent on an uninterruptible autopilot system for use in commercial aircraft. Although this was the first public acknowledgment by Boeing about the existence of such an autopilot system, it is believed that the technology has been operation on many commercial aircraft from as early as the late 1980′s and as late as the mid 1990′s.

The ‘new’ autopilot patent was reported by John Croft for Flight Global, with the news piece subsequently linked by a Homeland Security News Wire and other British publications around the same time in 2006. According to the DHS news release, it was disclosed that “dedicated electrical circuits” within an onboard flight system could control a plane without the need of pilots, stating that the advanced avionics would fly the aircraft remotely, independently of those operating the plane:

“The “uninterruptible” autopilot would be activated – either by pilots, by onboard sensors, or even remotely via radio or satellite links by government agencies like the Central Intelligence Agency, if terrorists attempt to gain control of a flight deck.”

The Flight Global news wire goes on to report that the uninterruptible autopilot system was designed for “increased security” in the event of a manual hijacking situation, as Boeing itself describes the feature as a preventative measure, keeping unauthorized persons out of a cockpit, setting the stage for an industry wide safety protocol:

“There is a need in the industry for a technique that conclusively prevents unauthorised persons for gaining access to the controls of the vehicle and therefore threatening the safety of the passengers onboard the vehicle, and/or other people in the path of travel of the vehicle, thereby decreasing the amount of destruction individuals onboard the vehicle would be capable of causing.”

Additionally, in the article entitled, “Diagrams: Boeing patents anti-terrorism auto-land system for hijacked airliners,” Croft outlines the clandestine oversight that the US and partner governments have with respect to the uninterruptible autopilot, making note of the auto-land function of the system and stating that the technology has its own power supply, self-sufficient of any electrical systems on the plane:

“To make it fully independent, the system has its own power supply, independent of the aircraft’s circuit breakers. The aircraft remains in automatic mode until after landing, when mechanics or government security operatives are called in to disengage the system.”

Although the information regarding the remote capabilities concerning Boeing were released in the 2006 DHS newswire, it wasn’t until retired military and commercial pilot, Field McConnell,launched a lawsuit against the FAA, NTSB and ALPA in February of 2007, did those specific modifications get pushed out into the open.

According to McConnell’s documents, Boeing is said to have stated that by end of 2009 all Boeing planes would be fitted with the BUAP - making them impossible to manually hijack within the plane but susceptible to remote control by the military, according the flight veteran.

McConnell has also stated that every airliner should now be classified as a ‘latent’ drone. Additionally, he has stated that due to flight aviation regulations pilots have ‘unknowingly’ assumed legal responsibility for airliners outfitted with the BUAP system.It’s important to remember that following the disappearance of MH370, media outlets and authorities were quick to place blame on the plane’s captain, Zaharie Shah, seemingly crafting a “suicide smear campaign” as described by the pilot’s family, while also manufacturing a terror narrative – that was later abandoned.

The mainstream media ignored much of the initial critical information that was revealed concerning the communication of the plane and its actual whereabouts according to eye witnesses in favor of a weak and unsubstantiated motive.

Perhaps the key element to keep in mind regarding the BUAP system - is that at any point during a flight, the plane’s controls can be seized remotely, subsequently overriding manual control.

Nudging BUAP Into Germanwings Story

As the narrative had already spun out of control regarding Germanwings pilot Lubitz following the crash, a Daily Mail article entitled,“Why can’t airlines seize control of doomed jets from the ground?“, emerged, revealing the largest mainstream media roll out, regarding the BUAP fly-by-wire technology. The article was released within 24 hours of the disaster, as if it had been ready to go for sometime. Here’s an excerpt that echoes Croft’s article from 2006:

“Manufacturers in Europe and America have worked on ways of creating a ‘hijack-proof’ aircraft. In 2006, Boeing was awarded a US patent for an ‘uninterruptible’ autopilot system.”

“This would allow pilots, ground controllers or security agencies such as the CIA to activate an automatic flight mode that cannot be turned off by anyone on board.”

“The system could also switch itself on if terrorists tried to fight their way into the cockpit, with pressure sensors on the door responding to excessive force.”

The Daily Mail piece could be seen as a way to preempt and ultimately ease questions concerning the BUAP system, while simultaneously priming the public for automated commercial airliners in the future. Similar reports advocating for a “remote control solution” appeared at exactly the same time on other media outlets, including CNN’s The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer.

The existence of this technology can no longer be denied, along with other anti-hijack patents that have long been established in the field of aviation. The the establishment media are most fearful of here is the PR disaster which will ensue should the public ever connected the BUAP system with the events of Sept 11, 2001 – eventually demanding answers as to why the BUAP was not engaged during any other the alleged hijacked passenger airlines on 9/11.

Take another listen to SUNDAY WIRE host Patrick Henningsen and his guest Field McConnell (start at 1h 29m mark), in an explosive discussion about the latest airline disaster involving Germanwings…



From that same source:

Revelations of a pilot

The idea of an uninterruptible remote controlled commercial airliner may be shocking to some, but during 21WIRE’s examination of missing flight MH370, we came across retired Delta pilot, Field McConnell, a 35-year flight veteran who cites that since 1995 this kind of advanced technology has been in use, culminating with McConnell testifing before a US court as to the existence of such systems.

There is some evidence to suggest that these may have been operational in some Airbus planes since 1989. At the start of this article, there were several publications that discussed the controversial autopilot feature a year prior to a subsequent lawsuit by McConnell in February of 2007, and according to his documents, the modification was reported to the FAA, NTSB and ALPA ( airline pilots association). Apparently due to McConnell’s lawsuit, Boeing was is said to have stated that by end of 2009 all Boeing planes would be fitted with the BHUAP - making them impossible to manually hijack within the plane but susceptible to remote control by the military, according the flight veteran.


but... that's not all:

Hacking, propaganda & security contracts in the aftermath of a disaster

IMAGE: ‘Hack in the Box Origami’ – Hugo Teso works as a security consultant in Berlin, Germany at n.runs AG. He became a media sensation in April of 2013, when he claimed that he could hack into a plane’s Flight Management Systems via his smartphone (Photo niunpeloderubia.wordpress.com).

In April of 2013, Hugo Teso, an apparent former commercial pilot turned IT security-hack-guru, made waves when he told a crowd gathered at the ‘Hack in the Box’ computer security and hacker conference held in Amsterdam, that he could hack into a plane’s ACARS flight system. According to the applied science used in flight management this would be unprecedented.

In an article for Avionics Today, the FAA denied the hacker’s ability to change the flight’s hardware system. This could be because the coded BHAUP software is built into the FMS and has other systems acting as a slave to its command functions using the same technology seen in the DarkStar drone:

“The FAA is aware that a German information technology consultant has alleged he has detected a security issue with the Honeywell NZ-2000 Flight Management System (FMS) using only a desktop computer. The FAA has determined the hacking technique described during a recent computer security conference does not pose a flight safety concern because it does not work on certified flight hardware.”

Below is a YouTube video of Teso at the Hack in the Box conference located in Amsterdam, discussing his controversial apparent plane hack…

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=wk1jIKQvMx8

[Frenchy]

Field Mc Connell ( Abel Danger ) is the Authority on this, Good God bless him.......

[Carmody]

Posted by Carmody (here)
Another possibility, regarding speculation....we are dealing with possibly a breakaway civilization on the US side of this story.

Then we get to the Europeans breaking ranks.

We have aerospace manufacturers in the USA who also make military and commercial aircraft. That these groups are also supposedly inside the core technology of the breakaway civilization, in a large way.

We have, in the 'Euro Theater', Airbus.... who comes originally... from a consortium of aerospace manufacturers. Who 'may' also be involved on the inside of that breakaway civilization, or involved in their own craft designs. They too may be trying to underwrite their own clandestine advanced space efforts via the mechanism of inflated fiats and derivatives in the euro theater... as a form of personal effort and also redundancy in effort.

But, along comes this lack of desire to fight another euro war.... and then the breaking of ranks.

The hidden hand is inordinately fond of killing multiple birds with one stone, stones that come out of nowhere, and are difficult to pin down in all ways. For an observer or the one on the defensive after the given act....No stable origin point, no stable singularity in suspected target, no stable outcome/unfoldings. That's the way they roll.

Discussion of Airbus LENR Patent A patent granted means it has passed scientific review and rigor. Ie, 100% real.

Ie, Airbus is now openly and publicly in the 'over unity' camp and field, with LENR patent work.

1992 – 2012

In 1992, Fleischmann moved to France with Pons to continue their work at the IMRA laboratory (part of Technova Corporation, a subsidiary of Toyota), but in 1995 he retired and returned to England.[31][32] He co-authored further papers with researchers from the U.S. Navy[33][34] and Italian national laboratories (INFN and ENEA),[35] on the subject of cold fusion. In March 2006, "Solar Energy Limited" division "D2Fusion Inc" announced in a press release that Fleischmann, then 79, would be acting as their senior scientific advisor.[36]

Toyota is the company that was punished, by G W Bush Senior, during his presidency.. for attempting to move to selling a minato motor based Toyota vehicle in the USA. Yes, in 1992-1993, Toyota made a break for the end goal, by announcing the introduction of a car with no energy input point, and no fuel use. It just ran. Forever. Seriously. You can imagine how buried that one was.

We caught the announcement on the radio one morning and called the radio station and ended up speaking to the DJ, who queried the newsline for a new printout of the news he had just read out, of this announcement..... and the data was gone/erased from the Reuters news line, in less than a half hour. Gone. Buried.

It is not that people don't care and that people don't try, it is just that they get struck down and also killed. More and more people are coming to understand this.... How they have been screwed over so horribly, for so long. How bent their lives are from where they should be. relatives suffering, dying from cancer, messed up lives, suiciding, massive wars and deaths, toxins ....you name it. All in the name of secrecy and control of technology ---for a select group.

Toyota is the company that 'backed up' the transmutation results and transmutation research of Mitsubishi Heavy industries research and results, in 2012.

Between the two companies... they are worth an operating capital/assets/vaulation of about +250 billion US.

Mitsubishi now granted a PATENT in cold fusion and nuclear waste transmutation. this means there was and is no scientific fault of any kind found in the works and the patent was and is granted as it is 100% real.

If anyone thinks they are looking at a multi-level fight, with thrusts and threats that are carried out...about subjects and things that are just out of sight, they are probably correct.

The black system(s) of the USA and others who are involved have a lot to answer for. Horrors to answer for at a level that the public will simultaneously be puking on their shoes in disgust, in anger and rage, when they finally find out the extent of it all. Stuff so nasty it will take many years for the public to wrap their minds around the scope of it. I'm not assigning blame on anyone or anything here, as this is a knot of gargantuan proportions; a scope that is breathtaking in size, it encompasses the entire planet.

How do you think it is going to feel to wake up and find out that everything you are is a lie... and that everything you could have been was forcibly taken from you?

The unstoppable force and the immovable object are about to meet, and openly. It will happen slowly and we are definitely 'into it', in the beginning stages, right now.