Military Review

The crash of the passenger aircraft of the company Germanwings in France: a detailed investigation

28
A private detective and human rights activist from Germany is conducting a new investigation of possible technical malfunction in order to restore the presumption of innocence unfairly violated during the accusation of the second pilot Andreas Lyubits in the crash. The prosecutor's office of the city of Dusseldorf (Germany) opened a criminal case in connection with the newly discovered circumstances of the accident.




On March 24, 2015, an Airbus A320-211 owned by Germanwings crashed in the highlands of the Alps of Haute Provence (France). Paris Office of the European Agency aviation Security Agency (EASA) investigated the disaster and reported that the tragedy was caused by the co-pilot of flight No. 4U 9525, who was heading from Barcelona to Dusseldorf, who was mentally unhealthy and intentionally caused the tragedy to commit suicide.

As a result of the publication of a preliminary report issued by the EASA official office in France, many German media actively began to blame the co-pilot Andreas Lübitz mentioned in the report, thus violating the presumption of innocence enshrined in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms article 6. In this vein, the biased, one-sided coverage of the disaster by the German media has formed a generally accepted attitude of the public: they say that in the case of a tragedy with flight number 4U 9525 only the human factor is possible.

Abusing the one-sided opinion of the German media, a number of German lawyers gathered 149 relatives of the dead passengers (excluding relatives of the biased accused co-pilot Andreas Ljubitsa) to file a lawsuit, first in the United States and then in Germany itself against the German airline Lufthansa, which is the owner of Germanwings. With the help of the German media, lawyers gained an advantage in bringing airlines to justice with subsequent compensation for multimillion-dollar damage to the relatives of the victims and the lawyers themselves. There is every reason to suspect that one-sided coverage of the disaster by some media in Germany may be caused by professional PR trials organized by the involved lawyers.

One woman, who works in the field of law, conducted her own international investigation and probably discovered the real cause of this plane crash, after which she initiated the re-initiation of criminal prosecution in the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the German city of Düsseldorf. Where an investigation was previously carried out related to the aforementioned case of the influence of the human factor is not supposed to be the only possible cause of this plane crash. The German activist, who wants to achieve justice, has done a lot of work in the framework of a deep study of various facts and expressed a reasonable suspicion of a technical malfunction. This happened in January 2018. The name of this activist is Nadi Muller, she lives in the city Offherheim (Germany).

The German prosecutor's office in Düsseldorf opened a formal criminal investigation because of the following suspicion: a technical malfunction may be the real cause of this crash. The official website of the prosecutor's office contains a file with the 10 UJs 37 / 17 number, which contains information about the beginning of the criminal investigation process conducted by the prosecutor's office, where the main cause of the catastrophe is considered a technical malfunction, and not the influence of the human factor of the second pilot Andreas Lubitz.

The theory of human rights activist Nadi Muller from German Offersheim was that the pressure barrier inside the stern of the aircraft broke due to a defect. A report by the EASA Civil Aviation Incident Investigation Division of the Paris Aviation Bureau explicitly refers to airflow noise caused by a malfunctioning pressure manifold. This source also mentions negotiations between crew members regarding technical problems on board. After consultations, the crew commander decided to leave the cockpit to go to the tail of the aircraft, where they can independently determine the cause of the noise, presumably related to the pressure barrier, these data are contained in the official EASA materials. While the aircraft commander visited the tail section of the aircraft, this pressure barrier collapsed, which suddenly led to a drop in pressure in the cockpit. Following the theory of Nadi Muller, this pressure drop caused a loss of consciousness in the second pilot, who was alone in the cockpit, while the crew commander was in the tail of the plane, where the pressure barrier was installed.

To restore pressure, the lonely second pilot immediately launched the emergency system to lower the aircraft, after which he lost consciousness due to lack of oxygen in the cockpit. During this incident, the crew commander attempted to get into the cockpit. All this fully corresponds to the content of EASA materials. The plane crashed in the highlands, at an altitude of about 10.000 feet. Due to the high mountains in this area, the co-pilot did not have time to regain consciousness after equalizing the pressure and stop the decline of the aircraft. Mountain range became an obstacle that prevented his attempt to escape.

This co-pilot, who struggled, with great courage to try to save the plane and the lives of passengers, was subsequently biased against the fact that he deliberately crashed the plane as a result of a suicide attempt caused by the alleged mental illness. In many ways, this is the result of purely financial interests. This was the reason for the slander of Andreas Lubitz.

Surprisingly, the Public Prosecutor’s Office in Düsseldorf discontinued the above-mentioned criminal investigation regarding the version of a technical malfunction after the German edition of Bild-Zeitung began to publish materials about this criminal case. This newspaper played a leading role in the campaign to discredit the accused co-pilot Andreas Ljubica as a “mass murderer of suicides”. Therefore, the parents of this dead (and, accordingly, defenseless) co-pilot filed a lawsuit against the powerful German media to force the publication to comply with the presumption of innocence rule.

This newspaper was informed about the investigation of Nadi Muller, as well as the initiation of a criminal case No. 10 UJs 37 / 17, which is led by the prosecutor in Düsseldorf. It is known that between the journalists of this newspaper and the investigators of the Düsseldorf Prosecutor’s Office there was an exchange of views, it is also known that this powerful newspaper has very good connections at the top (up to the top leadership of Germany).

In early February of this year, Bild-Zeitung published an article in which it was denied that the relatives of the victims of the crash were pursuing financial interests with their suit. This source showed these relatives very emotionally, having done everything possible to arouse the pity of the readers and enlist their sympathy. The picture presented was extremely one-sided. In addition, the article included a letter from the victims to the respondent, Lufthansa Airline, which was also written in an extremely emotional style. But after a detailed examination of the letter it is clear that it was developed by a professional legal adviser.

From the point of view of the author of these lines, who has been a practicing lawyer for more than 13 for years, this article with the enclosed letter was a classic example of a PR trial, as is common in the United States, when the law justifies multimillion-dollar losses.

The presence of these facts suggests an attempt by the German Bild-Zeitung to take on the role of “defender” of the victims, since the publication biasedly illuminates the role of defenseless dead co-pilot Andreas Ljubitsa from the very beginning to the present day, presenting the human factor as the only version of the crash.

Faced with this PR litigation, Nadia Muller filed a complaint with the German Press Council to initiate proceedings against the Bild-Zeitung. In a statement, Nadi expressed suspicion of several violations of the rules of the organization that controls the work of the press in Germany. The complaint is pending from February of this year.

The goal of human rights defender, Nadia Muller of Oftersheim, is to launch a detailed investigation into the technical issue of the pressure bulkhead as the real cause of a plane crash. It is very important right now, on the 3 anniversary of the tragedy, to prove that the suspect co-pilot Andreas Lubits was innocent and could not be a “suicide - mass murderer” responsible for the death of 149 people. Through the publication of these merciless articles in the media, the wrong version has spread. The truth of a technical fault should no longer be covered; it should be open to the general public. This is the desire of a brave woman from the city of Offhreime on the third anniversary of the tragic plane crash.
Author:
28 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. aszzz888
    aszzz888 24 March 2018 05: 17
    +9
    By publishing these ruthless articles in the media, the wrong version has spread.

    We are familiar with the methods of such geyropovskih and meager mass media, we are faced with this every day.
    1. Vard
      Vard 24 March 2018 06: 11
      +12
      Most likely there are interests of the aircraft manufacturer company here ... Shifting technical problems to the crew during air crashes, unfortunately, is a common practice ...
      1. 210ox
        210ox 24 March 2018 06: 36
        +2
        The second pilot lost consciousness ... And the first was breaking into him? What nonsense ..
        Quote: Vard
        Most likely there are interests of the aircraft manufacturer company here ... Shifting technical problems to the crew during air crashes, unfortunately, is a common practice ...
      2. Cook
        Cook 24 March 2018 09: 50
        +6
        And have there been many catastrophes lately, where the equipment would have been to blame, and the crew made guilty? Even if there were failures, in most cases the crew either could not correctly identify the malfunction and its causes, or acted incorrectly. I would not speak or write about the generally accepted practice of transferring blame to the crew, I just have to study the materials of the investigation against signature and look and listen to the transcripts. In a professional environment, it will be difficult to drag bullshit into a conclusion about the causes of the accident. In conclusion, each of the participants in the commission of inquiry is given the right to write a dissenting opinion if he does not agree with something. To shift the blame onto the crew, for the airline, it means actually signing their insolvency, during its preparation, formation, maintenance of its professional skills, and the general state of affairs related to ensuring flight safety. Therefore, airlines, and its representative is always involved in the investigation, are extremely uninterested in such a development. I will not say how this business is arranged in military or general aviation, I just do not know for sure, but I can definitely say about civil aviation. It was just that I had to participate in all kinds of investigations, though not so difficult, both as an investigator and as a “suspect”.
      3. iouris
        iouris 24 March 2018 13: 48
        +1
        The practice is "generally accepted", because it is generally accepted to fly only on "Boeing" and "Airbus".
    2. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 24 March 2018 08: 27
      +7
      Quote: aszzz888
      We are familiar with the methods of such geyropovskih and meager mass media, we are faced with this every day.

      "Muddy" story! But ... there was such a message: in the last minutes Lubits tried to regain control of the aircraft: to stop lowering and "raise" the airliner .... "Changed your mind" about suicide or what?
      1. aszzz888
        aszzz888 24 March 2018 09: 52
        +9
        Nikolaevich I (Vladimir) Today, 08: 27 "Changed Your Mind" suicide or what ?

        They can also agree to the Novice ...
  2. AntiFREEZ
    AntiFREEZ 24 March 2018 05: 28
    +5
    To restore pressure, a lone co-pilot immediately launched an emergency aircraft descent system, after which he lost consciousness due to a lack of oxygen in the cockpit. .

    And the commander, a sort of scoundrel, took the oxygen mask of the co-pilot with him? fool
    During this incident, the crew commander tried to get into the cockpit

    The commander is probably superman, does he need oxygen? Vtorok loses consciousness, while PIC is still trying to break into the cabin door what

    IMHO, the journalist has problems with logic, or she is happy with PR herself.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 24 March 2018 11: 03
      +3
      Quote: AntiFREEZ
      And the commander, a sort of scoundrel, took the oxygen mask of the co-pilot with him?

      Not everything is as simple as it seems. Look at your leisure for how the golfer Pine Stewart died. But everything was there, including masks.

      Quote: AntiFREEZ
      IMHO, the journalist has problems with logic, or she is happy with PR herself.

      A small leak, the commander went to watch, at this time depressurization. The co-pilot is panicking. Or, as in the case of Payne Stewart’s mission, in the course of action in such an accident, they simply did not register the item “put on masks”. Thinking "the pilots themselves will guess" and at the same time driving the same pilots at the level of reflexes the need for the most accurate implementation of step-by-step instructions.
      1. AntiFREEZ
        AntiFREEZ 24 March 2018 14: 37
        +1
        Quote: Spade
        how the golfer Pine Stewart died.

        I know about this case.
        Quote: Spade
        did not register the item "wear masks"

        Perhaps BUT ... small details - everyone should have lost consciousness, and judging by the decoding of the voice recorder, the sounds of a desperate knock on the door were heard, and even the screams of the FAC. request
        In any case, we are on the forum even further from the truth than the expert commission. hi
  3. Victor_B
    Victor_B 24 March 2018 06: 56
    +5
    I do not understand something!
    Where are the Russian hackers? Where is the bloody gebnya?
    Where is the bloody puten?
    After all, it is completely clear that Russia dropped the plane!
    1. Egoza
      Egoza 24 March 2018 08: 05
      +1
      Directly removed from the tongue! After all, "with high probability we can assume that they started the Novichok gas there in the cabin
    2. antivirus
      antivirus 24 March 2018 10: 35
      +1
      not Russian - Iranian then were well known. sanctions were imposed and they took 100 barrels of oil from Tehran to a quiet place. (Who writes "took it?")

      THERE IS THE REASON FOR THE DISASTER - THE PERSONS HACKED A COMPUTER AND DROPPED A PLANE.
      WHAT THE OPPORTUNITY TO KILL 100 MILLION MILLION PEACE PEOPLE IN ZAP COUNTRIES SHOWED
      AND SAVE TEHRAN FROM DESTRUCTION OF AX
  4. igordok
    igordok 24 March 2018 07: 41
    +2
    National Geographic has a series of crash investigation programs. Often interesting.
  5. Fedorov
    Fedorov 24 March 2018 08: 37
    +4
    Well, a human rights activist is just like a senior aircraft technician. He knows everything. Although with their justice system, anything can be. Her crowd of experts had to be attracted, to collect the remaining pieces, to model everything. It is very expensive and not fast. Or is she a multimillionaire? Or the "subscription" is serious. Just hit the press? Or Jeanne Dark.
  6. Altona
    Altona 24 March 2018 10: 32
    +2
    Quote: Cook
    In a professional environment, it will be difficult to drag bullshit into a conclusion about the causes of the accident. In conclusion, each of the participants in the commission of inquiry is given the right to write a dissenting opinion if he does not agree with something. To shift the blame onto the crew, for the airline, it means actually signing their insolvency, during its preparation, formation, maintenance of its professional skills, and the general state of affairs related to ensuring flight safety.

    ---------------------------------------------
    Well, very often, very often they put the blame on the "human factor". And no "professional environment" does not prevent this. And if politics is involved, then there are no restrictions at all. Malaysian Boeing MH17 flight isn't confirmation?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 24 March 2018 11: 04
      +4
      Quote: Altona
      And no "professional environment" does not prevent this.

      Hinders. They swear at forums on the Internet. They cannot influence by other methods.
  7. APASUS
    APASUS 24 March 2018 13: 18
    +1
    As a result of the publication of a preliminary report issued by the EASA official office in France, many German media actively began to blame the co-pilot Andreas Lübitz mentioned in the report, thus violating the presumption of innocence enshrined in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms article 6. In this vein, the biased, one-sided coverage of the disaster by the German media has formed a generally accepted attitude of the public: they say that in the case of a tragedy with flight number 4U 9525 only the human factor is possible.

    It’s still an interesting Law in Europe. It allows one to interfere with manure and dirt, and take care of the rights of others.
    Remembering the case of flight MH-17 over the Donbass, it becomes disgusting to read these lines.
  8. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 24 March 2018 19: 20
    +1
    Ambiguous note, moronic translation ("pressure barrier")
    1. iouris
      iouris 25 March 2018 12: 42
      +1
      I agree, but the essence of the problem is understood: journalists have reason to doubt the accusation of the pilot, because many facts speak in favor of the version that the aviation regulatory authorities are totally corrupt by manufacturers. At the same time, manufacturers do not always refine aviation equipment, but simply “fuse” problem aircraft into “third world countries”, modernizing the fleet of aircraft in “civilized countries” at a faster pace ..
      1. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 25 March 2018 16: 01
        0
        But who argues, there is a reasonable grain in the note, but that is the point of journalistic work, in order to express the idea briefly and clearly, but here it is absent. It seems that the payment is progressive.
    2. glk63
      glk63 25 March 2018 23: 24
      +1
      Most likely, the pressure gauge was meant winked I agree, it seems that the article was translated by a Google translator. I understand that the author is German, but editing has not been canceled yet ...
      1. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 26 March 2018 09: 09
        +1
        And I'm at a loss: for what money do the editor pay? However, if this is a girl manager, then it’s understandable.
  9. NF68
    NF68 25 March 2018 16: 31
    0
    Here are those times. How many German media at one time poured slop on Lubitz.
  10. Kelwin
    Kelwin 25 March 2018 18: 58
    +1
    I never believed that Lyubits was crazy, and now I don’t believe that a man runs half marathons, buys himself and his girlfriend in the car, and suddenly he’s crazy ... nonsense. I don’t know how possible the problem is with the pressure gauge and further others, but for sure, where there is a lot of money, I haven’t spent the night.
    1. NF68
      NF68 25 March 2018 21: 14
      +1
      Quote: KelWin
      I never believed that Lyubits was crazy, and now I don’t believe that a man runs half marathons, buys himself and his girlfriend a car, and suddenly a crazy ... crazy.


      Would you read what they wrote about him in the German media. Put together everything that could be collected. However, on the other hand, his employers reacted to this company more restrained even then. They could be understood. And how convenient it is to shove your own mistakes and shortcomings onto a dead pilot. If it really turns out that Lyubits is not to blame for anything, then there will again be a lot of noise. Someone really does not want this.
  11. akims
    akims 25 March 2018 19: 54
    +1
    Sounds like the truth. The Germans boast of their technical perfection, and then mountains of lies and other foul-smelling masses come up!
  12. Lena (Kiev)
    Lena (Kiev) 19 October 2019 13: 18
    0
    After a year and a half, someone suddenly dragged a link here to the air forum. There they answered:

    Voicing such a hypothesis, it would be worth voicing the design of the door and the electronic lock.
    And then it would come to light that without active opposition from inside the cabin, an electronic lock would be easily opened from the outside through the electronic access,
    at the end of the warning cycle. This is usually 30 seconds.
    But then the tale of the sleeping Lover would not work.


    Report of the BEA (French Air Crash Investigation Commission) in English:
    https://www.bea.aero/uploads/tx_elydbrapports/BEA2015-0125.en-LR.pdf
    Do not be lazy, read.