Germanwings Flight 9525…Emerging Anomalies
Last Updated on July 1, 2019 by Hamad Subani
The alleged crash of Germanwings Flight 9525 took place yesterday in a remote part of the French Alps, minutes away from two major military bases. This post attempts to gather information that makes this alleged crash consistent with the alleged crash of Swissair 111 in particular, as well as the alleged crash of Air Asia Flight 8501, and the redirection of Malaysian Airlines 370 to the US base at Diego Garcia.
Since some “wreckage” has been found, direct parallels can be drawn to both Swissair 111 and Air Asia Flight 8501. But in both these cases, the alleged crash took place in water. Therefore the Powers That Be had sufficient time to compact the same aircraft and deposit them at the seabed. In the case of Germanwings Flight 9525, we find the familiar “shards and fragments” prop that we encountered at the supposed crash site of United Airlines Flight 93 at Shanksville on September 11th 2001. A fairly remote and inaccessible region became the supposed crash site for Germanwings Flight 9525. Like United Airlines Flight 93, we are told that no bodies are to be recovered. Like United Airlines Flight 93, Germanwings Flight 9525 may have been flown with its unsuspecting passengers to a nearby military base. While “wreckage” from an identical airliner was strewn well in advance.
Note: This post will continue to be updated…..stay tuned.
One of the main sources I am using in this developing stage is the Professional Pilot’s Rumour Network.
Despite the very difficult terrain and currently snow-covered access routes, blackbox(s) have already been retrieved and are already being paraded before the media. To quote member CSCOT,
Geotracker: “It’s also reported that the black boxes are retrieved.”
Geotracker, Where was that reported?
That would be remarkably fast wouldn’t it – incident happens this morning less than 3 hours ago in a very remote area, and somehow the recorders have been retrieved and that fact reported via media.
We are initially told that several bodies have been recovered and the aircraft is more or less in one piece. But as things emerge, we learn that similar to SWR111, the aircraft has been obliterated into a millions of pieces and that there are no bodies. To quote user Blind Squirrel,
Alain Vidalies, Minister of Transport, says that “several bodies” had been seen around the wreckage of the aircraft. Presumably this suggests an impact with limited forward speed. Europe 1 also reports that the aircraft is “almost entirely in one piece.”
Why the initial disinformation? As in the case of SWR111, we are also coming across huge discrepancies in eyewitness accounts, with some claiming to have heard/seen the plane while some claiming to have heard/seen nothing. There are also contradictions regarding the distress call. To quote user Blind Squirrel
Additional details from the French press
Le Monde:-
The French Transport Minister’s initial statement that a voice Mayday was transmitted is authoritatively contradicted. The DGAC duty engineer (ingénieur de permanence) declared an emergency on his own authority when the aircraft failed to respond to repeated ground transmissions and deviated from its assigned heading and altitude.
When he did this, in conformity with established anti-terrorism protocols a fighter aircraft was scrambled to try to make visual contact with the missing aircraft, along with a police helicopter.
The nearest road is 7 km (4 miles) from the crash site, and it’s now snowing there.
La Provence:-
Quoting a rescuer on site: “Everything is pulverised. You can’t distinguish the outline either of the aircraft or of the bodies.”
A lieutenant-colonel of the Gendarmerie: there are perhaps half a dozen substantial chunks of the airframe left; everything else is in very small pieces. The débris field extends over an area of a hectare (2.5 acres).
According to Germanwings, this specific aircraft has had trouble with its computing apparatus of late, which was substituted before the accident.
To quote user donpizmeov2,
Why would you want to head to the Alps when few miles right you have NCE? [Nice]
User Marie Paire adds,
Yes, Nice was far, but Marseille was just 5 minutes or so to the left when the aircraft started descending. It is difficult to envisage any circumstances under which anyone consciously would elect to continue flying straight ahead into the mountains for another 100 miles instead of diverting to Marseille. And at the same time not saying a word, either to enroute ATC or to Marseille Approach. Incapacitation of the crew is one of the very few scenarios consistent with these know facts. The question then would be what could cause such – apparently almost instantaneous incapacitation? Hypoxia? Possible, but how? Explosion in the cockpit or cockpit area? Possible. There are certainly other scenarios, but not many.
Like SWR111, we are also missing critical communications from the aircraft. To quote user FE Hoppy,
What smacks me as odd is that the aircraft left it’s cruise alt and descended in a straight line towards the Alps for 10 minutes without communicating. I’m not yet clear as to when the Mayday was made, if it was a mayday or if it was from the crew nut they had a lot of time to stick 7700 or give a radio call during the descent.
Comparing this to the 4000′ loss of alt due to icing doesn’t wash and If it was an emergency descent due to decompression why didn’t they turn off the airway and away from high ground?
To quote user CharlieBrem,
An Air France pilot flying over the area told France’s BFM-TV that the German A-320 crew did not apparently declare an emergency to controllers. The “distress call” came from them setting the transponder to 7700
Once again, the familiar theme of pilots suspiciously toying with the transponder, as they did in the case of MH370 and SWR111. As in the case of SWR111, the captain was also very experienced. Unlike the investigation of MH370 which immediately revealed the details of the co-pilot and the passenger list, this information is still being withheld.
To quote user kbrockman
What is very strange is the straight path flown right up until impact, no attempt whatsoever to aim for one of the many possible airports nearby.
To quote user daz211,
I can’t understand how an aircraft can decend so dramatically over 8 minutes with out ATC asking why or the pilot contacting ATC stating why.
To quote user John in YVR,
Hard to imagine the debris field would be a wide as it shows in posts 203 and 205 if the flight tracker in post 197 is accurate.
Even with the rough terrain the VS suggests that there would be more big sections.
To quote user clearedtocross,
Just for info – no fingerpointing meant: In the Marseille Area (LFMM) there seems to be quite a lot of military activity going on. An exercise called MALAY FREEDOM 01-2015 will be active tomorrow near the projected flightpath of the doomed flight and the LF-138 Restricted Area of Camp de Canjuers goes up to FL530. The latter is a very large military camp and a place where there is rocket firing too. And then, just about where the flight crossed the coast, there’s Toulon, the main French naval base, prohibited area LF-P62 up to FL195.
To quote user Trackdiamond,
Departure was delayed by half hour.The spokeswoman VP couldnt account for why it did when interrogated by a journalist. The plane is an older generation 320 (flew first Nov 1990?91?)..clocked over 58000 hrs. Why couldn’t the senior executive answer a simple question as to delay reason? Surely they would know such basic info before facing the bullets in a press conferences? Better to always have Flt Ops personnel in these initial press conference rather than sales executives i would say…reflected poorly on German wings/Lufthansa.why wasnt Lufthansa ops expertise there..that they own GW..
To quote user jugofpropwash, terrorism has been discounted rather prematurely,
All the White House is saying is that none of the usual suspects have claimed credit for taking out the plane – and presumably, that they haven’t had any recent intel that something was planned. If the White House didn’t say something, then everyone would be taking “no statement” as being an indication that it was terrorist related.
To quote user SimplytheBeast,
So we have a European built aircraft operated by a European Company , Flying between two European Countries. The investigation is being carried out by European Agencies yet for some reason Americans tell us almost immediately that there is no terrorist connection and now a Senior American Military official is allegedly leaking information the the NYT about information gleaned from the CVR. Not comfortable with how this is playing out.
To quote user Jet Jockey A4,
I have watched the available videos several times and…
I cannot see any sign of the initial impact where surely a hole in the ground would appear, perhaps even a major part like an engine would have been spotted.
Yet there are small debris all over both sides of a small hill going down the slopes on and down into those two small valleys.
Can someone explain this?
On September 11th 2001, UAL 93 also left no impact hole on the ground when it allegedly crashed at Shanksville. To quote Golf Seirra,
Looking at footage / pics what surprises me is there is no smoking hole or evidence of ground impact…I have seen C130’s fly into the hillside around Kabul and leave a distinctive pattern….hell, even the AN12’s & Mi-8’s leave a mark…something is missing if it is CFIT related…
![This was exactly what happened to UAL Flight 93 on September 11th 2001. To quote, "Jon Meyer, the first reporter on the scene, said he was "able to get right up to the edge of the crater" where Flight 93 supposedly hit the ground. However, he described: "All I saw was a crater filled with small, charred plane parts. Nothing that would even tell you that it was the plane. ... There were no suitcases, no recognizable plane parts, no body parts." [9] Local coroner Wallace Miller, who was also one of the first people to arrive, said the crater looked "like someone took a scrap truck, dug a 10-foot ditch, and dumped all this trash into it." "](https://i0.wp.com/www.cabaltimes.com/wp-content/UAL93_Shanksville-300x194.jpg?resize=563%2C364)
To quote skyhighfallguy,
Rate of descent: greater than cruise descent, but less than emergency descent (loss of pressure)
Speeds (really only ground speeds for now), are in the normal range (not too fast, not too slow).
Someone shoots pilots and crashes plane into mountain is ONE scenario.
COCKPIT Fire , loss of consciousness OR PARTIAL loss by crew after they started a descent.
everything else doesn’t make sense.
A reminder, that SULLY was talking up a storm while he landed in the hudson and had less than 2 minutes in the air after engines out.
These guys had 8 minutes to do something, UNLESS they were incapacitated or PARTIALLY incapacitated either by nefarious or accidental reasons.
To quote rog747,
if the A320 had a decompression then the ‘procedural thing’ to do is descend to 10000′ PDQ, squawk 7700 and tell ATC what is happening and what you need in terms of airspace – is that so? but knowing these chaps knew they had Les Alpes in front of them surely they would/should have turned around to head back to safer altitudes and look at nearest diversion options ? – which were all more or less behind them
if you need to EMER descend from 38000′ what is the RoD and time please you require to get to 10000′ asap? is it more or less than than the approx 3700-4000′ pm @370kts this a/c took in about 8 mins to get to 7000′?
if you had a depressurisation, an engine failure, a cabin fire or say a windscreen blown out (is that poss?) a high level birdstrike into the windscreen (how likely could that be?) would you still stay on track and descend into the mountains?
but this a/c stayed on track more or less as flight planned and it descended below MSA sadly and fatally impacted into the mountain range not that far from the peak tops by the look of the pictures/wreckage
with no radio calls, no 7700, no turn back indicates the poor crew had something going on which was beyond them
I’m not a pilot but retired now after many years at LHR&LGW in Traffic and Ops with British Midland Airways (amongst others)
thanks
As in the case of MH370, satellite data appears to have been held back. To quote DrPhillipa,
No news or hints of ECAM or other relevant ACARS messages so far. Would decompression not scream some alarm?
Later, we learn that ACARS data is not available.
To quote user ACMS,
I’ve said it on page 4 and I’ll say it again:-
Normal electrical power appears to have been working as the transponder and associated ADSB was on
No emergency 7700 set
No Mayday call
374 kts GS at impact suggests around 330 Kts IAS
3,500 fpm descent indicates an open descent with speedbrakes.So, a decompression event occurred at FL380, the crew started the Aircraft down but then somehow ( Oxy system failed, injured etc ) became incapacitated and the Aircraft continued until it flew into the ground.
As in the case of SWR111, there are already indications that the Cockpit Voice Recorder information is not complete. Even though the picture seen below shows its round memory storage area intact.
We later learn that one of the two flight data recorders has its memory card missing. No pictures are provided. To quote the New York Times,
At the crash site, a senior official working on the investigation said, workers found the casing of the plane’s other so-called black box, the flight data recorder, but the memory card containing data on the plane’s altitude, speed, location and condition was not inside, apparently having been thrown loose or destroyed by the impact.
UPDATE: The black box (Flight Data Recorder) has been found, but it has been most likely tampered with. What took so long? And what about the other one which French officials referred to as having its memory modules slip out (impossible)?
To quote Capt. Kremin,
The questions are whether this aircraft went fast enough to activate the high speed protections? If it did, why didn’t it pitch up, and what was it doing flying so fast in the first place?
If pilot incapacitation occurred, why did the Auto-pilot maintain maximum possible speed, and why did it not capture an altitude selected on the FCU?
The standard drill for an emergency descent involves keeping the autopilot engaged if possible, dialing a lower FCU altitude, turning off the airway and commencing the descent by selecting Open Des.
The aircraft continued on track but commenced descending at maximum speed, so none of that appears to have been done. Unless there was a massive un-correctable error in the Auto-flight system, there had to be pilot intervention to get it to do that.
This is a very strange accident.
To quote user Pace on Germanwings officially ruling out decompression so early in the game,
How on earth could they rule out depressurisation and crew incapacitation? There is no basis to do that at this stage.
they would have had 8 minutes to have made ATC aware of a control problem yet made no contact?
The aircraft flew in a straight line surely any pilot faced with such a situation would try everything to gain control which would make it extremely unlikely that the aircraft would fly a straight line.
Every indication points to the pilots being incapacitated and the autopilot holding the aircraft on a heading and nothing to two alert pilots trying to control or regain control of an aircraft
Some inconsistencies in photos of the crash site. To quote user JamesT73J,
I think the blackened mountainside is just the rock colour – reason being the painted parts of the wreckage that you can see in the photos don’t appear to have been sooted or charred.
To quote the New York Times, the Cockpit Voice Recorder audio has already been analyzed.
Then the audio indicated that one of the pilots left the cockpit and could not re-enter.
“The guy outside is knocking lightly on the door, and there is no answer,” the investigator said. “And then he hits the door stronger, and no answer. There is never an answer.”
He said, “You can hear he is trying to smash the door down.”
To quote user AnglianAV8R
Live press conference by French Official now…
Cockpit voice recorder info …. Captain left cockpit. Co Pilot initiated descent by keying attitude selector. Captain called at door, knocked, no response from Co-Pilot. Then noise of human breathing heard… All the way to impact. ATC calls heard several times, no response
[…..]
Edit: I’m curious to know how they can be sure he had keyed the altitude command, when they only have CVR ?
To quote user Evanelpus,
“Is it really possible to hear normal breathing on the CVR in a 20 year old 320?”
In the land of the journalist, everything is possible.
To quote user MD80fanatic,
i’m still not totally convinced of the suicide angle. Without knowing precisely how long that cockpit door would hold, a suicidal FO in total control of the aircraft would dial in a 3000fpm descent from FL380 and then sit back and do nothing? I know suicidal people are irrational by definition, but with full control of the situation, for an unknown amount of time, one would think a much steeper descent, and a turn to the closest terrain linearly would have been in order? Seems more likely that the FO was not conscious for whatever reason sometime after the Captain left the cockpit.
To quote user AmuDarya,
Not a pilot but all this seems highly irregular for an aircraft disaster investigation.
1. Needless reveal by Prosecutor (not an aviation professional or regulator) of screams heard on CVR within 48 hours even as relatives are still in deep shock.
2. How could the Prosecutor possibly know of intent or voluntary action at this early stage?
3. What investigative purpose or public purpose is served by revealing information from the CVR before a careful audio analysis, properly synced to flight data is complete? This is not an overnight process.
4. Conversely, strong statements by a person in a position of supervision over an investigation may ‘set’ minds and hinder the careful unearthing of alternative explanations and chain of events.
5. In any case, I understand that air accident investigations in France have only recently been assigned to regional prosecutors a few months ago as a result of administrative and legal changes.
It’s quite possible the gent is unacquainted with the kind of painstaking, fact based, non-judgmental, non-accusatory mindset that I understand is needed for successful, quality air accident investigatory work.
A similar theory was concocted by Reuters to explain the alleged crash of AirAsia 8501. According to them, the pilot left his seat to pull some LIVE CIRCUIT BREAKERS!!! Never mind the fact that a crew member usually guards the door while the pilot goes on a break. And that the pilot usually has an access code for entering the cockpit even if it is locked from within.
If there is some truth to the audio, it could also be the crew, who suddenly realized that the pilot and the co-pilot had locked themselves in the cockpit and had changed course, preparing to land at a military base. They would have been frantic to get into the cockpit to find out what was going on.
Veterans Today managed to get hold of some authentic Airbus documents showing that the crew could have entered the cockpit. To quote,
In all likelihood, the cabin crew of the ill fated GermanWings flight could simply have entered the cockpit at any time. If the plane were programmed specially to disallow this normal capability of the Airbus320 series, the airline has failed to inform the public of this.
This information is “confidential” as it would be a theoretical aid to hijackers.
To quote another post that has been mysteriously deleted,
A previous post by gbpeck or something similar has been deleted, as I’m sure mine will, but he or she made a valid point. If contemplating suicide, would someone rely on the other pilot going on a comfort break on a short flight? It seems unlikely.
To quote user BRE,
I listened to most of the press conference (interupted by streaming hick ups), and I must say I liked the presecutor very much. He had obviously listened to the recording carefully and had been briefed, and was trying to give an honest summary while trying hard not to be misunderstood.
Some of the things he said or did not raised questions:
1. While he described the clicking of the altitude knob and the breathing of the FO in great detail, there was no mention of a buzzer. Can the lock/deny function be activated before the first request for entry? If so, will it suppress the buzzer even on the first request?2. He said the pax were unaware of the drama until the very last moments when cries could be heard. How on earth could they not notice the Captain trying to break down the door?
3. There is no mention of any recovery attempt, whereas transponder data say the flight gained 2000 ft prior to impact. Eye witness accounts are compatible with TOGA being applied.
4. No mention of the Mirage.
To quote F-16Guy,
Not sure if this question has been raised, but I am wondering why a civilian prosecutor at this early stage have access to the CVR recording, and furthermore, why is he willing to tell the public about what the CVR contains?
I was of the impression that the CVR is BEA property until the investigation is completed, and that first thereafter a civilian prosecutor can have access to the information, and if needed raise a criminal case against someone.
Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses (BEA) – English Homepage
I was of the impression that there was waterproof doors between the safety investigation and the criminal investigation. Anyone cares to explain?
To quote user pilotmike,
Apologies in advance if I have missed any vital pieces of information; I have tried to check the published information thoroughly before posting.
Some things are simply not adding up for me, particularly the ‘evidence’ supporting the theory that this was a malicious act by the FO. It seems that the FO has as good as been found guilty of murder without full evidence or any trial, however…
1. We are assured that the sound of the FO breathing (note: ‘normally’, not hyperventilating or panicked) is heard through to the end. Similarly, we’re told that the Alt select can be heard being wound down, a seat being moved, and the door being opened and/or closed. Yet I haven’t heard of any reports of the FD door being positively locked in the ‘Lock’ position, yet this should be clearly audible if these other faint sounds have been picked up. I cannot help feeling that this would be of sufficient importance to have been explicitly stated in the very detailed account offered by the French authorities of what they have heard. Some have questioned how breathing, described as gentle can be heard. I can assure readers that with digital signal processing techniques, including correlation and autocorrelation, signals significantly below the noise floor (ie completely drowned out by noise to the human ear) can be measured and heard, making the CVR a very rich source of audio clues that we wouldn’t normally be able to hear. Few are aware that GPS operates by receiving signals sometimes 30dB or even 40dB below ambient noise levels (ie when massively swamped by noise which is many orders of magnitudes stronger than the actual GPS signal) by using this very technique.
2. Is the reported ‘normal’ breathing consistent with the alleged actions the FO is apparently guilty of doing? It gives the impression of being indicative of a relaxed, possibly incapacitated or even semi-conscious or unconscious person rather than someone knowing they are pointing at a mountain and about to die.
3. It has been assumed that the FO was conscious, if for no other reason than because he HAD to repeatedly re-lock the door after the 5 minute time-out. Have we had this explicitly stated by the authorities who know the facts or heard the CVR audio? If so, wouldn’t this positive re-locking be clearly audible on the CVR as per my point above? However, the FO did not NEED to re-lock the door. If the Captain was preoccupied with banging on the door, as has been reported, it is entirely possible, even likely that he never made a (further) attempt to activate the access code as by this time his desperation to re-enter the FD would very likely be closing down options in his mind, to simply trying to smash his way in, just as we have been told. And wouldn’t any attempt to re-enter the entry code be reported on as significant? A brief break in the door banging while a code is re-entered would be quite obvious on the CVR.
4. We are informed that the passengers were apparently unaware of the problem until the final seconds. By all accounts, the Captain made significant efforts to either gain the FO’s attention, or indeed to break the door down. Are we really to believe that this all went completely unnoticed by the passengers?
Given these anomalies, I don’t believe we have been told significant facts that have been revealed by the CVR. And it also seems very premature to judge the FO as totally guilty, as many have done so on this very forum, until the full facts are known. Maybe the media reports forced their hand, but I believe this partial revelation of CVR evidence combined with strong suggestion that the FO deliberately did this is not the way to handle such an important investigation as this.
Meanwhile, supporters of the co-pilot claim that he is being framed. Even German pilots have have doubts. His supposed “pregnant girlfriend,” Kathrin Goldbach, who is the source of many damaging allegations against him remains mystery. It is unclear when their relationship started.
Why was Germanwings chosen (and not Lufthansa?). Because Lufthansa was seeking to replace Germanwings with its daughter company Eurowings. And therefore lawsuits/liabilities/infamy associated with Germanwings would not hurt them in the long run. .
The Military bases at Marseille/Montpellier/Toulon/Isle de Levant on Mediterranean Coast of France have been linked to previous aviation mishaps.
Some time ago, I received information from Mary O’Connor, whose father was killed on September 11th 1968 (note occult timing) when Air France Flight 1611 crashed into the Mediterranean off the coast of France. French general René Cogny may have been the target of this crash. Cogny was an opponent of General Henri Navarre, who was responsible for the French loss of Indochina. This was of course, a Globalist plan to ensure that all of Indochina would eventually fall to the Communists.
To quote Mary O’Connor,
To whom it may concern,
In 1968 my father Arthur O’Connor was killed in an Air France plane crash from Corsica to Nice on the 11th of September, 98 people mostly Corsican including 13 children were killed. He got the last seat, a cancellation on the plane. He left behind a family of five in Dublin, Ireland
Immediately after the crash rumors spread that an unarmed missile from the nearby Isle de Levant military testing base had hit the plane. These rumors have persisted and grown stronger over the last 43 years. The french military have stated repeatedly in writing that no missile testing was in progress during that period. They have also stated that “no French missile was involved in the crash”, a peculiar wording?
Documents have been found clearly showing that heat seeking missile testing was taking place on this date, advertisements were printed in the local newspapers clearly showing missile testing dates. Recently Michel Laty, a retired military secretary at the time stated on French TV that there was a error in identification of the target and the missile attracted by the heat of the engines hit the Caravelle, killing all 95 persons aboard.
BBC 4 radio did an extensive radio broadcast on the affair some years ago.
A book entitled “Secret d’Etat” (written and researched by Jean Michel Verne and Max Clanet, Ramsey 2008), investigated the whole affair and found many disturbing discrepancies regarding the investigation into the causes of the crash.A english language website has been put together to get information about this case to the wider world, to see if the victims families can finally get a truthful answer.
http://theother911.weebly.com/Please could you post this so that your members can have a look. Thank you.
Isle de Levant is an offshore island off Toulon. To quote,
In October 1950 a military missile test site was established at the French naval base on the Ile du Levant, an offshore island in the Mediterranean near Toulon. This was named CERES (Special Weapons Research and Tests Center) in 1952 and replaced a beach site at Pampelone used for ad-hoc launches since 1948. In 1968 it was expanded to include the La Renardiere site on Pont ST Mandrier and renamed CEM (Mediterranean Test Center). La Renardiere had been used in 1945 for testing the first French liquid propelled rocket, the EA 41. Ile du Levant was known to have been used for at least 111 launches from 1956 to 1969, reaching up to 270 kilometers altitude.
While Isle de Levant and missiles may be irrelevant to Germanwings Flight 9525, the Mediterranean coast of France, and the military bases situated there are relevant, considering their history of aviation intrigue.
A Mirage was scrambled from the nearby Orange Air Base, but what it saw or whether or not it intercepted Germanwings Flight 9525 is unknown. This piece of news has been largely suppressed. It is also possible that the Mirage escorted the plane to safely land at an airbase.
To quote user slip and turn,
Mirage seem to be based both just 60 miles to the west of 4U9525 final track (Base Aérienne 115) with main runway direction perpendicular to track, and even closer than that on the coast only 30nm west of track (Base Aérienne 125), where they also have a helicopter squadron which I offer may have included some of the machines seen at the crash site. BA125 seems to be a substantial test facility employing possibly 5,000 personnel. It also seems to have an important nuclear defense role. Parts of both bases are pixelated in Google Earth.
The Independent newspaper/website reported early on that the final descent took 18 minutes not 8, and that Mirage caught up with the A320. Did anyone ever get to the bottom of what that story was about ? Was it retracted or comprehensively debunked ? It is still out there.
I am afraid I am as yet unwilling to buy the conclusive (sic) troubled FO story so prematurely offered by the authorities.
Here’s the quote from the Independent
For the next 17 minutes, it shed around 1,000 feet of height a minute – a gradual glide downwards rather than a dive. The plane vanished from radar contact soon after 10.48am and is believed to have crashed a few minutes later.
Ms Royal confirmed this morning that, soon after 10.30am, when the pilots had stopped responding by radio, the French military scrambled a Mirage jet fighter to investigate. This aircraft was seen by eye-witnesses following the doomed airliner as it skimmed the Alpine ridges before crashing into a sheer mountain-side. The pilot of the Mirage could, therefore, also possess crucial information on the Germanwings aircraft’s behaviour.
The Current French President has a known appetite for false flags….and hates Internet “conspiracy theories.”
The Germanwings Flight 9525 incident comes quickly on the heels of Charlie Hebdo, which has been referred to as the French 9/11.
On January 27th 2015, French President François Hollande attacked “conspiracy websites,” in a public address. To quote,
[The] answer is to realize that conspiracy theories are disseminated through the Internet and social networks. Moreover, we must remember that it is words that have in the past prepared extermination. We need to act at the European level, and even internationally, so that a legal framework can be defined, and so that Internet platforms that manage social networks are held to account and that sanctions be imposed for failure to enforce”
What seemed to have got President François Hollande so rattled up was that all of these websites were raising disturbing questions about his pet project, the attack on Charlie Hebdo (A list of seven websites that he was referring to can be found here). To quote Jay Weidner,
The only people who call conspiracies ‘theories’ are the conspirators.
Passengers
One of the passengers Yvonne Selkehad links to Intelligence. To quote,
Yvonne Selke, who was taking a European vacation with her daughter, was an employee of Booz Allen Hamilton in Washington for nearly 23 years. “Yvonne was a wonderful co-worker and a dedicated employee who spent her career with the firm supporting the mission of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency,” which coordinates satellite-based mapping for the Pentagon, said a company statement released by Betty Thompson, an executive vice president.
Someone in her position could have seen many things that Google Maps blurs out for the rest of us. The top-secret project Booz Allen Hamilton was carrying out for the Pentagon was worth $315 million.
According to Veterans Today,
A Spanish intel team was aboard specializing in cyber-terrorism, they were the target (limited confirmation). The Spanish team was involved in an investigation of the “Swiss owned” company, Crypto AG (highly confirmed). Crypto AG is a Mossad front. (highly confirmed)
While there have been numerous attempts by the mainstream media to demonize the co-pilot, there is absolutely no background information on the pilot, who may have been involved. Also, as in the case of MH370, there are two obligatory Iranians.
There were also many schoolchildren. Guess who has an obsession with little children of the server class. British Paedo-Lords are probably en-route to southern France.
And like Swissair 111, there are no bodies. To quote,
Some 600 body parts have been found, and not a single corpse, meaning identifying people had been hugely difficult.
Maybe all of those on board were devout Christians and experienced the Rapture!
It would be logical that most of the passengers and schoolchildren had cellphones and some of them would have recorded what took place. It seems one did, but now French officials are denying that the video ever existed, even though they had shown the footage to Paris Match and Bild editors, who had vouched for its genuineness. Assuming that the footage was fake (just like everything else),there would be good reason why French officials would prefer to keep it out of circulations. It could easily be nitpicked by skeptics. The planes’s descent rate of 3000-4000 ft/min with a nose down attitude of 12°-15° would have been definitely noticed by the passengers.
How Recent Aviation mishaps are being used to discredit pilots, and push for pilotless aircraft
Just as the Powers That Be are pushing for driverless cars, smart homes and Cloud Computing, recent aviation mishaps such as this one all end with the bogus investigative conclusion that the pilot (or co-pilot) was solely responsible. But if pilotless aircraft were introduced, things would get all the more easier for the Criminal Elite. For example, instead of having a compromised pilot fly MH370 to Diego Garcia and put two Iranians on board to assist him against the passengers, planes could automatically fly to secret bases. This would be way more easier to cover up.
On the other hand, simple improvements, such as putting video recorders on the flight deck, are being stonewalled. To quote user mickjoebill,
As someone who has installed cameras inside building demolitions, inside airframes that were tested and cameras in fire research establishments as well as commissioning and wrangling minor mods I think you are understating the utility of a camera when recording the leadup and events of an accident.
The camera doesnt have to survive the crash, just the compact flash (size of postage stamp) solid state recoding media, which can be enclosed in layered compositite material.
Redundency x4 can suppliment the existing single unit.
Spread the recorders into the parts of the airframe that survive. If landing gear survives stick one in there.
Chaos offers opportunities for survival, maximise the opportunities with multiple units.
24hrs of data can be recorded on a CF card. Measures to make it easier to find can be developed.
I suggest that the recording media of one or two on board phones on this flight, although unprotected could have survived.
For example, the solid state memory in an unprotected camera survived the space shuttle breakup and was found despite the massive size of the debris field.
To quote Ian W,
The cockpit is a very simple environment for video software to compress. Only those pixels that are altered need to be sent. Therefore, for most of the time there is very little for the video to send. The compression of even moving areas is extremely efficient. Just imagine that there had been video recording of this GW incident on the same CVR memory. There would be none of this hamsterwheel debate. Now imagine if that recording had been compressed and sent as soon as ATC felt that there was a problem or the aircraft automatics felt there was a problem – say an EGPWS warning. Already ATC can tell the aircraft to send them information over ADS-C and the pilot is unaware that the contract has changed. The same could easily be done with uplink of CVR/DFDR information without the crew being aware and without them able to stop it. A compressed transmission of a few minutes of DVDR/CVR may only take seconds.
It is unfortunate, but the actions of a few have reduced the trust of the paying passengers and could result in a far more detailed recording of what is happening in the cockpit. I have no doubt that the air carrier’s insurance will be interested in this level of recording too, as a self inflicted hull loss may not be insured. It may become a case of if you want aircraft operator insurance you must have this specific level of recording equipment operating in the cockpit.
Resources
A long thread at the Professional Pilot’s Rumour Network (Note: posts are being deleted; copy paste anything interesting that you see)
UAL Flight 93…….Eyewitness testimony regarding the strange crash site.
More detailed photos of the Germanwings Flight 9525 crash site
Veterans Today raises some questions on the demonizing of the co-pilot.
Loading ...
watch september clues