Sunday, August 30, 2015

THE DEATH OF A PERCEPTION CALLED PRIVACY

Hello World,



I read a news that the administration is in talks with the US administration to get into a data-sharing agreement where the governments will share their ‘Terrorism Screening Information’ for collaborative enhanced law enforcement. Also the government is looking to demand Internet Data from the US servers, covering companies such as Google, Bing, Yahoo etc. 

While I am all for collaborative safety measures and law enforcement to protect the citizens from terrorism I do not agree with the level of information sharing that will happen, especially concerning the information on US Servers that may be shared or deleted by the US administration upon request from international agencies.

While massive amounts of personal information is going to be shared by the governments, which itself will be a massive breach of our privacy, I am more concerned of the access to internet content on US servers that will be exclusive to the govt. agencies here. There will be disastrous consequences when the agencies here get the exclusive right/access to the information stored on US servers. In the name of potential terror prevention mechanisms, the information that will educate and help Indian citizens will be deleted and/or the author of the content be punished.

The Indian societal set-up is a mix of demographies and this set-up is here to stay. However, the educated demographies are slowly growing and the subsequent result includes a growing disparity in the levels of awareness among the citizens here. What is obvious for one is non-existent for the other, even when both of them are from the same family, living in the same house. While we are struggling to come to terms with harsh realities, especially that of the grossly inhuman activities we have been practicing in the name of religion, tradition etc., we are also actively looking to assess events going on around us using different forms of information available to us. 

Most of the Indian know-how depends largely on the personal account [or rather opinion, be it informed or cooked-up] of a trustworthy acquaintance [family, friend, neighbour etc.] but we as a community are slowly realising the power of the internet. We are buying a lot of items online and consciously choosing online stores over the conventional brick-and-mortar businesses. We are looking things up more often than before. The internet, at this point in time, serves as a single unbiased source of information [both facts and fiction] to us here.

In the recent past, multiple events covering large scale violations of human rights took place and the administration has been pointing at certain pieces of information [potentially untrue] on the internet, stating that those fragments of information caused the acts of terror. This, in my opinion is serving as the basis for the government agencies demanding Internet-Data on US servers so they can delete those pieces of information before they create mayhem.

While this sounds very safe and people-oriented, this is the real danger looming on us Indians right now as the administrations are close to inking the deal. Once the deal is inked with such an agreement, everything that is said about what’s going on in India, that is on US servers will be available for censorship by the administration. In essence the government will control the online opinions of Indian citizens, potentially violating their rights to free speech by deleting anything that is found as undesirable to those in power. This will also open the floor for lobbyists who will prompt the administration to delete data from US servers that might pose as any competition to their corporate profits [which they might share as a fee for the favor]. 


Allowing any administration to review and censor information shared over the public domain will cause disastrous consequences in countries like India. The US administration may not be entirely aware of the social environment prevailing in India right now. The disparity in public awareness is indescribable and the hatred on the basis of economic-status/religion/caste/language is growing at a rate faster than the growth and inflation rates. Every hate-speech has an audience and the audience is dumb enough to approve any nonsense that may be thrown at it. Allowing the administration, that is run by one or more groups utilising such hate-based vote-banks, to decide on the existence of information on US servers [be it any server for that matter] will create a information bias where one set of political hate-speech and corporate schemes will prevail over the rest. Those who hold the power and their friends will get to keep their information on the internet safe and visible while those of their [perceived] adversaries will cease to exist and the authors of such information will be prosecuted and possibly murdered. The request for deletion will be made on grounds of potential law and order issue that may rise as a result of something on the internet. What will not be made clear is that such censorship will have politically backed propaganda where one group will work towards preventing the rest of its competitors from spreading awareness. 

Be it a political/corporate-backed scheme or just an administrational drama, in the end, citizens will not have the freedom to share their views without getting censored or punished for exercising their right to do so. Internet Start-Ups will be operating, running the risk of getting shut down anytime they get on the bad side of the administration with or without knowledge or intent. Anyone who is friends with those who control the censorship of information on the internet will enjoy the privilege of terminating their competitors by illegitimate means which will be recorded as legitimate action executed by the administration in the name of national security or public interest. 

Our privacies are anyways gone as the mass surveillance systems are already tracking our every move without us knowing about it. What is left is the censor-protected data storage centers abroad, possibly beyond the purview of the local administration that serves as the platform for censor-free information sharing among citizens who at best are still struggling to understand the concept of awareness and freedom.

If the US administration agrees to hand over access/control of Internet-Data on US servers to the local administration here, then that will essentially mark the beginning of the institutionalisation of persecution of Indian citizens. Letting the administration control the information on the internet will result in the formation and/or the growth of terrorist entities within the country who will never make it to the database that is being shared among the agencies. There are organisations here that engage in acts of terror against select group of innocent citizens simply on the basis of hatred and those groups will be further empowered to establish their control on the society. These groups will never be called terrorists and will never feature on any database, partly because they are connected to political parties but mostly because the levels of citizen awareness here is still below detectable range. Allowing them to access an institutionalised censorship tool will result in the increase in hatred within the country and civilian deaths in riots will grow exponentially.

As of now, we are not sure what type of information will be shared as part of the collaborative sharing of terrorism screening information and therefore that is open to debate. What is certain is the large scale breach of privacies of citizens. While I do not agree with any version of mass surveillance programs, I do believe that safety will cost a certain amount of privacy, irrespective of us liking it or not but transparency can at least make it fair. What I am absolutely terrified about is the fact that an administration is about to get access to internet-data on US servers in exchange for sharing terrorism screening database. 

The terrorists will just have to switch roles from enemies to friends of the administration so they don’t feature on the database that is shared. Entities operating entirely on the basis of mutual hatred among citizens will gain control over what propaganda reaches the citizen and the citizens will be left with no fair means to express their views. An avalanche of ignorance and institutionalised terrorism is looking over India right now. 

All we had was a silly perception of privacy and with this agreement, even that is about to die. 

On a very different note [a shameless plug], if you are interested in unique tamil short films, feel free to visit https://www.summamovies.com/I couldn't tolerate the mass masala entertainers anymore and decided I will do my best to produce content with substance. I have a long a way to go as a producer and a start-up founder, but I am glad our journey has begun. I look forward to your support. Each film on our site costs INR 15. Thanks!!!


Image Source: http://www.seqlegal.com/sites/default/files/free-legal-document-images/privacy-policy-image.png


Regards,


Wednesday, July 1, 2015

Iran Nuclear Deal: Potential Impact on Oil, Aviation & Defense Markets of The Middle East

Hello World,

Image Source: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/whats-stake-iran-nuclear-talks/


The Middle-East is a fast growing market for multiple industries, with oil, construction, aerospace and defense being the prominent ones. I am trying to get a big picture view of how each of these markets interact with each other and form an interconnected system which is dynamically changing right now. Here are my views on different trends and my interpretation of how activity in one will impact the activity in the other. My focus is especially on the Middle-Eastern aerospace, defense and oil markets and how the Iran Nuclear Deal, should it turn out as expected, will influence them.


Fight for Market Share

OPEC countries want to keep their supply high to compete against western shale-oil and the result will include reduced oil prices. Irrespective of what it is against, the increase in oil supply is happening and is not going to go away soon. As a deterrent to this, ISIS has taken over key oil-supply chains and the Middle-Eastern Administrations need international military support to recover these 'Lost-Oil-Markets.' Getting back the 'Lost Oil markets' from rebel/terrorist groups will add value to the Middle-Eastern oil industry.

Given that this market is already pushing ahead with what may be an 'unrestricted supply' the annexation of lost markets will only pump in more oil into the market, eventually reducing the price of crude oil globally. While more oil can help the Middle-Eastern market gain more market share, the global oil revenues will significantly drop which in turn will impact the spending plans that heavily rely on oil revenues. Although we can't expect that spending to vanish, they will be significantly delayed due to this trend.

Lost Oil markets can only be retrieved through carefully coordinated military operations in those regions which are now under the control of ISIS and other rebel/terrorist groups. The Middle-Eastern defense forces have been modernizing themselves but they are still dependent on western forces for military support [equipment, training and operations]. Now, Western Administrations [NATO countries] don't have the money to spend on elaborate international operations. Even if they did, their help to the Middle-East will indirectly hurt western shale-oil/natural gas industry. Reducing oil prices will impact the Russian military modernization and if this is something desirable to the west, maybe they will let the oil prices continue to fall down. The question is: Will the West think so and if yes will it let the trend take its course?

Secluded Middle-Eastern Commercial Aviation Market [Iran]

On a different angle, US had opened the gates for GE/Boeing to sell commercial aviation hardware to Iran. While this was looking to create a US-controlled [potentially Pro-Boeing] aviation supply to Iran, Al-Naser airlines bought Airbus aircraft [8 A340 and 1 A320] and transferred them to the blacklisted major Iranian airline [Mahan Air]. This means that Airbus has reached the key Middle-Eastern customer faster than Boeing. Iran's commercial aviation industry is expected to take up 400 commercial aircraft, moving forward and this indicates the possibility of a commercial aviation race, should the sanctions be relaxed.

Interestingly, Iran is a member of OPEC countries looking to capture more market share in the oil industry. So, if my crazy view is right to any extent, relaxing sanctions on Iran can get Iran administration's support in restricting oil-supply to get the oil prices rise again. Even if this is not the case, at least the western aviation suppliers will have a new market to sell to. Either ways, the west has more to gain from relaxing sanctions on Iran. The Iran Nuclear Deal is a key instrument for potential opportunities that can lead up to relaxing western sanctions on Iran. The question is: Will the sanctions be relaxed?

The Other Side of Iran Nuclear Deal

From another angle, Israel is concerned with US-driven Iran Nuclear Deal terms. The cause for the concern is the perception of the deal that indicates the possibility of Iran eventually developing a nuclear warhead right after the timeline as agreed over the deal. If this perception were to grow into any other form of concern over Iran's future 'nuclear' capabilities, the Middle-Eastern defense spending will continue to grow [its already growing fast].

Israel has however spent a lot of money on military operations and is potentially looking to sell IMI for cash that can support its defense aspirations. The projects under hold include US DoD FMS programs. Supporting Iran with relaxed sanctions can help west make another friend among OPEC countries but the Nuclear Deal will potentially hurt its friendly relations with Israel, a big-ticket FMS customer for The US. The loss however won't be as big as the corresponding benefit from the growth of the Middle-Eastern defense spending fueled by the concern over the [successful execution of] Iran Nuclear Deal.

The Iran Nuclear Deal, will therefore open up Iran to international [especially western] suppliers and also secure Iran administration's obligation to support any western efforts to influence OPEC countries from continuing to increase oil output. The question is: Will the Iran Nuclear Deal cover such obligations?

What's the Big Picture?

Not supporting Middle-East with turn-key military operations will help curb oil-pressure on western shale-oil and also positively influence the Middle-Eastern defense spending. It is about time the Middle-Eastern administrations developed their indigenous capabilities to sustain any regime stabilization supported by western military help. No point in western forces conducting operations when right after their pull-out, things start getting back to where it was. 

On the other hand, securing Iran from sanctions will create opportunities with Iran in the commercial aviation domain, much to the displeasure of its neighbors. So, in the end, Oil+Commercial will stand taller than Defense opportunities in the Middle East. 

For Iran's commercial aviation opportunities, Airbus is looking to be a potential winner by reaching the customer even during the times of sanctions, but the competition is very close. 

French delegation representing big businesses in France had visited Iran as of Jan, 2014 to discuss potential business opportunities as the French administration foresaw a potential deal that will relax the sanctions on Iran allowing western suppliers to sell to Iran. Here is a news report:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/15/us-france-iran-idUSBREA0E1IZ20140115

Summing up, the Big Picture view is that the Iran Nuclear Deal will create:

• Successful Commercial Aviation Opportunities in Iran
• Extended Defense Opportunities in the rest of the Middle-East
• Possible influence into the OPEC-driven oil-market

The Big Picture questions are:

• What does the West consider the most important?
• How is the Middle-East planning to prepare itself for any turn of events?


PostedToday.Org Features CrazyMotts Blog!!!!!

Thanks to PostedToday.Org for featuring this blog post on their breaking news - international headlines segment.

Image Source: http://posted-today.org/2015-07-10/


Here are the twitter responses for this view from Experts:

Thanks to the experts for taking time to read my blog post and sharing their insights with me via twitter!!!!

Nathalie Goulet, Attorney, Senator [Orne], Senate of France, Member of Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Armed Forces, Member of Union of Democrats and Independents-UC



Hossein Dalirian, Reporter, Tasnim News Agency:


Hussein Al Shimmary, Independent Journalist and Political Analyst:

Alborz Habibi, Journalist, Contributor to YourMiddleEast:

Saeed Khatibzadeh, Resident Representative, Institute of Political and International Studies, Iranian Embassy, Berlin:

Mostafa Dehghan, Freelance Journalist based at Tehran:

Dirk Hanke, Finance/Risk Analyst:

John-Michael Kibrick, News Editor, ynetnews.com:
Feel free to read John's opinion on the Iran Nuclear Deal at ynetnews.com


Helen Robertson, Oil Market Editor, OPIS:

David Shorr, Foreign Policy/International Affairs Expert, Consulting Program Officer, William & Flora Hewlett Foundation:

Sam Cutler, Editor-in-Chief @ Sanction Law, Policy Advisor @Ferrari & Associates:

Ali Ghezelbash, Co-Founder @ European Iran Research Group:

Reza Akhlaghi, Editor and Senior Blogger, Foreign Policy Association Blogs:

Siavash Fallahpour, Journalist based at Tehran [Covers  Middle East & Arab Affairs]:

Dr. Mohammad Gharebag, Staff Writer @ KYODO NEWS:


Karim Emile Bitar, Senior Research Fellow, The French Institute of International and Strategic Affairs [IRIS]:
I followed up with this question for Karim:

Do you think P5+1 countries will compete for biz-opportunities and take different stands on sanction-relief clauses for Iran?

Bradley Harris, Lobbyist @ Friends Committee on National Legislation [FCNL]:

Joshua Noonan, Presidential Management Fellow, US Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, Post-Soviet Analyst and Expert:

Raquel Redondo, Freelance Journalist [Covering Iran Nuclear Talks since 2012]:

Roberto Neccia, Iran Analyst, Diplomat @ Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs:

Update as of 29th Oct, 2015:

As indicated above, Iran has announced its intent to buy aircraft from Airbus and Boeing. Here are the post deal news reports:

Iran plans to buy 80-90 Boeing, Airbus planes a year, post sanctions


http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/02/us-iran-planes-idUSKCN0Q705W20150802

Iran plans Airbus, Boeing purchases under finance deals

http://news.yahoo.com/iran-plans-airbus-boeing-purchases-under-finance-deals-130647427.html


Five New Airbus Airplanes to Join Iran's Civil Fleet


http://www.aviationpros.com/news/12113892/five-new-airbus-airplanes-to-join-irans-civil-fleet


American Coalition Against Iran

http://www.unitedagainstnucleariran.com/company/airbus-group



http://www.uskowioniran.com/2015/10/iran-close-to-deal-with-airbus.html


Update as of 26th Jan, 2016:

Iran marks comeback with talks to buy 160 European planes [includes 127 Airbus Jets]


http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-aviation-idUSKCN0V2098


I see that things are moving forward as expected. Good times for Iran. Hope the regional peace grows with this sanction removal and subsequent economic exchanges.

On a very different note [a shameless plug], if you are interested in unique tamil short films, feel free to visit https://www.summamovies.com/I couldn't tolerate the mass masala entertainers anymore and decided I will do my best to produce content with substance. I have a long a way to go as a producer and a start-up founder, but I am glad our journey has begun. I look forward to your support. Each film on our site costs INR 15. Thanks!!!


Best regards,


Wednesday, April 8, 2015

UNTOUCHED POSSIBILITIES OF THE GERMANWINGS CRASH

Hello World,
Another commercial plane went down and again the blame is on the pilot. The Germanwings 9525, an Airbus A320-211, crashed into the Alps mountains after what is being defined as a constant descent, beginning few minutes after a routine contact with air traffic control. I sincerely believe, this accident has more to do with the aircraft than the pilot. Here are the reasons why I do not buy the ‘Crazy-Pilot’ theory.

This time, instead of waiting for the media to speculate, the Crisis-Management efforts have efficiently used the media elements to prevent the general public from thinking anywhere near the actual root-cause of the incident. 

Firstly, the very fact that the prosecutors’ claims are being published as key findings and then publishing the findings as support indicates that this effort is avoiding the acceptance and analysis of possibilities that will indicate the mistake of individuals other than the flight crew. 

How did a German media-house get hold of cockpit voice recording (or its transcript) at a time when no such information was officially released? If the report was alleged and the claim unsupported by facts of the leak, what actions are being taken against the German media-house that published such a report? [Nobody will talk about it because it probably was a paid media campaign]

As long as something is published in a large scale, it will be deemed factual and this element of mental heuristics is being used by the Crisis-Management team here.

One of the mentions that has been prominent in the news reports is that the aircraft (Germanwings 9525) was approved for ESG1 in 2012. ESG1 stands for Extended Service Goal-1 and the approval has come from EASA qualifying A320-200 for ESG1 exercise through a suitable revised/re-compiled version of the Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 2 Rev. 01. 

According to this ‘extension-of-life’ program, as approved by EASA, as long as the aging A320-200 series aircraft undergo the required package of structural and systems modifications, before the aircraft reaches its Design Service Goal (operational life limit, typically 48000 Flight Cycles or 60000 Flight Hours), the aircraft can be approved for an extended operational life with the revised limits being 60000 Flight Cycles or 120000 Flight Hours.

Red Flag No.1:

FAA has rejected a request from Airbus and American Airlines (AAL) to amend an existing FAA Airworthiness Directive to include ESG1. FAA, in its Proposed Rule published on 05/28/2014, has issued a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking where it has disagreed with the proposal of including ESG1, among other elements of the request. FAA’s evaluation has determined the existence of unsafe condition and its likelihood to exist and develop on other products (within the scope of the directive which includes A-320-200 series including A-320-211).

Please find the concerned paragraphs of the FAA’s Proposed Rule in the pics below:

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2014/05/28/2014-12251/airworthiness-directives-airbus-airplanes#h-13


https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2014/05/28/2014-12251/airworthiness-directives-airbus-airplanes#h-13

 Feel free to look into the official FAA announcement here:

Germanwings 9525 aircraft had an ‘operational-life-extension’ approved in 2012, which includes a procedure that has been approved by EASA but not the FAA. The aircraft had been received by Lufthansa in February, 1991 which indicates its age to be around 24 years at the time of the crash. The aircraft had got the ESG1 approved in 2012, and remained with Lufthansa until January, 2014, when it was handed over to Germanwings, indicating it has gone through the necessary structural and system changes prior to its reaching the Design Service Goal. 

Interpretation:
The aircraft that crashed got an approval of life-extension based on practices accepted by one regulator but rejected by another on the grounds of existing unsafe conditions. An aircraft at the end of its life, getting a questionable life-extension approval, can be safely assumed to be vulnerable to risks of varying types covering diverse levels of failure-modes.

Questions:


If the ESG1 procedure and related maintenance tasks can indeed enhance the safety of the aircraft, why did FAA’s evaluation find existence of unsafe conditions pertaining to ESG1?



Why hasn’t it been highlighted that the aircraft got approved over a procedure that did not get a global acceptance from the civil aviation regulators?



Why hasn’t anyone raised the question on the age of the aircraft and its vulnerability to failure? (The aircraft was almost near the end of its operational life, otherwise, it couldn’t have got the ESG1 approval in 2012)

To be fair, we need to look into the elements of ESG1 and analyze its implications so as to make sure, the Airbus life-extension program can actually impose any risk whatsoever on the aircraft involved.

Red Flag No.2:

The ESG1 program was approved by EASA through the approval of ALS-Part-2-Rev.01 in 2011 and as per Lufthansa Technik’s understanding, ESG1 has imposed changes on the inspection methods followed by operators which included elimination/relaxation of inspections such that only 40% of the tasks remain unchanged.

Let’s look into some excerpts (published data) from Connection, the Lufthansa Technik Group Magazine, specifically the issue dated 4th July, 2012:

Excerpt-1

“By the end of 2011 all the engineering data had been assessed, the results had been accepted by the Structure Task Group (STG) – comprising Airbus, leading operators, MRO companies and the certification authorities – and finally compiled into a new Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) Part 2 Rev. 01 approved by EASA. In a first stage this major effort has been accomplished for the A320-200 (with the exception of some unique operational environments). The other models will follow in a second stage scheduled for mid-2014.”

Interpretation:
The ESG1 program is a very recently approved program, approximately 3 years old at the time of the Germanwings crash. 

Excerpt-2

“The new ALS introduces changes in the mandatory structural inspection program based on a 2.00 FH/FC average mission. As these requirements also apply below DSG, any A320 family aircraft in service is affected.”

Interpretation:
 The new ALS (that includes ESG1) has introduced changes in the structural inspection program and these changes were expected to affect any A320 family aircraft in service. However, we cannot conclude if the impact could be negative or positive from this statement alone.

Excerpt-3

“Taking into account that approximately 200 such tasks exist, some of which require wing tank access or the removal of cabin interiors, the challenge operators face over the next months becomes clear.”

Interpretation:
This was published in July, 2012 and this mentions the challenges that the ESG1 program will impose on the operators. Although we cannot conclude on the diversity and intensity of challenges imposed, it does indicate the possibility for the operators to reschedule, revise, or even skip procedures in an attempt to comply with the ESG1 program which might subject the aircraft to further risk of failure during operation.

Excerpt-4

“At the same time, the extensive test data computed by enhanced analysis methods have made it possible to depart from the conservative approaches adopted in the design phase three decades ago, allowing the elimination or relaxation of a significant number of inspections. At the end of the day only 40 percent of the tasks remain unchanged.”

Interpretation:
Test data from the recent past was used as the basis for deciding to eliminate/relax inspections such that only 40% of the tasks remain unchanged. This means that the inspection methods for aging aircraft were revised based on recent test data and the revision largely covered elimination and relaxation of inspections. This indicates that the new program basically forced the Risks of Failures Going Undetected or Improperly Identified on the operators who complied with the new program.

Questions:

How come they had the direct knowledge of the risks involved and still allowed the ESG1 approval for the Germanwings 9525 aircraft?


Even if the aircraft had not gone through the changes in full/part, it was rendered vulnerable when the operator had the aircraft approved for ESG1. Why is this not raising any question on the details of the past 3 years’ maintenance tasks executed on the Germanwings 9525 aircraft?


However may be the advancement in technology, why would anyone agree to the elimination or relaxation of 60% of inspections, that too for an aircraft that is over 20 years old?


However suspicious the ESG1 program elements may sound, one cannot just blame the decision to eliminate/relax inspections as dangerous without looking into the testing methods, based on which the decision was taken. 

Red Flag No. 3:
In the 2009 book titled ‘ICAF 2009, Bridging the Gap between Theory and Operational Practice: Proceedings of the 25th Symposium of the International Committee on Aeronautical Fatigue, 27-29 May, 2009, Rotterdam, The Netherlands,’ on page 226, under ‘BACKGROUND OF A320 ESG PROGRAM,’ we find this:

“To achieve approval for the Extended Service Goal package, Airbus is carrying out full-scale fatigue tests on new production standard aircraft sections, enhanced with special structural features. The original A320 configuration will be taken into consideration, as well as the specificities of other family types. All of the results will be compiled to show the fatigue behavior of the complete aircraft family."

Interpretation:
They used new production standard sections for the fatigue tests and used that result to derive the data which was subsequently used as the basis for achieving regulatory approval. The whole basis for the request for approval for ESG program was built on the educated guesswork or mathematically-supported May-Be-Approximation of a test data that was believed to represent those of the old aircraft.

If this has to be right, then we can test a car from 2015 and use the data to reflect on cars from 1992 and say that based on our tests on a 2015 car, its 1992 equivalent will have about the same effects as the new one, except we can reduce the margins slightly to accommodate the 20+ years and abuse the 1992 car went through. Also we can decide how to modify the 1992 car so it can run smoothly for the next 5 years, based on what we find from the 2015 car. If this doesn’t ring a bell, nothing will.

The methodology is not entirely wrong but definitely incomplete in terms of addressing the real issue which happens to be deciding on maintenance methods and upgrades to extend the life of 23-24 year old aircraft.

Questions:

When the objective is to extend the life of aging aircraft (that are over 20 years old), why hasn’t the testing used aircraft sections from used A320 aircraft?


What was done to include (in the testing) the element of operational wear and tear and the impact of harsh environments the aging aircraft would have gone through?

Red Flag No.4:

The recent claims seem to point at the possibility of a pilot allegedly locking out another from the cockpit and the locked-out pilot trying hard to get it. Apparently, there is a way to get inside a locked cockpit. Watch the video below:




Interpretation:
Prosecutors’ claims of information that can support the possibility of one pilot getting locked out of the cockpit may not be true. In fact, it still remains to be proven beyond doubt that the co-pilot was in and the pilot was out of the cockpit when the plane crashed.
Questions:
So far the investigation seems to be pointing at the co-pilot locking-out the captain. What element of the voice recording confirms that the co-pilot was the one inside and the captain was stranded outside?
Why did the captain not use the emergency cockpit-access procedure to enter the cockpit?
Why isn’t the possibility of the ‘incapacitation of pilot’ and/or electrical-system failure being considered which may have left the pilots unconscious and/or the communication systems dead?

Deliberate Human Responsibility???!!!!
Just because so far there is no evidence released that points to a technical system failure, the possibility of deliberate human responsibility is being thrusted into the minds of the general public (or may be the regulators too) so they can just assure themselves that it was indeed the co-pilot who crashed the aircraft.
How about accepting the inability to conduct fair investigation as a consequence of lack of evidence?


Views of a Journalist:
John Rosenthal has provided a neutral analysis of the crash investigation in his report:


http://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/the-trouble-with-germanwings-flight-9525/


Conclusion
In my view, the aircraft was an aging platform, well near or over its design operational life and it might have been subjected to a very questionable ‘Life-Extension-Program’ which in part or full might have rendered the aircraft vulnerable to multiple unidentified failure modes, one of which struck the aircraft during its final flight that ended in the crash. The Life-Extension-Program was approved by EASA but FAA refused to allow its inclusion. If one regulator finds enough evidence to agree why does another find enough evidence to disagree? What does that tell about the very viability of the Life-Extension-Program and its impact on the aircraft it is approved for, irrespective of its full/partial implementation?
The possibility of co-pilot deliberately crashing the plane is a story being cooked up to cover up this incident so as to protect multiple commercial interests. In the end, as it turns out, pilots can no longer divulge their health issues or personal fronts to their managements as those details will be cleverly used against them, when they are not even alive to defend their stand.
At this point I am even curious to learn if those individuals who get angry at speculators online (and drag the discussion to the most insignificant bolt on the plane) might be part of a specially constituted online-clean-up team reporting to the crisis-management team that is trying to keep operator, manufacturer, maintainer and the regulator from any possible blame, every time a plane goes down (debris recovery is irrelevant here).

How in the world do these stakeholders remain untouched while pilots alone get blamed for ‘tendencies’ and ‘depressions’ based on what everyone proudly calls ‘initial reports’?????

The lack of exceptions in this trend is what keeps me wondering what really happens to these untouched possibilities of plane crashes.

On a very different note [a shameless plug], if you are interested in unique tamil short films, feel free to visit https://www.summamovies.com/I couldn't tolerate the mass masala entertainers anymore and decided I will do my best to produce content with substance. I have a long a way to go as a producer and a start-up founder, but I am glad our journey has begun. I look forward to your support. Each film on our site costs INR 15. Thanks!!!


Some references:



http://www.lufthansa-technik.com/documents/100446/160376/Technik+Connection+4-2012.pdf

http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-a320-147.htm

http://www.lufthansa-technik.com/documents/100446/160376/Technik+Connection+4-2012.pdf

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/02/germanwings-crash-second-black-box-found

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/03/us-france-crash-idUSKBN0MU0MA20150403

http://www.wsj.com/articles/germanwings-plane-was-accelerated-on-descent-say-french-investigators-1428055460

http://blogs.webmd.com/breaking-news/2015/03/germanwings-crash-is-depression-really-to-blame.html?ecd=soc_tw_033115_blog_germanwings

http://airflightdisaster.com/index.php/the-ironic-tragedy-of-germanwings-flight-9525/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525

http://transport-central.com/Germanwings+Flight+9525

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-begins-tests-to-extend-service-life-of-a320-family-220962/

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2009-06-09/airbus-expects-minor-mods-keep-a320-flying-years

https://www.friedlnews.com/article/analysis-crash-of-germanwings-flight-9525-investigation-and-latest-responses

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=-B4HBw1-RgcC&pg=PA226&lpg=PA226&dq=airbus+esg1+approved&source=bl&ots=P3cD1QinOJ&sig=nL52j7idy8pB2ldT_CU18WMKIDU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=agMlVYaUKoOzuQTj0YHYCw&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=airbus%20esg1%20approved&f=false

http://www.planespotters.net/Production_List/Airbus/A320/147,D-AIPX-Germanwings.php

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/analysis-germanwings-crash-accident-investigation-410749/
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d42_1427636702
Regards,