Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pilot Disagreement Caused Garuda Crash.  
User currently offlineBillReid From Netherlands, joined Jun 2006, 978 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 14902 times:

From Telegraaf, Amsterdam Holland.

SYDNEY - Een meningsverschil tussen de piloot en co-piloot van het Garuda-toestel dat 7 maart neerstortte bij de Indonesische stad Yogyakarta, is mogelijk de oorzaak van de crash. Dat blijkt uit de recorder van de cockpit, aldus een Indonesische onderzoeker.


A disagreement between the pilot and the co-pilot from the Garuda airplane that on 7 March crashed near the Indonesian city Yogyakarta, is potentially the reason for the crash. This is evident from the cockpit voice recorded stated by and Indonesian inspector.


Some people don't get it. Business is about making MONEY!
42 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBillReid From Netherlands, joined Jun 2006, 978 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 14823 times:

Further.

Uit de opnames blijkt dat het toestel nog veel snelheid had en de co-piloot nog een rondje wilde maken in plaats van direct te landen. „Ik ben bang dat het ongeluk gebeurde door verstrooidheid van de bemanning”, aldus Tatang Kurniadi voor de Australische tv-zender Nine Network.

De politie ging er direct al vanuit dat menselijk falen vermoedelijk de oorzaak was van het ongeluk. Direct na het vliegtuigongeluk, waarbij 21 mensen omkwamen, zeiden overlevenden al dat het toestel met grote snelheid de landing inzette. Bijna 120 inzittenden overleefden de ramp.


From the recording it appears that the airplane still had alot of speed and the co-pilot wanted to do a go around in place of a direct landing. "I am afraid that the accident happened because of disorganization from the crew" said Tatang Kurniadi for the Australian TV network Nine-Network.

The police immediately came to the conclusion that human error was the probable reason for the crash. Shortly after the accident, where 21 people died, survivors said that the airplane approach began with high speed. Almost 120 passengers survived the disaster.



Some people don't get it. Business is about making MONEY!
User currently offlineEK156 From United Arab Emirates, joined May 2005, 765 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 14614 times:

Was this an ego issue from the pilot or Captian? I mean why didn't he listen to his FO? This is very sad!!!

User currently offlineSSTsomeday From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 1276 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 14554 times:

It sounds to me more like an issue of a high speed approach, as opposed to a disagreement in the cockpit.

If the A/C was coming in hot and possibly high then the co-pilot's suggestion to go around would have been appropriate.

Of course I don't know if he tried to take control or something, which could have exacerbated a bad situation.

All this is speculation until the investigation is completed, I suppose.



I come in peace
User currently offlineFloridaflyboy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2007 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 14498 times:

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 3):
All this is speculation until the investigation is completed, I suppose.

Exactly. I'll wait to see the transcripts from the CVR before making any conclusions about what happened in the cockpit.



Good goes around!
User currently offlineNorcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1446 posts, RR: 12
Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 14490 times:

Well, I guess that would confirm what NAV20 was saying all along.

A shame really.



If you're going through hell, keep going
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21456 posts, RR: 60
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 14443 times:

Don't believe it. It's obviously a flaw in the 737 classic design and they should be banned... and don't tell the Indonesian government otherwise.


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineMD80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2659 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 14349 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 6):

Apparently there is a rather serious flaw with that model 737, that needs to be addressed. It is regarding an electrical short in the wiring to the wingtip landing lights, which causes the engine on that wing to shut down.

I too will wait for all the data to surface before casting blame.


User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5668 posts, RR: 45
Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 14254 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting MD80fanatic (Reply 8):
Apparently there is a rather serious flaw with that model 737, that needs to be addressed. It is regarding an electrical short in the wiring to the wingtip landing lights, which causes the engine on that wing to shut down.

What has that, if it has real basis, got to do with a plane that had both engines running.

Further despite claims of a dispute between the crew there is also dispute between Indonesian officials and investigators so this story still has more to play. From the Sydney Morning Herald. April 2

....."THE chief investigator of the Garuda plane crash that killed five Australians denies the allegation that the pilot and co-pilot were arguing before the crash.

Cockpit voice recordings recovered from the jet showed the co-pilot wanted the pilot to go around again instead of landing, Tatang Kurniadi of Indonesia's National Transport Safety Commission told Channel Nine's Sunday program yesterday.

But the chief investigator, Mardjono Siswosuwarno, told the Herald yesterday there was "no such … discussion between pilot and co-pilot describing their confusion about what was happening" and that conversations between the two were considered to be "normal"......

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/dis...acts/2007/04/01/1175366080773.html

Cheers



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineMD80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2659 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 14104 times:

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 9):
What has that, if it has real basis, got to do with a plane that had both engines running.

We don't know for certain if both engines were running, or were producing equal thrust (the FDR will reveal the truth). Curmudgeon posted an incident report of a 737-400 with the problem I described....which was a basis for discussion, last month, about what could be the reason for high speed and inproper flap deployment during the late phases of the approach.


User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5668 posts, RR: 45
Reply 10, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 14001 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

MD80,
I stand corrected but your comment presented in isolation may lead some to give credence to Ikramerica's obviously tongue in cheek comment(It was wasn't it, Ikramerica?)
The fault you mention while serious, damn I would hate for an engine shutdown at that point, is certainly not commonplace.
With hundreds, perhaps thousands of 734 flights a day and many many hundreds of thousands over the years this does not seem to have occured very often.

Cheers



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineAvt007 From Canada, joined Jul 2000, 2132 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 13994 times:

Quoting MD80fanatic (Reply 10):
We don't know for certain if both engines were running

We don't know anything for certain ,but that's not stopping anyone from rampant speculation. Why not wait for facts before arguing pointlessly? It could have been any number of problems, including incompetence, but at this point there isn't enough hard facts available. As for the pax opinion mon approach speed, I don't beleive any of it. I've flown as a pax for decades, but I still can't tell from looking out the window how the approach is going. I'd prefer to wait for FDR data.


User currently offlineCurmudgeon From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 695 posts, RR: 22
Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 13916 times:

Quoting MD80fanatic (Reply 10):
We don't know for certain if both engines were running, or were producing equal thrust (the FDR will reveal the truth). Curmudgeon posted an incident report of a 737-400 with the problem I described....which was a basis for discussion, last month, about what could be the reason for high speed and inproper flap deployment during the late phases of the approach.

Jeez man! I posted that in a light-hearted vein to show that there are new flaws surfacing all the time in aging airliners. In the millions of hours logged in the last 15 years, there have been exactly three airborne engine failures due to the fuel shut-off valve getting an erroneous "close" signal when the outboard landing light motor operates. This a wiring bundle issue, and the FAA currently has no sense of urgency about it. (because the risk of two engines failing is over the one:ten billion range, and operating those lights is optional)

This airliner was making power on both engines as noted on the FDR. Additionally, an engine failure, even with no flaps at all, is no reason to crash an airplane.

This is simply a case of the captain having a cognitive disconnect...fixating on the landing rather than the reality of a high energy situation. The F/O apparently suggested a go-around but did nothing to take control until it was too late. The exact timing and sequence of events will be released by the Indonesian authorities soon.



Jets are for kids
User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13004 posts, RR: 12
Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 13900 times:

If 'pilot disagreement' could have been a factor in this deadly crash, one has to wonder about the training and update training of the pilots and co-pilots at that airline, especially as to cockpit management and not have a pilot seen as an absolute leader.

User currently offlineJasond From Australia, joined Jul 2009, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 11739 times:

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 14):
If 'pilot disagreement' could have been a factor in this deadly crash, one has to wonder about the training and update training of the pilots and co-pilots at that airline, especially as to cockpit management and not have a pilot seen as an absolute leader.

The disagreement could be anything from a simple enquiry by one crew member to the other about the nature of the approach to an all out slanging match between the crew, we don't know yet. My interpretation was that the statement was made by an official involved with the ongoing investigation and was then summarily retracted. By this time however the media has run with the story, as for the truth, we still don't know.


User currently offlineLTAC03R From Turkey, joined Dec 2005, 62 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11102 times:

Quoting BillReid (Thread starter):
The police immediately came to the conclusion that human error was the probable reason for the crash.

LOL!! That's it. We'll just call it a day now. So much for the art of crash investigation.  scratchchin 



The difference between god and a pilot is that god doesn't think he is a pilot.
User currently offlinePipoA380 From Switzerland, joined May 2005, 1594 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 9173 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EK156 (Reply 2):
Was this an ego issue from the pilot or Captian? I mean why didn't he listen to his FO? This is very sad!!!

This happened a lot in some major crashes. The fact that the Captain has authority on the FO, and that very often, FOs do not dare to say something to the captain, this can lead to some very bad situations.

I'm thinking of the Tenerife crash, where the FO did not tel the captain that he wasn't sure the tower had given them clearance. And others as well, where same thing happened. I guess cockpit management still has some work to do...



It's not about AIRBUS. it's not about BOEING. It's all about the beauty of FLYING.
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 9064 times:

Quoting PipoA380 (Reply 17):
This happened a lot in some major crashes.

 checkmark 

This indeed wouldn´t be the first time authority of senior captains prevented a better judgement of the F/O avoiding an accident. If I recall right Korean had a serious problem with this in the past. Pilots were almost all ex airforce people with much self confidence & a strict cockpit hierarchy.


User currently offlineBHMBAGLOCK From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2698 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 8547 times:

Quoting PipoA380 (Reply 17):
This happened a lot in some major crashes. The fact that the Captain has authority on the FO, and that very often, FOs do not dare to say something to the captain, this can lead to some very bad situations.

A friend of mine died like this. He had told several of us that if he kept flying with the same Captain(corporate jet) that he would defnitely die. He gave two weeks notice and intended to work through the notice so he'd have a chance for a good reference and ended up flying into a mountain in NW Georgia in the clouds while trying to get the Captain to climb.



Where are all of my respected members going?
User currently offlinePilotaydin From Turkey, joined Sep 2004, 2537 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 8244 times:

Quoting BHMBAGLOCK (Reply 19):
A friend of mine died like this. He had told several of us that if he kept flying with the same Captain(corporate jet) that he would defnitely die. He gave two weeks notice and intended to work through the notice so he'd have a chance for a good reference and ended up flying into a mountain in NW Georgia in the clouds while trying to get the Captain to climb.

damn!......that's just horrible...



The only time there is too much fuel onboard, is when you're on fire!
User currently offlineAirTran717 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 746 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 7309 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 6):
Don't believe it. It's obviously a flaw in the 737 classic design and they should be banned...

Just what flaw might that be? Do enlighten us.


User currently offlinePolymerPlane From United States of America, joined May 2006, 991 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6962 times:

Many of the arguments here are based on the small piece of quote.

Here's the "facts" that I gathered from reading the news:

1. The captain was the one who's doing the landing
2. Captain asked for the flaps to be lowered
3. Flaps did not jam, rather the co pilot did not lower the flaps.

I thought that eventhough the F/O has to give inputs to the Captain, but the last decision is in the captain's hand, especially he's the one doing the landing. Why did the F/O not put down the flaps if the captain asked him to do so.

I am just trying to understand how the cockpit dynamic works. I thought the last decision has to come from the one doing the landing.

We do not know what happened in the cockpit, and what would have happened if the flaps were lowered. Though go around could have saved the airplane and it is the safest alternative, but if that's the case, there would not be any landing.

Who's fault is it, if lowering the flaps would have slowed down the airplane enough, to warrant a safe landing, and the Captain did not realize that the flaps was not properly lowered, under the stress of landing the airplanes?

I am sure part of the blame also lies on the Captain, but I have always thought that because of the Captain's position as the one who's doing the landing, the F/O should have helped him rather than contradict him and create the "arguments", and vice versa.

Cheers,
PP

[Edited 2007-04-02 16:56:49]


One day there will be 100% polymer plane
User currently offlineFoxBravo From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2983 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6938 times:

Quoting AirTran717 (Reply 21):
Just what flaw might that be? Do enlighten us.

I could be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure Ikramerica was taking a sarcastic jab at the Indonesian government's misguided response to the unfortunate recent series of accidents and incidents. Without even waiting to determine the cause, the government has proposed such draconian measures as banning aircraft older than 10 years.



Common sense is not so common. -Voltaire
User currently offlineAirTran717 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 746 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6645 times:

Quoting FoxBravo (Reply 23):

Yes, I have discovered that tone in this thread. I follow now. LOL It does typically seem to be the line of thought that it's automatically human error in these cases.... to see a government say it's automatically the plane's error? LOL

717

I have had some experience with Indian pilots... they typically insinuate that they are not wrong about whatever given subject... be it airplanes, or the score of the Red Sox game. Being wrong must be beneath them in some way. I dunno.


User currently offlineBuyantUkhaa From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2856 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6465 times:

[quote=FoxBravo,reply=23]I could be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure Ikramerica was taking a sarcastic jab [quote]
Of course he was, but it was too subtle apparently  Smile



I scratch my head, therefore I am.
25 Morvious : True but he did asked the pilot "Isnt he cleared yet?" while the captain replied with an easy, "Yup" and "Oh yes" I also think that it didn't manner
26 LJDRVR : Not sure what's more sad, the police chief officially pronouncing the cause of the accident based on his "investigation", or you amateurs attempting t
27 AirTran717 : A little harshly worded, but I couldn't agree more. People on a.net have nothing better to do than speculate all day long on issues they either don't
28 MD80fanatic : Nope, the cockpit crew is alive and well.
29 AirTran717 : The point is that people died in this incident. In the ultimate scheme of things, does it matter if it's crew or passengers? Of course not. 717
30 Jetfuel : How you do you know who is an amateur?
31 F9Animal : I find this hard to believe, as I have always heard good things about Garuda and its pilots. Although it is possible, I would think there would be bet
32 SEPilot : I have never flown a 737, but on small planes the feel of flaps going down is unmistakeable. I cannot believe an experienced captain would not know j
33 Pilotaydin : well....fly 180 duty hours a month, 1000 flight hours a year, and 1800 duty hours a year...and you won't know where you are, or what you're doing....
34 LJDRVR : I don't, Jetfuel. But the fact that you're making an issue about it leads me to believe you probably are. If you had any expertise you'd be busy laug
35 SEPilot : But if you were in the middle of a very tricky approach and ordered your copilot to lower the flaps, you don't think you wouldn't realize it if he (o
36 MD80fanatic : Pilotaydin: You cannot remember routine, uneventful flights. But if one particular flight ended in a rice paddy with your aircraft on fire...chances a
37 Pilotaydin : that's a good issue you're standing on...see i dont know what they talked about on the deck, but sometimes the captain asks for weird things at weird
38 PolymerPlane : That is after the fact though. He would not have guessed that his airplane would ended up in a rice field. Cheers, PP
39 MD80fanatic : All memory is "after the fact". When something big happens.....like the space shuttle blowing up, everything directly leading up to the event is reme
40 Post contains links and images Gammagirl : Interesting reading in this mornings Sydney Morning Herald http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/pla...peed/2007/04/06/1175366474352.html According to the
41 BuyantUkhaa : From the article: The Indonesian Transport Minister, Hatta Radjasa, has tried to block the release of the "preliminary factual aircraft accident repor
42 Post contains links Gammagirl : A clarification, it seems: http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/...ATSB/2007/04/07/1175366524674.html Not suppressed, merely delayed as a courtesy to t
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Could Have Caused This Crash? (video) posted Mon Jul 31 2006 18:05:02 by Alberchico
Cockpit Confusion Caused Helios Crash posted Wed Sep 7 2005 13:34:52 by Hodja
Parts Maker Caused Silkair Crash: Court posted Thu Jul 8 2004 15:27:59 by Ryanair!!!
Dream About '96 Garuda Crash & Delta PNS Incident posted Tue Jan 13 2004 06:16:06 by Chgoan
Inflight Sex Caused Plane Crash! posted Thu Dec 25 2003 09:28:08 by Sabenaboy
BA 747-436 Pilot Honoured For Avoiding Crash posted Sun Nov 4 2001 00:47:01 by 777-500ER
Air Show Crash In Argentina: Pilot Died posted Mon Mar 12 2007 18:18:50 by Captjetblast
Garuda Airlines Crash -- Video posted Thu Mar 8 2007 19:20:18 by Tockeyhockey
Pulkovo Crash Report: Pilot Error posted Sun Feb 18 2007 02:54:16 by BuyantUkhaa
Pilot Fired Over DC-10 Crash posted Tue Sep 19 2006 13:15:03 by Airfoilsguy