Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Garuda Yogjakarta Crash - Captain Charged  
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 6112 times:

"Stephen Fitzpatrick, Jakarta correspondent | February 05, 2008

"GARUDA pilot Marwoto Komar faces up to seven years' jail after Indonesian police yesterday laid charges over last year's Yogyakarta plane crash in which 21 people, including five Australians, died.

"Police have been under intense pressure to speed up the criminal investigation into crash on March 7 when Garudaflight 200 from Jakarta overshot the runway.

"A National Transportation Safety Committee report last October found that Captain Marwoto, 45, tried to land the Boeing 737-400 at twice the proper speed and ignored 15 automated cockpit warnings as he did so.

"He also rejected frantic calls by his co-pilot, Gagam Saman Rahman, to perform a "go-around" at the last minute, which could have avoided the tragedy."


http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...story/0,25197,23161043-601,00.html

Always a pity when crashes become the subject of criminal charges. But this crash, according to the investigation report, did seem to be the result of gross negligence (final approach at about 200 knots with only 5 degrees of flap) rather than anything to do with the aeroplane or the conditions.


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
119 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offline727forever From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 793 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5936 times:

Disturbing...Very disturbing.

I am always one to defend my fellow aviator, but I am really struggling to determine a scenario in which a flaps 5 landing at 200 knots would be required. My question is, what is his experience and training background? Was he really qualified to be in command of a 737?

That being said, I am still opposed to criminal prosecution of pilots following an incident or accident. If these precedences are allowed to be set we will reach a point at which no compensation will be enough to cover the liability that any of us take on when signing for an airplane. The risk of being criminaly prosecuted, for instance if an uncontained engine failure kills passengers, is something that a pilot can't control but who's to say a court won't pin it on the pilots in search of a scape goat. The way the EMB pilots were treated in Brazil following the midair with the GOL 737 is case in point. The U.S. NTSB is thought of as a highly prestigious board of investigations. They are even guilty of quickly pointing the finger at pilots while ignoring many of the outside factors such as in the OH accident in LEX.

My concern is that if the industry continues to do nothing to stop criminal prosecution by conviction happy judges we will loose control of the situation and no longer be able to learn from accidents and incidents out of fear of legal action. Airlines are already throwing away in house manuals in favor of inferior manufacturer manuals to reduce potential liability in the event of an accident. This trend will worsen if a solution such as an international review board much like the marintime board is not created.

727forever



727forever
User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4840 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5918 times:

Bad precident in charging crews, however when someone makes more than just a mistake/error and makes many serious bad decisions as this Captain did and people die then yes he should be charged.


56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineAFGMEL From Australia, joined Jul 2007, 744 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5908 times:

There is no reason that I can think of other than flap failure why anyone would want to land that fast. Surely a blatant disregard for safety is an offense?


B 727-44/200 732/3/4/8/9 767-3 742/3/4, 772/3, A319/20/21 332/333 342/3 , DC3/4/10, F28/50/100, ATR72
User currently offlineMandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6927 posts, RR: 76
Reply 4, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 5883 times:

He needs to prove partial incapacitation or something taking his mind off for his defence.
He is reported to have not slept the night before due to domestic problems.
If you ask me what was he guilty of, only 1 thing, he turned up for work and didn't call in sick that day.

The silly thing is, we've seen gross negligences in the past (those which are more intentional than this one), but since they got away with it, no one's charged.

They're barking up the wrong tree IMHO...

Mandala499



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21544 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 5821 times:



Quoting NAV20 (Thread starter):
Always a pity when crashes become the subject of criminal charges.

When people are at fault, why is it a pity for them to be held responsible. 21 people died. If it was an avoidable accident, I think it would be a pity to sweep it under the rug.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineOHLHD From Finland, joined Dec 2004, 3962 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 5811 times:



Quoting NAV20 (Thread starter):
Always a pity when crashes become the subject of criminal charges

My opinion too however if it is real that he tried to land at 200 knots then he is an crazy MF. But I also believe that the Indonesian authorities desperately need a scapegoat.


User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 5806 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 5):
When people are at fault, why is it a pity for them to be held responsible. 21 people died. If it was an avoidable accident, I think it would be a pity to sweep it under the rug.

The issue you failure to realise is when you have a safety program that is founded in guilt and prosecuting those that make mistakes you have a system that will not report the true picture of operations. Most western countries and several countries in the same area as Indonesia have safety programs that are based on self disclosure. If a mistake is made it's researched for all to know how it happened and how it can be avoided in the future. A system that punishes mistakes is a system where DFDRs are erased, where CVRs are erased.

If you truly believe in punishment, then you must support the FOQA program and feel every deviation should be punished? Your position is a step back to the dark ages of aviation!


User currently offlineSOBHI51 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jun 2003, 3506 posts, RR: 17
Reply 8, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 5718 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

So 15 automated warnings,a co-pilot shouting in your ear and you still try to land that plane is not criminal?I think 7 years is not enough .He should get 7years for each dead passenger.


I am against any terrorist acts committed under the name of Islam
User currently offlineB747-4U3 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2002, 991 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 5609 times:



Quoting SOBHI51 (Reply 8):
So 15 automated warnings,a co-pilot shouting in your ear and you still try to land that plane is not criminal?I think 7 years is not enough .He should get 7years for each dead passenger.

Well if he ignored the co-pilot's requests for a go-around then the co-pilot should have taken control of the aircraft. That's what they are there for! Why is the co-pilot not being scape-goated like the pilot?


User currently offlineSOBHI51 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jun 2003, 3506 posts, RR: 17
Reply 10, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 5489 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 9):
Well if he ignored the co-pilot's requests for a go-around then the co-pilot should have taken control of the aircraft. That's what they are there for! Why is the co-pilot not being scape-goated like the pilot?

A co-pilot taking over from the pilot????Mutiny on board.
If he tried to do so and the pilot insisted on continuing the landing the headlines next morning will read as follow.(Fight in the cockpit causes the crash and death of 125 passengers and crew).



I am against any terrorist acts committed under the name of Islam
User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7700 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 5427 times:

IMO there is and should be assumption against criminal charges in accidents.

IMO this was not an accident, it was negligance, bordering on murder.

OK he had a bad night, but what about the automated warnings, what about his training, what about the warning from the co pilot.

IMO he has had his warnings, now let the court decide.


User currently offlineFly2CHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 5398 times:



Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 2):
Bad precident in charging crews, however when someone makes more than just a mistake/error and makes many serious bad decisions as this Captain did and people die then yes he should be charged.

Why shouldn't they be held accountable? What difference exists in the flying profession? Doctors, Lawyers, Accountants are often subject to prosecution. Captains always say they want to be treated like senior management, hence this should include responsibility (precisely the same as with the company's CEO or CFO).


User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12639 posts, RR: 46
Reply 13, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 5373 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 7):
The issue you failure to realise is when you have a safety program that is founded in guilt and prosecuting those that make mistakes you have a system that will not report the true picture of operations. Most western countries and several countries in the same area as Indonesia have safety programs that are based on self disclosure. If a mistake is made it's researched for all to know how it happened and how it can be avoided in the future. A system that punishes mistakes is a system where DFDRs are erased, where CVRs are erased.

While I strongly agree with this, if, after a full and thorough investigation, the actions of the crew are found to be criminally negligent, then I feel they certainly should face charges. A court can then decide the correct punishment if they are found guilty of said charges.

A "no-blame" ethic works great for minor issues and near-misses, but when people die, I don't believe you should be able to hide behind that ethic. There's a significant difference, and I believe a clear line, between a "mistake" and a pilot doing something that's criminal - such as flying while drunk. If the Garuda pilot had been drunk, should he avoid prosecution just because he's a pilot? IMHO, absolutely not.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12742 posts, RR: 25
Reply 14, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 5358 times:



Quoting 727forever (Reply 1):
That being said, I am still opposed to criminal prosecution of pilots following an incident or accident. If these precedences are allowed to be set we will reach a point at which no compensation will be enough to cover the liability that any of us take on when signing for an airplane.

Many professions that have life or death responsibilities have the threat of possible criminal prosecution as one aspect of the job: cops, medical doctors, bus/train operators, etc. I can think of cases where members of these professions have been criminally prosecuted for gross negligance in the performance of their duties. Yet we don't see a criminal prosecution after every case where a cop shoots someone, or a patient dies, or a bus crashes. And we still see people accepting postions as cops, doctors, and bus drivers.

I think the threat of criminal prosceution in the case of gross negligance is called for when your job has life and death responsibilities associated with it. It's probably best that those who can't accept such a standard do not enter those professions.

I find it interesting that most folks thought this accident would be swept under the rug, and now that stiff penalties are being sought some are saying that a bad precident is being set.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 5353 times:



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 13):
There's a significant difference, and I believe a clear line, between a "mistake" and a pilot doing something that's criminal - such as flying while drunk. If the Garuda pilot had been drunk, should he avoid prosecution just because he's a pilot? IMHO, absolutely not.

I am not saying every crewmember in every accident/incident has a "get out of jail free card". If there is a clear indication of criminal conduct then I have no problem.

However, the issue of negligence is a little bit more difficult to handle. First of all, it becomes a very "convenient" way to dispose of accidents and as such there is very little incentive for crew members to be forthcoming with the chain of events during the accident. Situations like that can become a witch hunt. Secondly, the concept of negligence is very difficult to prove. What if there is a training deficiency and this crew becomes the first crew to experience this anomaly in training. Again, it's becomes very convenient to have the event labeled negligent and that way no deficiencies are highlighted in the training program.

I think trying to prove negligence takes away from the primary aim of accident investigation which is to find out what happened and then to ensure it doesn't happen again.


User currently offlineBoeingOnFinal From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 5285 times:

Phil, since you have experience from various airlines, I ask: Are there any Operational Procedures in those airlines you have worked for that states action to be taken in the situation where the Commander and the Co-Pilot disagrees on a decision? If so, do they differ from airline to airline, aircraft to aircraft?


norwegianpilot.blogspot.com
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12639 posts, RR: 46
Reply 17, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 5274 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 15):
I am not saying every crewmember in every accident/incident has a "get out of jail free card". If there is a clear indication of criminal conduct then I have no problem.

OK, then we agree.

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 15):
What if there is a training deficiency and this crew becomes the first crew to experience this anomaly in training.

Again, this isn't an issue in my book. If the crew has followed SOPs and training fully, and it then emerges there is a 1-in-a-million combination of factors that leads to an accident, then I don't see any reason for the crew to be blamed or face any legal proceedings.

Considering a different scenario - if the airline has been advised by the manufacturer of a specific issue and doesn't pass this on to crews, then clearly the airline and its officers would be acting negligently, and, in the event of a accident resulting in injuries or deaths, should be prosecuted.

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 15):
I think trying to prove negligence takes away from the primary aim of accident investigation which is to find out what happened and then to ensure it doesn't happen again.

Again, I agree, and my take would be that the legal authorities would only consider whether or not negligence was a factor, after the accident investigation has been completed (I don't see how it could happen any other way). I see the two issues of accident investigation and possible criminal prosecution as completely separate.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 5271 times:



Quoting BoeingOnFinal (Reply 16):
Phil, since you have experience from various airlines, I ask: Are there any Operational Procedures in those airlines you have worked for that states action to be taken in the situation where the Commander and the Co-Pilot disagrees on a decision? If so, do they differ from airline to airline, aircraft to aircraft?

If the PF doesn't acknowledge the PM's challenges, then the assumption is the PF is incapacitated and the PM would take over the aircraft.

In terms of a decision that is discussed in the cockpit, in theory, a solution that is agreeable to both the PF and PM would be the best solution. However, at the end of the day, the Captain has the responsibility for the decision. It's my opinion that CRM, if implemented properly, will ensure situations like the one we're discussing don't happen.


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 19, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 5254 times:



Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 7):
The issue you failure to realise is when you have a safety program that is founded in guilt and prosecuting those that make mistakes you have a system that will not report the true picture of operations. Most western countries and several countries in the same area as Indonesia have safety programs that are based on self disclosure. If a mistake is made it's researched for all to know how it happened and how it can be avoided in the future. A system that punishes mistakes is a system where DFDRs are erased, where CVRs are erased.

If you truly believe in punishment, then you must support the FOQA program and feel every deviation should be punished? Your position is a step back to the dark ages of aviation!

Thanks PS, good to have some real knowledge of the various factors inserted.


User currently offlineBoeingOnFinal From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 5226 times:

Thank you Phil.

This particular situation seems to be more of a decision either discussed by both crew members, or a decision taken by the commander himself without consulting the other crew member(s). My question was more directed towards the latter, where the commander makes a decision that deliberately goes against SOP or Local Authority law. Is this ever taken account for during CRM or in company OPS?



norwegianpilot.blogspot.com
User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 5215 times:



Quoting BoeingOnFinal (Reply 20):
My question was more directed towards the latter, where the commander makes a decision that deliberately goes against SOP or Local Authority law. Is this ever taken account for during CRM or in company OPS?

Again, if the PM challenges the PF and there is no response, either verbal or non verbal, then the assumption is the PF is incapacitated and the PM assumes control. I can't see a situation where the PM directs a go around why the PF wouldn't comply. The PM might have to be very forceful in his go around call but in the situation we're talking about the PF never called for a go around and never challenged the PF on his approach. Sometimes just dropping hints about being fast and high don't sink in due to target fixation!


User currently offline2175301 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 1074 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 5170 times:

I don't know of a single other profession where people have not been charged with criminal charges for certain cases of gross misconduct. I even know of police officers, Dr's, and Nurses so charged. Admittedly these are rare cases and only in the most severe cases of misconduct.

I see know reason for Airline Pilots and Crew not to face the same possibility.

Yes, there are tremendous advantages to self disclosure programs and learning from ones mistakes. I work in the nuclear industry and that is the kind of program we work under. But, at the end of the day if someone really does something grossly wrong they can - and will - face criminal charges (and it has happened). It is my understanding that the aerospace program, medical field, and nuclear programs all work under similar rules of self disclosure and lessons learned programs. They all look for various system type errors or problems as the cause before considering that a person was actually responsible. The overtly stated rule of thumb on a major investigation is that the cause of a major event is never someone just making a bad decision except in extremely rare cases like sabotage; yet, once in a while the investigation leads down the path that the root cause was indeed the actions and attitudes of a single person (I understand that this comes up about once every 10 years by investigators with decades of investigative experience).

15 automatic warnings - copilot warnings.... In a case like this - I think it is reasonable to accept that the Pilot crossed the line.

I find nothing wrong with criminal charges in extreme cases; and a lot of right in it. Being a pilot and participation in a self identification / lessons learned program does not grant you immunity.


User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 5161 times:



Quoting 2175301 (Reply 22):
The overtly stated rule of thumb on a major investigation is that the cause of a major event is never someone just making a bad decision except in extremely rare cases like sabotage; yet, once in a while the investigation leads down the path that the root cause was indeed the actions and attitudes of a single person (I understand that this comes up about once every 10 years by investigators with decades of investigative experience).

Show me an accident where, the crew has survived and there has been one single cause of the accident directly attributable to the crew or even the PF. I argue the world of aviation isn't quite that black and white. Aviation accident investigation has taken the systems approach where a single accident is indicative of a system failure rather than an individual act of gross negligence.

Again, if we were to hold the crew criminally (and using your same logic civil liability would apply too), you would see air transport come to a screeching halt world-wide. It's bad enough it happens in perhaps "less developed" countries, but an application as the posters are proposing would bring air commerce to a halt.


User currently offline727forever From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 793 posts, RR: 5
Reply 24, posted (6 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 5105 times:



Quoting Fly2CHC (Reply 12):
hence this should include responsibility (precisely the same as with the company's CEO or CFO).

If that were the case, after messing the company up the pilot could collect millions in severence and move on to another company and receive millions to screw them up before collecting yet another severence package. In addition to the moral obligation to the career and my passengers, the threat of license and thereby career revocation is more than enough to keep me responsible for my actions.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 14):
Many professions that have life or death responsibilities have the threat of possible criminal prosecution as one aspect of the job: cops, medical doctors, bus/train operators, etc. I can think of cases where members of these professions have been criminally prosecuted for gross negligance in the performance of their duties. Yet we don't see a criminal prosecution after every case where a cop shoots someone, or a patient dies, or a bus crashes. And we still see people accepting postions as cops, doctors, and bus drivers.

How many of these professions cross many different borders, each with their own set of rules and levels of prosecutorial aggression, all within the span of a few hours? The problem is that in an accident a prosecutor can choose to focus just on a few small details that were part of the error chain and go after the pilot despite the other factors in the accident that may have lead up to the errors of the pilots. It is not appropriate to just give carte blanche to prosecutors to start going after pilots when the science of accident investigation is not one where absolutes can be known.

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 15):
However, the issue of negligence is a little bit more difficult to handle. First of all, it becomes a very "convenient" way to dispose of accidents and as such there is very little incentive for crew members to be forthcoming with the chain of events during the accident. Situations like that can become a witch hunt. Secondly, the concept of negligence is very difficult to prove. What if there is a training deficiency and this crew becomes the first crew to experience this anomaly in training. Again, it's becomes very convenient to have the event labeled negligent and that way no deficiencies are highlighted in the training program.

Phil, I haven't always agreed with you in these forums, but on this one I agree with you 100%. Even in this case the media has only reported what it wanted to report. It is only telling us 200 knots at flaps 5 with warnings and a co-pilot go around. What else was there? I'm sure a lot of other things were going on that we are not hearing about. What was the weather? Turbulance? Aircraft abnormalities? People here are ready to put this Captain in the electric chair over what few facts the media have given us. This is precisely why criminal prosecution is wrong. To many unknowns and to many people who do not know.

Quoting BoeingOnFinal (Reply 16):
Phil, since you have experience from various airlines, I ask: Are there any Operational Procedures in those airlines you have worked for that states action to be taken in the situation where the Commander and the Co-Pilot disagrees on a decision? If so, do they differ from airline to airline, aircraft to aircraft?

This varies from airline to airline. At my present airline the co-pilot is to bring the situation to the Captains attention and discuss but the Captain is ultimately responsible. If the co-pilot voices and something still goes wrong the CVR should be the witness that gets him out of trouble in the hearing with the FAA, NTSB, and the Company. Other companies this is not the case and the co-pilot is expected to continue to challenge and change the outcome.

727forever



727forever
25 Scbriml : I don't see anyone saying the Captain should be executed. What I have seen is people saying he should face prosecution, if he was indeed negligent in
26 Post contains links PhilSquares : http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...crash-pilot-with-manslaughter.html 1) According to the pilot's attorney, the police used information contained
27 Khobar : And how exactly is this accomplished in cases lacking actual incapacitation? Do you threaten them with being put on report or something? Clunk him ov
28 Revelation : Then the crew should be able to point out that the training syllabus doesn't cover this case, no? And from the other point of view, it also becomes c
29 B747-4U3 : Well its not really a mutiny as the co-pilot is allowed to take control when the captain is not doing his job as he should. The captain was quite cle
30 PhilSquares : Thanks for the info, but you really need to include everything in your example. I will fill in what you omitted. Contributing to the accident were th
31 Spartanmjf : To paraphrase the great American political philosopher Benjamin Franklin, it is only treason in the third person - such as their revolution - and not
32 Mikesbucky : The USAF uses two boards whenever there is an accident, a safety board and an accident investigation board. The safety board is self-reporting and its
33 Post contains links Scbriml : But certainly not all: http://www.manchestereveningnews.co....nk_pilot_gets_six_months_jail.html http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/08/13/national/m
34 Ikramerica : At least from the information we have. As do I. I'm not into lynching. But I also don't believe in holding anyone above the law, that their actions s
35 StealthZ : This appears to be SOP in Indonesia, prosecute becuse the public is baying for blood knowing that the laws you are using will easily be thrown out on
36 Post contains links Scbriml : Regardless of one's opinions of them, such systems exist in many countries. In Italy any accidental death must be investigated and responsibility ass
37 Pagophilus : In professions where you hold people's lives in your hands, you need to be held responsible for what you do, intentional or otherwise. With that clou
38 Post contains links PhilSquares : Ok..here it goes again.... 1) I do not think the crew should be prosecuted because of an accident. The assumption is there is no willful violation of
39 PhilSquares : And you get to double check or triple your scripts after they are filled. There is no motion freeze on a real aircraft. It's very easy to sit back an
40 NAV20 : Procedures vary between countries but the legal principles are roughly the same. If you have an accident in your car and the police are called (or if
41 PlaneWasted : Just prosecuting the pilot won't prevent accidents like this in the future. If he was stressed and made stupid decisions he should not have been in th
42 Bennett123 : ikramerica. Fair point, my statement is based on the information available. So let a court decide. Philsquares With due deference to your position. I
43 Bennett123 : ikramerica. Fair point, my statement is based on the information available. So let a court decide. Philsquares With due deference to your position. I
44 Khobar : As noted, those are "contributing", not the cause of the accident. In this particular case, there was a single cause - the crew effed up. As for the
45 PhilSquares : Your point is?????
46 Barney Captain : Peoples lives. Like the two up in the cockpit. Trust me, no threat of additional legal pressure will make aircraft safer. In fact, for the reason Phi
47 Post contains links and images Mandala499 : Here's the brief from the report on the Captain's history: He's qualified enough. The captain is also known by those who has flown with him as a coop
48 Sh0rtybr0wn : This crash was the result of criminal negligence. 15 warnings and his co-pilot screaming at him should have made him question the landing and go aroun
49 Barney Captain : Including his own. How do you know? I submit that you turn it around and ask, "what possible human factors were at play that would cause a well quali
50 Sh0rtybr0wn : Sure, it could have been, but probably not. Anyway, I think in this case a trial is warranted. If the evidence shows that landing this plane that day
51 Pagophilus : Yes, but my point is that in a profession where you hold the lives of so many people in your hands, as stupid as it sounds, you're not allowed to mak
52 Pagophilus : You don't know who will die in an accident. It depends on what part of the plane hits what fixture on the ground, where the fire starts, how quickly
53 Pagophilus : Yes, that's true, but human life is sacred. Which is why you can look back and say that's why something happened. But it doesn't absolve those respon
54 Mandala499 : Read the accident report and you will see that: 1. Aborting the landing when there is a question of safety IS (not should) an industry standard proce
55 Bennett123 : Firstly, I am not one who believes in criminal prosecution following crashes. In many cases there is a sense that "there but by the grace of god, go I
56 Mandala499 : 200kts landing isn't a landing deficiency... what I said in what you quoted is that, professions which are viewed as specialists, such as pilots, are
57 Bennett123 : I do not see that individuals should only be chargeable if their professional body agrees that they have been negligant or worse. The role of the AAIB
58 Khobar : Regulations don't guarantee diddly. There is no evidence supporting the notion that such a regulation would have made any difference at all. The crew
59 NAV20 : The normal rule is that Safety Board reports cannot be used as evidence in court. I'm sure that that will be the same in Indonesia. The reason is tha
60 NAV20 : Mandala499, thanks for the link to the Report. Seems to be a highly-competent effort, as far as the facts are concerned. And very much confirms all th
61 LeftWing : So will now Mr. Rusdi of Lion, Mr. Adam of Adam, Mr. Brady of Mandala, Mr.Robby of Garuda start to invest in training their pilots to a world std, get
62 Khobar : And if he refuses??? You can't just hit a switch and lock out the other console (EgyptAir 990), and even if you could you'd also have to incapacitate
63 LeftWing : if the pilots have had correct CRM and sim training he would never elect to do so, in worst case situations the PNF would ask the cabin crew to help
64 Post contains links Mandala499 : Well, then throw out the requirements associated with 'lex specialis' and throw everyone into 'lex generalis'. Throw out the bar association, throw o
65 NAV20 : Presumably his lawyers can have a go at habeas corpus'? That will at least make the police state and substantiate their grounds. But, as to 'cooperat
66 PhilSquares : So what? I don't see how that has anything to do with the accident. I could make an argument that the ATC services, realizing the flight was high, cl
67 NAV20 : You COULD make such an argument, PhilSquares - but only if (as appears likely) you've read neither the Report nor the passage I quoted from it. Which
68 Baroque : With respect Nav you are assuming that drawing attention to differences is pejorative. I do not take it as such. To think that Indonesian systems are
69 PhilSquares : Get a clue! I hate to tell you but I have lived in more parts of the world than you could ever guess. It's not racism, it's just a simple fact. Call
70 NAV20 : Fair enough on the face of it, PhilSquares. But so far there is no evidence that the Indonesian authorities have put a foot wrong. And don't forget t
71 Khobar : I would imagine the problem pilot would not "elect" to do so - I would assume it would be detrimental to his career goals. I guess it boils down to a
72 PhilSquares : Again, the accident report states the PIC was task fixated on the approach. You, sitting back in your stuffed chair can find it very easy to second g
73 NAV20 : Not smoke inhalation, PhilSquares - the First Class cabin was flooded with burning fuel. As I said, no reports of anything wrong with the aeroplane.
74 2175301 : While I will concede that an airline pilot has the ability to quickly kill (or save) several hundred people based on his actions and responsibilities
75 Bennett123 : I do not favour charging pilots who have crashes as a general rule. Frequently, there are a range of contributory factors. Whereas in this case, the c
76 Mandala499 : For the 239763474th time.... the Captain NEVER mentioned downdraft to the media, police or NTSC investigators. The story of the downdraft was said by
77 2175301 : Mandala499 You make a valid point that the co-pilot should also be investigated and perhaps charged. However, that in itself is not a reason not to ch
78 Bennett123 : Mandala 499 we had not previously discussed the possibility of criminal charges against the FO. However, I agree that the points that you make are val
79 Mandala499 : Bennett, This is why there are various arguments around this case... If the Captain is charged, why shouldn't the copilot? Because, the co-pilot also
80 NAV20 : Mandala499, the intentions of the police (like police the world over as far as I know) is likely to be to 'get a result,' as they say. But there are
81 PhilSquares : There have been several posters on here, me included, who have tried to explain the philosophy to you. But, I will try again. At every airline I have
82 Post contains images Tb727 : No. Simple, if the Captain isn't listening and doing something similar such as an unsafe approach/landing or going below minimums, we are taught to r
83 Mandala499 : The prior agreement is the company operational policy. The "Captain, we're unstable, Go-Around, My controls" is there to safely allow disaster aversi
84 NAV20 : Thanks, PhilSquares - though my question was more about the 'How?' rather than the 'What?' of the situation. Clearly, simply trying to wrestle the co
85 NAV20 : Crossed with your #84, Mandala499. Concur with your hope that the pilot receives fair treatment. Although 'recklessness' seems to established by heigh
86 Baroque : Mandala, you might want to list how the Indonesian court procedures will differ from those in say the US, UK or Aus. My understanding is that they wi
87 Fly2CHC : So would you be happy with non-upgradable Y tickets for duty travel, and outstation slips at 3 star hotels (like most non-senior airline management0?
88 Mandala499 : THAT is what they get in airlines here for crew. For deadheads, you get your Y class ticket (it's worse actually, ie. if the Garuda flight is full, y
89 Fly2CHC : Wow....I had no idea. That sounds tough. I was referring to experiences with other international carriers.
90 Lufthansa411 : Reasons why this happened only come out after a crash. The real question is, how many pilots/crew don't call in when there is something like a domest
91 Mandala499 : Another very good point! I was quite worried of a friend at another flag carrier near my region who was in depression due to domestic problems but st
92 Bennett123 : IMO flying is stressful enough without issues. Hopefully pilots and airlines have the sense to see that it is best to deal with the issues before you
93 Post contains links NAV20 : One at least of his victims can prove a great deal more than 'partial incapacitation.' Cynthia Banham is (was?) a successful political journalist who
94 PhilSquares : 1) NWA 255 2) Avianca 2016 JFK 3) KLM/PA ground accident 4) NWA DC-9/727 Runway Incursion DTW 5) DL 1141 DFW 6) AA 1420 LIT 7) BMI 092 Kegworth 8) CI
95 NAV20 : Only know the details of four of those off-hand, PhilSquares - but I don't think any of the four qualify by my 'every mistake in the book' criterion.
96 PhilSquares : Suggest you do a lilttle research then without making statements like that. In my book they do and I consider my book a lot better than yours! That's
97 NAV20 : I just said that none of the ones I know about entailed 'pilot error' on the scale that is reported here - and that none of them was caused by pilot
98 PhilSquares : Great. Let me ask you, again, are you a professional pilot?
99 NAV20 : No.
100 Mandala499 : NAV, Testimonies from the victim are there only to assert the fact that they were injured and people were killed in the accident. It is to strengthen
101 Bennett123 : I agree concerning the charge. Out of Philsquares list, the one that screams at me is Avianca. The pilots apparently knew how short of fuel that they
102 Post contains links NAV20 : Not sure about the 'conscious fault' thing, Mandala499. Except that there is no doubt that the pilot was 'conscious.' As to expert witnesses, the def
103 Wolflair : Phil got it right when he asserted that not even pilots should be above the law. The key for the system to work is to leave accident investigators to
104 Post contains links Khobar : China Airlines Airbus Industrie A300B4-622R, B1816 Nagoya Airport April 26, 1994 Contributing factor was the design of the GO lever. "It is considere
105 Post contains links PhilSquares : If you're going to quote, please quote the everything. 4. CAUSES While the aircraft was making an ILS approach to Runway 34 of Nagoya Airport, under
106 Zeke : Nav, the A300 is a conventional aircraft with a control yoke and moving thrust levers, it is not FBW, it has no "Apha Floor".
107 David L : " target=_blank>http://sunnyday.mit.edu/accidents/na....html Isn't it normal practice in most types to disconnect the autopilot with the AP Disconnec
108 PhilSquares : "Normal" practice, in every aircraft I have flown, looked at, read about is to disengage the autopilot by the thumb/toggle switch. However, all aircr
109 Khobar : The point is quite simple - you said it was airmanship101, that knowing the system is a fundamental requirement for SAFE operations. You cite this as
110 Post contains links and images Mandala499 : Welcome to the court system in Indonesia. Generally, it favours the prosecution. In most cases, it is just to validate the findings of the criminal i
111 PhilSquares : You conveniently left out the quote I have added above. The board determined ALL the following factors were the cause of the accident. Your quote was
112 NAV20 : Agree that it is not fly-by-wire, Zeke, but it does have 'Alpha Floor' - to quote the relevant accident reports:- Nagoya - "The AOA increased, the Al
113 Post contains images NAV20 : I'm sure that you'll agree with me if I say, in my turn, that you have to be careful about written reports too! This particular case is a good exampl
114 Zeke : It is nothing like the FBW version, all it does is apply thrust at an AoA, no energy state is calculated, no pitch protection is available. it shares
115 Post contains links NAV20 : Tend to agree with you, Bennett123 - nearest thing yet, report/CVR shows a lot of confusion on the flightdeck. Regrettably though, the issue of wheth
116 Mandala499 : I said, be careful when using transcript as the sole source. When in conjunction with other parts of the report, I got no problems with that. Back to
117 Post contains images David L : I understand that but, in previous discussions, some have chosen to use that as evidence that it's "too difficult" to disengage the autopilot on an A
118 Bennett123 : Mandala499 I am not trying to play down the role of the DGAC. The number of crashes/incidents in Indonesian aviation would send up warning signs even
119 Khobar : Actually, my first quote was number 1 on the list. The second quote which addressed your assertion (that the crew had no business flying the aircraft
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...
Garuda 737 Crash Photos posted Wed Jan 16 2002 18:13:42 by ChrisKSDF
Garuda 737 Crash posted Wed Jan 16 2002 16:39:29 by Wirraway
Garuda Crash Investigation: Pilot Error posted Mon Oct 22 2007 07:14:42 by BuyantUkhaa
American Pilots Charged In Brazil Crash posted Fri Jun 1 2007 22:51:20 by STLGph
Pilot Disagreement Caused Garuda Crash. posted Sun Apr 1 2007 22:48:04 by BillReid
Swiss ATC Charged Over Bashkirian&DHL 2002 Crash posted Tue Aug 8 2006 02:40:02 by Zarniwoop
Garuda Captain Dies At The Helm Of His A330! posted Tue Jul 25 2006 13:31:32 by VH-BZF
Dream About '96 Garuda Crash & Delta PNS Incident posted Tue Jan 13 2004 06:16:06 by Chgoan
Captain Crash posted Tue Dec 30 2003 20:16:52 by Trekster
Are Airline Pilots Ever Charged After Fatal Crash? posted Sun Sep 15 2002 00:42:42 by Bobcat
American Pilots Charged In Brazil Crash posted Fri Jun 1 2007 22:51:20 by STLGph
Pilot Disagreement Caused Garuda Crash. posted Sun Apr 1 2007 22:48:04 by BillReid
Swiss ATC Charged Over Bashkirian&DHL 2002 Crash posted Tue Aug 8 2006 02:40:02 by Zarniwoop
Garuda Captain Dies At The Helm Of His A330! posted Tue Jul 25 2006 13:31:32 by VH-BZF
Dream About '96 Garuda Crash & Delta PNS Incident posted Tue Jan 13 2004 06:16:06 by Chgoan
Captain Crash posted Tue Dec 30 2003 20:16:52 by Trekster
Captain Crash posted Tue Dec 30 2003 20:16:52 by Trekster