Singapore_Air From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1721 times:
s I write, SQ006 was reported to have crashed on runway 05R at Taipei's Chiang Kai Shek Airport exactly one year ago, around this time.
On 31 October 2000, I went on the internet (BBC NEWS), and saw that there was breaking news. A plane had crashed in Taiwan. In my head I thought, "Oh God it's China Airlines again." I was very mistaken. I rushed downstairs to my new cable digibox. I was gobsmacked. In front of me was the lovely Jane Hill, with the ticker below saying a Singapore Airlines 747 had crashed at Taipei. I stared at the TV for a few seconds, before rushing back upstairs to the pile of SIA timetables. Looked at flights from Taipei to Singapore...nothing. Referred to Taipei and saw that SQ6 was meant to have taken off roughly half an hour ago. I didn't know for sure though.
Anyway, i rushed back down. I couldn't believe what was happenning to be honest. I just sat and saw the information from Reuters being processed.
Upstairs, I had only three windows open. BBC, CNN and singaporeair.com which wasn't loading. Still at this moment, I couldn't believe it but I wasn't shocked or stunned, I was just sitting there, scrambling and scrounging for any sort of news I could get.
Dinner. First pictures of the crash, I'm sure many people who watched the news will remember, was of the front of the Megatop with the silver fireofficer. I was really upset when I saw it was a Tropical Megatoppy. Soon, Reuters reported that no people died. I was ecstatic.
Some passenger numbers came out but that was it. Boeing did the normal crisis routine that they always do, reporting the aircraft reg, number of hours etc...
The bad night progressed as I tuned in to watch an SIA Press Conference from LAX. James Boyd came out (not what I had expected), with no suit. I wasn't too impressed. He said something about the flight commander saying he had hit something and that there were x number of passengers but according to Taiwanese sources no one had died. A sigh of relief when I heard that.
Couldn't really concentrate on my studies so i stopped. Just watched the news, being frustrated that they weren't concentrating on something that I wanted to hear about. Urhggh.
Pictures of people in the airport started to come in. And most of them seemed OK. However the picture of the Megatop from a CI pax were shocking. The flames were very dramatic.
I went to sleep at about midnight. I gathered some thoughts. I had been an SIA fan for about 3 or 4 years. Nothing had prepared me, and I'm sure a lot of other SIA fans for what was unfolding. It seemed that SIA, the greatest airline in the world, was not invincible from disasters and crashes. It was very sad, firstly for the victims (at this point, it was quite obvious peopleperished), and the airline.
The following day, I found a good news station in Singapore called ChannelNewsAsia. I downloaded all the media reports every day. I still have them now. I saw Cheong for the first time in my life actually. He was older than I expected and the hair! Anyway, he did the best he could and it was wise of him to admit full responsibility for the accident, although in every accident there is more than one cause. I thought that was really good of him in an emotional sense, and also in a cold-hearted PR way was good as one newswire reported, it would look good if the airline accepted 100% responsibility, but at the end was only say 20% or 60% responsible.
In the morning of that day, was watching BBC NEWS, and they said the airplane was on the wrong runway. I was not impressed and was quite shocked that this could happen to SIA. At school, I was getting some flak because of that fact. I really didn't know what to do and just said "I'm sure Singapore Airlines are very sorry for what has happenned," and I just quickly left for the next lesson trying to put a brave face upon things.
The news conferences continued. The airline handled it magnificently undoubtedly. The VP Public Affairs put a human face on the airline and looked visibly moved, perhaps actually coming to human terms about what had happenned, when a man stormed in the press conference who was in a right state. Things didn't go well in these conferences though. A poor woman ordered Cheong to talk to her husband on her mobile / cellular / hand phone. It was a real sight. I think she represented what the rest of the families wanted at the time... answers.
The Straits Times, the English-speaking newspaper of Singapore, had some theories as to why the plane was crashed. Things like burst tires / tyres, lighting faults, pilot error, mechanical faliure etc... They all seemed very trivial at the time as it was just useless speculation, but speculation nonetheless.
At this point, I think I had come to terms with it all. However I was very angry at Taiwan. The investigators were fine, but with a prosecution department coming in, it just seemed so stupid and surreal. What was the point?! Were they on the witchunt? Did they need something to do? The two departments were finding the common cause, but were handling it in totally different ways. It was totally illogical to have the two there.
With regards to the arrest of the pilots, I felt very sorry for them, so did world-wide pilot's union, who threatened to boycott Taiwan. Once again, my anger at the Taiwanese (prosectitioners) boiled again as they weren't helping in the slightest.
Meanwhile, here on Airliners.net there were many views. Conflicting of course. There was much arguing, bitch-fiting, totally stupid posts, and some people who quite frankly probably wanted SIA to crash, regardless of the loss of life. That's when I joined as Khoahuynhuk.
The factual report was an interesting read. Although it didn't answer the question, why did the plane crash, it did give us some facts and eliminated some factors.
Weather and mechanical faliure were ruled out. The plane was sound, having just been under maintenance and the weather was within the plane's operating parameters.
The airport was found to be at fault. The lighting was insufficient and not up to international standards. The maps issued were out of date and therefore didn't represent the airport as normal (it displayed runway 05R as a normal runway, instead of being a taxiway ONLY), and the ATC did not look out. On top of all this, a ground radar was not there which could have prevented the accident. We've seen how a ground radar can help. The recent crash in Milan and the Tenerife accidnet both prove how valuable one can be.
The pilots were arguably at fault, though theoretically not. The PVD which is used to identify runways in Category 3 airports did not show the pilots when they used it, that the plane was on 05L (the correct runway). Instead it didn't light up at all (05R is not equipped with this function, 05L was). To use the PVD, the plane has to be at a 45 degree angle to the runway so the PVD catches the ILS of the runway. However the Captain thought he could see it fine anyway and considering TPE isn't a Category 3 airport, there was really no need. That is where most of the stick for the pilots came in. On one side one can say, how stupid, why didn't they check for sure considering the weather conditions? On the the other one can say, "Well it's not a Category 3 airport, and anyway the ATC should have checked they were on the right tunway". There are many conflicting views as to this factor, and the report which comes out this Decemeber (2001), should try to clear this up, if not clear it up completely.
SIA pilot training was 'normal' so there was no cause for concern, with the two pilots at the control being described by SIA trainers as "above average".
SIA has moved on and has implemented some self-improvement. Pilots are being payed more, most likely to increase morale. According to some pilots, morale had already increased a couple of months after the crash. Other things have been implemented however I am not aware of the specifics. However, I can safely say that it has learnt from the lessons.
The victims got $430000 in compensation, $30000 if they were only injured. Personally, this seemed good at the time, but it obviously wasn't for a lot of the families. Many lawsuits are being filed against SIA, mainly in the United States. A certain law group, whom I will certainly not advertise, and who incidentally immediately set up a site dealing with the crash only 7 hours after the accident, is handling about 40+ cases in Los Angeles. Compared to the AF compensation after the tragic Concorde crash though, the compensation seems pale, and I hope SIA gives them more.
Finally, I haven't said much about the victims. I am not a hypocrite and won't write stuff like "I know how they feel. It's such a hard time for them." Of course it is, however I'm in no position to speak for them, nor about how they are feeling. Of course it is a hard time and of course they are devestated, however I don't think anyone else outside from their situation can honestly comment.
We must also not forget the crew. Names who stand out to me include Ang Miau Lee, Suresh Anandan, Goh Boon Hwee, Alfred Lee, and the well-publicised Faranza Abdul Razak, only 19. If I remember correctly, all of them escaped the fireball, however they went back into it and either died, or hhave suffered great injury. True Singapore Boys and Girls.
My thoughts and prayers were with them then, and are with them again as we remember SQ006.
Jiml1126 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1642 times:
Well, it's really shock.
Actually BBC and CNN received the breaking news about 30 minutes after the crash. And coincidently, I decided to look at Taiwan's major news of the day at http://udnnews.com when I step into the computer room.
And I just saw a big title saying "Singapore Airlines crashed at the runway during take-off." It was the time when typhoon "xangsang" visiting Taiwan.
Singapore 777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1630 times:
Yep, I am sure it must have been a shock to everyone here just as much, whether they have been predicting that SIA will crash or not.
Lessons have to be learnt from this accident. SIA have to be more forgiving with the way they treat weather-related delays instead of forcing their planes out of the terminal for takeoff. They have to have some trust in their crew and let them make decisions based on safety being top priority when conducting a flight. This was an accident that should never have happened and could well have been prevented.
Jaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1616 times:
Well, it certainly was a shock coming in the wake of the Swissair MD-11 crash. Swissair and Singapore Airlines were the Gold Standard in international air travel, and their involvement in air crashes that implicated the airlines in some way was very disturbing.
VirginA340 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1612 times:
SIA dropped the ball on this one. The comapny needs a change of mamgement. If this was JAL the manangment would be forced to resign in disgrace and the pilot incharge would be in jail for mansluaghter. I still hold SIA responsible. SIA will not be getting my, my families or my friend's business anytime soon. I'll be flying NWA, JAL, Qantas or sail on a boat before I ever fly SIA.
Greg From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1603 times:
Singapore_Air...you make it sound like YOU were one of the victims with this long winded 'diary' of the 'terrible events' that shook 'your life.'
Just let it be. It was a terrible tragedy. Gross negligence on part of the pilot. I know the CA law firm handling some of the cases--the evidence against SIA is very strong regardless of ground conditions in Taipei.
As much as I hate to agree with VirginA340...there needs to be a change in management.
Singapore_Air From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1590 times:
VirginA340: That's cool.
Greg: SQ6 was a terrible shock and tragedy for all of the airline industry. 83 people lost their lives. And in my defence, yes, the terrible events did shake my life. It shook my life a whole lot. you know, when you look up to something as great as SIA, and you see it collapsed on a runway, it certainly does hit you.
VirginA340 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1569 times:
Singapore Air; It's not like SIA will go under like certain airlines after a crash. SIA will be around as long as they don't play games with families like certain airlines that I can name of the top of my head. As long as the manamgent and employees responsible are ousted from there and have no influence what so ever then they'll survive. (Personally I wouldn't trust them to scrub clean a toilet to a 747!) I hold managment to a high level of responsibility. If they can't handle it. then get the hell out of Dodge and let someone else who is more qualified to better handle things.
Greg. It's nice that for once we can actually try to get along
9V-SVA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1512 times:
VirginA340: all the airlines you mentioned have crashed before. JAL 123 in 1985, QF 1 in 1999 and NW 1482 in 1990. What makes you want to fly them as they all have suffered the same fate at SIA. They have all crashed their aircraft at one time or other!
VirginA340, I encourage you to wake up and face the real world. Insensitive comments are unwelcome here.
EGGD: Live with it eh? If your favourite airline were to crash a plane, how would you feel? You will feel shocked and sad! That's why airlines make it a point to commemorate the anniversaries of air crashes.
Greg: The pilot was not ENTIRELY in the wrong. Taiwan's Aviation Safety Council has proven that the maintainance at CKS Airport was shoddy. There was only one light switch for two runways, thereby confusing the pilot in bad weather.
Singapore_Air From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1501 times:
VirginA340: DO you include the management of CKS Airport in your hate? I find it hard for anyone to say that it is just Singapore Airlines at fault. Or maybe, people want to ignore some FACTS and would rather have their own personal vendetta and sweep the ASC (Taiwan)'s Factual Report down a vacuum toilet.
Please do open your eyes to the larger picture my dear. The lighting, the PVD. I hope you will read my original remembrance again. Just have a look and see that there is more than one mitigating factor in this tragedy.
9V-SPK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1502 times:
I was different from you.I went to bed just 15 minutes before the crash.next thing i heard in the morning was that SQ crashed in Taipei, my mum told me.Didn't believe it first, but her face told me it was a serious accident.Watched on news and saw the pictures and the video taken from a passenger on CI.
Also newspapers.I bought 6 different papers and all SIX of them had different views.One said SQ pilots killed the passengers, One said Weather was main reason, One Said Control tower gave wrong instructions.What should i believe?
Actually, nobody wants these kind of crashes happen.Genereally speaking, i don't like China Airlines, Garuda, Korean Air.HOWEVER, i would NEVER want them to crash.For aviation lovers, every crash is always a sad news, with people killed, planes destroyed, airports closed.
But you have to be strong Singapore_Air.For SIA, everything has changed after the crash.Yes, everything will not be the same.Everything will be BETTER!So don't worry.One crash doesn't mean total failure.
P.S - For those who wants any airline to crash and see people get injured or killed...you're just......pathetic i should say.Have some sense.
Carmy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1470 times:
I feel inclined to agree with 9V-SPK. No one wants any airline to crash, and a person hating any airline is no excuse for wanting to see innocent civilians die. If anyone doesn't like a particular airline, so be it. Don't sit down all day and hope that the airline crashes.
Personally, I heard about the crash on the radio just before going to bed. The presenter was getting all emotional about it and I immediately hopped out of bed and turned on my television to Singapore's ChannelNewsAsia. Unfortunately, they had absolutely zero coverage about the accident. Can't be anything big then, I thought, and hopped off to bed.
Imagine the shock I got the next morning when i looked at the copy of The Straits Times lying on my dining table. A picture of the beautiful Tropical jet in flames. Switched the television on, and the news was all over the various television channels. Watched it for a while, then went out for an appointment.
I realised how the accident had shaken Singapore and understood first hand, how much pride Singaporeans actually took in SIA. People shopping at Singapore's version of the Champs-Elysee, Orchard Road, would actually stop at the large screens to watch ChannelNewsAsia, a Singaporean-based Asian news channel. Large groups of them would stand in the blazing tropical sun and just watch the SIA press conferences. All around the little island nation, almost every Singaporean, aviation freak or not, discussed the tragedy with great interest.
When the Taiwanese refused to release the pilots, passions ran high on the ground. Many Singaporeans wrote letters to the media, expressing disgust at the actions of the Taiwanese. Every Singaporean took a personal interest in the accident, with many of them offering blood or other items when there was an appeal.
And yes, like Singapore_Air mentioned, the stories of the SIA cabin crew who actually ran back into the plane to help others. And those who stayed on to help when they could have escaped. SIA has always taken much pride in her cabin crew, but this time, they have proved that besides providing the service that even other airlines talk about, they will strive to do whatever they can, even in times of danger. Little wonder that the Singapore Girl remains so popular even after almost 30 years.
And got to agree with 9V-SPK. SIA has changed after the crash. But the company has always been able to survive even in the worst of conditions. In 1972 when they first broke away from Malaysian Airlines, everyone thought they were doomed because of Singapore's tiny domestic market. But the company beat the odds and survived.
Nicolasrolland From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1407 times:
Well Singapore is a great country,
efficient, nice, hard working and with great peoples.. great dialects, great languages... a nice mix of origins...
Everything is well planned, if something negative happen in the world.. singapore is touched but less dramaticly coz they plan theses situations.
let's say I wish that my EP will be approved soon
I flew with SQ I would say 3-4 times
for long-haul flights... and always.. always I have to give a perfect note to the service, the flight, the plane, the people, the efficiency, the most beautiful airport...
Looking forward of booking my next flight with SQ
Well always looking at SQ messages on this site... always learn interesting things..
Greg From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1406 times:
Again, I'll agree with the forum members---get a life. Your are possessed and obsessed with SIA. It's likeyou think its a living person. It's real creepy. You post every little news 'blurb' about them on here hoping someone will respond. I'll tell you a little secret: Although most of us respect what SIA has accomplished....it's just not THAT interesting to read ten posts a day copied from every business source.
We're all sorry about the loss of life in any accident, this one included. Your are, however, trying to make the aircraft, the attendants, and the pilots some kind of saints. I doubt seriously the Vatican will Cannonize the Megatop.
VirginA340 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1375 times:
Let me make it clear that ever one including managment, pilot incharge and airpot manamgment in charge is veery well to blame on this. It alarms me on how some of you people will actually go the extra mile to protect an airline but yet not do the same for victims' or the surviving pax on board. I recall one of you wishing a certain pax to die because he told his story on how he saved a cuple dozen people.
You overzealous SIA fans need to realize that airlines do not cater to you as an aviation tample for you overzealous buffs but they rely on $$$$$ to help them survive. If they are not keeping their end of the bargin by protecting your ass then they will pay the consequence and changes will be made other wise They'll be bansided to where EAL, BN and PA 1 are currently at. Airline hell! We as pax pay our hard earned monry hundreds and thousands in international airline tickets. We expect the airlines to do it's job by protecting us from point a-b. That's not asking too much. If SIA can't hack it then they can go out of business while I'll fly their competitior who can better handle the job.
QantasAirways From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1370 times:
I remember that crash!
I went to sleep with nothing in my mind.
I turned up at school, and my friend stared at me. I said "What?" and he said, "Did you hear the news? Singapore Airlines has crashed in Taiwan"
I was totally shocked and was in desperate need of more details - which I could not find at school.
It was a terrible day... I'm afraid that I have never been so close to Singapore Airlines since
Rest in Peace SQ006
The Spirit of Australia