JAL admits safety wasn't top priority

[A-FLOOR]

http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200504150158.html

JAL admits safety wasn't top priority

04/15/2005
The Asahi Shimbun

In an astonishing admission aimed at explaining its troubled record in recent months, Japan Airlines on Thursday said safety had not been its top priority.

All efforts and attention were focused on punctuality. The airline was careless about safety, JAL said in a report to the transport ministry on steps it is taking to restore its tarnished reputation.

JAL is under government orders to pull itself together following a string of mishaps, hence Thursday's report on its measures to prevent a recurrence of maintenance mistakes and flight regulation violations.

And in a case of worst-possible timing, part of the flap from the wing of a JAL aircraft that landed at Narita International Airport on Thursday was found to have fallen off in flight, officials said.

Flight 73, carrying 428 passengers and crew members, arrived at 5:10 p.m. from Honolulu.

Mechanics found the component had detached from the main left wing.

The airport's 4,000-meter runway that the aircraft used was closed for three minutes from 6 p.m. to search for the missing part. It was not found.

JAL said the mishap did not compromise flight safety.

Upon receiving JAL's report, officials of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport said they will regularly inspect facilities and airports used by the airline to confirm that the company's safety measures are being observed.

The ministry also grounded a JAL pilot for one month beginning today for starting takeoff procedures without clearance from air traffic control at New Chitose Airport near Sapporo. The pilot of the Tokyo-bound flight was forced to abort takeoff at the last moment in January because another aircraft had just landed on the runway about a kilometer away.

In another incident, at Inchon Airport in South Korea, the pilot and co-pilot of a flight bound for Narita misheard the control tower's instructions to wait, and taxied onto the runway, forcing another plane to restart landing procedures.

Reprimands or warnings were issued in both incidents.

On March 17, a clearly fed-up transport ministry ordered JAL to improve its operations.

In its report to the transport ministry on Thursday, JAL acknowledged the string of mishaps stemmed from a lack of awareness within the organization that safety should be the main priority. The company said maintaining reliable flight departures took precedence over safety. It also cited strains between management and employees resulting from the merger of the old Japan Airlines and Japan Air System.

The JAL report said management will hold 100 meetings with workers over a period of two months to listen to the views of rank and file workers and ram home the need to focus on safety.

The company said it will also review its maintenance and flight regulations.

In addition, JAL said it would set up a "safety headquarters" to ensure that information is shared and immediate directions are issued in emergencies.

Kazuo Kitagawa, the transport minister, said after receiving the JAL report: "Problems have continued even after JAL received the ministry's improvement order (in March). This is an extraordinary situation. The public rightly remains critical of JAL. So I implore JAL to unite in ensuring safety."

"There are no other examples of an airline coming under such ministry monitoring," noted an official with the ministry's Civil Aviation Bureau.(IHT/Asahi: April 15,2005)
From an airline that has seen some of the worst in aviation history this really surprises me. I recall that after the crash of JAL123 in 1985 the JAL CEO resigned and as with other major airlines that have seen some really bad things happening to them, they vowed safety would be their top priority from then on.

Hardly 20 years down the road we see this. :ouch:

[Avman]

Well at least they have admitted it. Not like many others who just hope nothing happens to expose their safety deficiencies.

[eman_resu]

Admission is one thing

Culture change is completely another, I don't think for one minute that this will have any effect, apart from the sacrificial one or two that fall on the sword........

You can't change years of history, and their healthy disregard for non-japanese opinions and methods, especially western ones.

If it's not done the Japanese way, how can it be correct?

Waiting for a Japanese input on this thread............

[sammypilot]

For the year ended the 31st March 2005, Japanese Airlines reported the loss of 159 items from their aircraft whilst operating. This is up some 60% from the 96 reported in the previous 12 months.

[Kaptin M]

When a company refuses to advise its pilots of NOTAMS that directly affect flight ops, such as the removal of the windsock at an airport, is it any wonder there`s a Safety issue?! :mad:

It`s not enough to issue brochures that are titled "Safety" (or similar), the understanding and implementation needs to start at the grass roots level.

Just for info., All Nippon (aka ANA) also had a similar incident over the week-end, when they entered the active runway in Niigata without an ATC clearance.

[N380UA]

Are any of these contributions here, written by folks that really know Japan or are these just personal impressions and ides of what it may be like in Japan? I know for a fact that I may feel as safe and secure on a Japanese carrier as with any other European or US national airline. As Avman said, just because other airlines didn’t bring out such a report doesn’t mean that they're flawless. Kaptin M is right, safety starts at the grass roots but just because I don’t do as you do doesn’t mean that Im wrong or you're right.
On the by by JAL123 was due to fçuk up of Boeing (US – not Japanese).

[A-FLOOR]

N380UA: I don't care if it actually was the fault of a Boeing engineer, or for that matter the weatherman, Michael O'Leary or a fat lady in the back who sat down too fast. The 747 had "Japan Air Lines" written on it, and as far as I'm concerned that is where the ultimate responsibility for this particular accident lies.

Don't get me wrong, -as a matter of fact I will be on a JAL 777 out of CDG next thursday- I trust them with my life just as good as any other legacy carrier, but when I read stuff like this it does tend to worry me :uhoh: ;)
But even so, I still hold JAL in very high regard, and I am happy that they can be (sort of) sincere about this problem.

It kind of sets them apart from other Japanese companies, I'm sure you all agree. :E

[virgo]

Come on chaps............what's the shock-horror ?NO airline puts safety first. The FIRST consideration is to make a profit, that's what an airline business is all about.
It always annoys me when, following an incident or accident, a spokesman solemnly states that "..............safety is this airline's number one priority"
Of course it isn't and never will be..........it might be the SECOND or be given a very high priority.
When you think about it, it's no use having the safest airline in the world that never makes a profit (Unless the the people are prepared to subsidise it ?)
At least some airlines are prepared to admit it rather than being deceitful.

[eman_resu]

Where the heck was the 'admittance' when JAL actively covered up the runway incursion in January??????

Oh, and no deceit there then....

Yes, they maybe a legacy carrier, and the legacy is a culture of no change, and the Captain is god.

My partner travels by JAL occasionally, and it's the only airline out of the 'legacy' ones where I feel the need for her to call as soon as she lands, because if there was an incident, I don't believe that much of the Western world would ever hear about it....

[JA841B]

This guys in Japan have a few problems in general. They don't learn from mistakes and to master their life they need a guidebook. It will take ages until the society in Japan is going to change and as a result from this flying in Japan remains unsafe as long as a Japanese captain is in charge.

[punkalouver]

I do get the feeling that on time performance is way more important than safety. The recent train derailment sounds like it could such a case. A while back there was a detailed show about the sarin attacks on the Tokyo subway. On one of the trains when it stopped at the station, all these people got off choking and collapsing. After a brief look the train was sent the on its way. You would think that there would be some suspicion of something unusual requiring more investigation.

[etrang]

virgo, fully agree. After all the SAFEST way to run an airline is to never to allow your planes off the ground.

[N380UA]

JA841B your quite obviously stationed in the wrong country then.
flying in Japan remains unsafe as long as a Japanese captain is in charge.
I personally know a number of Japanese skippers that are very competent in terms of their piloting, airmanship and MCC abilities shying no comparison with any other western captains. To say that flying in Japan would be unsafe is utter nonsense!

[RevMan2]

Posted this initially to Safety CRM and QA, but it may fit just as well here...

An insight into the background to the commuter train incident from "Japan Today"

"The accident is a result of JR West's policy to prioritize operations over commuters' safety and a working environment in which the drivers are driven by fear and extreme pressure not to err — or face punishments," Osamu Yomono, vice president of the Japan Confederation of Railway Workers' Unions, said in a news conference in Tokyo.

Yomono was referring to the so-called "reeducation" program in which erring train drivers are forced to reflect on their mistakes and vow never to do it at the threat of losing their job.

Takami, who was 11 months on the job, underwent a 13-day reeducation program for a past mistake. Takami's 90-second delay will have led him to go through the same program.

Takuya Nakao, a senior member of the West Japan Railway Workers' Union and a train driver for almost 14 years, said his experience in the reeducation program because of an overrun was "demeaning."

"Apart from writing six to eight pages of reports everyday where I had to reflect on my mistakes and my duties as a driver, I had to stand at the train platform and greet the drivers when their trains come and leave the tracks. It was obvious for all to see that I was doing that because I was being punished and it was awfully hard for me," he said.

Nakao resumed his work after three months after he was forced to vow to never repeat such a mistake and if he does, he is ready to leave his job.

"Unless I tell them so, I will never be let off the hook," he said.

Yomono adds: "Drivers under reeducation have to do meaningless chores such as weeding and are shouted at and intimidated by superiors. Fear of being subjected to this again must have overwhelmed him and deprived him of the ability to make a normal judgment." He urged that the management to rethink its policies."


Different transport mode, same culture, similar issues. Hmm

________________________________________________
Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong

[LongRangeNav]

Japanese aviation is different to say the least but people making comments as to the abilities of Japanese pilots is absurd.

"flying in Japan remains unsafe as long as a Japanese captain is in charge"

A bit harsh I fear. Yes there are some cultural issues but from my experience I have found only the same cross section of good and bad that you would find in any western country.

[Kaptin M]

Yes, you are correct LongRangeNav, it is the cultural issues that make Japanese (and most other Asian countries) flight decks a less than optimum environment for safe aviation operations.

Regardless of the CRM courses given, there is the deep-rooted and centuries long established tradition of respecting one`s elders, and in Asian cultures this means NOT questioning the senior person`s decision and obeying it REGARDLESS of whether the younger person knows that failure will be the end result.
I have experienced it first hand.

Unfortunately (or fortunately) for foreign pilots flying in Asian airlines, because we are NOT of the nationality of the country in which we work, we are treated as second class citizens - this is particularly so in Japan - and as a result find that we sometimes have an uphill battle with airline management supporting our (the Captain`s) case against the local F/O`s, many of whom may have been in the company 3 years or less!

Punishment in Asian societies - rather than positive re-inforcement - is par for the course.
It is MORE important (and far easier, of course) to find SOMEONE to blame, rather than investigating a system that has been in place, unchanged, for decades...or longer.

[poorwanderingwun]

Why is Japan being selected for criticism in not putting safety first...In 20 years of being professionally involved in the industry in various levels of airline operation I've never worked for any operation that gave safety the top priority... indeed.. the passengers themselves don't give safety the top priority.... safety is traded off for both economy and convenience ...
The important factor is that safety standards should not be allowed to fall below a certain level....

That level is generally extremely high world-wide. Not being complacent... we need to constantly monitor the situation...but let's not kid ourselves that any one nation or culture alone is subject to commercial pressures... every one of us who've been around for more than a few years will I'm sure, have witnessed examples of commercial pressure intruding into safety standards.

Sometimes that pressure is succesfuly resisted, othertimes not.

[LongRangeNav]

Captain M, I hear what you are saying but there are still a lot of Japanese pilots who are well aware of their own cultural limitations and try and work around them. Young co-pilots here, or at least where I work, consistently say that they enjoy working with foreign captains, and for one I find that encouraging for the future. If we represent ourselves well they may well take on some of our initiatives.

Yes, CRM, in some cases is a joke, but if we apply it as it should be then surely it will rub off.

A friend of mine told me that Japan is not right , not wrong, its just different! They are far from perfect but which country is, and on the whole I can think of a lot worse places to fly. Times are changing in Japan just not as fast as elsewhere maybe.

When I started in Japan I did feel like a second class citizen, and to some extent I still do, but at work I certainly feel that my services are valued. At the end of the day we are guests here and it suits us to be here, for whatever reason, so we have to deal with it. It's their Sandpit!

[XXTSGR]

As a sideline:-Jet Ordered to Land on Closed Runway

Saturday April 30, 2005 4:31 PM

TOKYO (AP) - A passenger jet was ordered to land on a runway closed for repairs at Tokyo's domestic airport, and officials on Saturday blamed the mishap on air traffic controllers.

Japan Airlines flight 1158 from Obihiro, northern Japan, landed on the runway at Haneda Airport minutes after it was closed for construction Friday night, said Kenichi Kohashiguchi, an official at the Transport Ministry's accident investigation commission.

A second plane was headed for the same runway several minutes later, but was ordered to change its approach at the last minute, Kohashiguchi said.

Both flights landed safely and no injuries were reported, he said.

The error occurred because air traffic controllers forgot the runway had been closed, a Transport Ministry official told a news conference later Saturday. Nearly 20 air controllers were on duty at the time and none of them noticed, he said.

"We found out that all the duty controllers had forgotten the runway closure,'' ministry official Yoshinori Furukawa told the televised news conference. "We apologize for the trouble that has caused everyone to worry.''

The runway, one of three at the airport, is closed three nights a week for construction work from through October.

[Kaptin M]

When a company refuses to advise its pilots of NOTAMS that directly affect flight ops...... is it any wonder there`s a Safety issue?! I wonder how much the above contributed towards the incident as well?
OCC (Operational Control Centre) deciding that the pilots "don't need" this sort of information, in spite of ATC thinking it important enough to issue a NOTAM.

At the end of the day we are guests here and it suits us to be here, for whatever reason, so we have to deal with it. It's their Sandpit! Just because it's "their Sandpit", LRN, that does NOT mean that lesser values of Safety than are applied as an industry norm have to be accepted.
When CRM and culture are in conflict, then CRM must take priority.
Unfortunately this IS sometimes the case (CRMvsCulture), and convincing two like-minded individuals to go against all that they have been raised with since birth, and live with on a daily basis, is expecting a BIG turnaround....and it is NOT happening!

[N380UA]

So here we are burning the Jap's on their safety standards and their CRM whist just above a thread is running on how the Yanks see British ops (airmanship CRM etc.) as, and I quote :

absolutely, positively stupid

for running a 747 on 3 engines across the Atlantic… a bit hypocritical don’t you think. As it was stated earlier, others aren’t any better! (Unless of course anything that runs under FAA apparently).

[AtoBsafely]

I would have to agree with 841B as a generalization, although it is a bit harsh too, maybe. Yes, there are Japanese captains who are very competent and focused on safety. However the culture here equates more rules with safer operation, and in the process many pilots here lose sight of the big picture and focus just on obeying all the rules. Also, the culture assumes the copilot has very little experience and so the captains generally make unilateral decisions. Copilots are expected not to ever question the captain. In general I think CRM in Japan is about 30 years behind the western world.

[eman_resu]

N380UA,

Very different situations, the BA 'incident' was a controlled risk all the way through, all be it with a less than optimal outcome I agree. However none if that would have come to light had it not been for the Manchester spotters (and 50 odd pages on the subject in pprune)

However, we have an airline with 1 runway incursion at least this year, (by I believe two senior pilots within the company), several reports of parts falling from aircraft and other problems associated with poor management, poor CRM and endemic cultural issues.

Unfortunately I'm not even sure that a serious incident could change the airline, as whatever happens it will never be their fault, or alternatively some executive will pop out, apologise profusely and return to his desk.

Until the various national bodies, such as the FAA / CAA start to look at the CRM and cultural issues on this airline, and start blocking flights in order to start the change that is required, to avoid an aluminium shower, then the airline will never change.

I think the FAA (for example) should take a longer look at how an airline actually performs on a day to day basis and how it flies in its airspace, rather than specific incidents based around proven, managed SOP's...

and in answer to an earlier post I am personally very familiar with the Japanese disrespect of westerners and western methodology.

[EDDNHopper]

the BA 'incident' was a controlled risk all the way through, all be it with a less than optimal outcome

If it had a less then optimal outcome, then risk was less then optimal controlled all the way through, or shall we better say: less than optimal contained. Full stop.

What is being discussed here are different risk-taking (or risk-averting) cultures, i.e. different attitudes and approaches towards translating a (potential) danger into a calculable risk. Basically all leading to the same outcome: compromising safety, or even safety breaches. The gist of many postings is that Japanese risk-taking approaches are inferior to "Western" risk attitudes. I am afraid that just because these approaches are different they are not necessarily inferior - in fact, some procedures might even be "better" than those practised in the "West".

[Kaptin M]

JAL plane makes emergency landing
Japan Times

NARITA - A Japan Airlines jumbo jet from New York bound for Narita airport made an emergency landing Sunday at Shin-Chitose Airport in Hokkaido after oxygen masks in the passenger cabin were released due to reduced air pressure, JAL officials said. No injuries were reported.
The Boeing 747, en route from So Paulo via New York, made the emergency landing at 12:50 p.m., he officials said.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources tell me that JCAB have taken control (impounded) the aircraft in Chitose to thoroughly examine it, with no JAL staff permitted access. This person also stated that many pax reported feeling cold for some time prior to the "decomp" and ensuing emergency descent.

A friend who was onboard the flight reported the airconditioning going quiet prior to the mask drop, and the emergency descent.

[N380UA]

http://matt.carter.name/blog/2005/04/jal-safety-and-communication-or-lack.html

As I was trying to find out what type and how old the 747 in the decomp incident was, I came across this report. Though sounding rather discouraging to ever fly with JAL again, it seems that this guy got a serous weed up his arse with JAL altogether. Have a look and judge for your self.
On the byby any clue on what the explosive sound on takeoff could have been?

[Captain Sushi]

Fingers troubel may be.

[Eimar Moron]

Does anyone else know about this report from the Dunnunda & Godzone forum?
JAL 747 landing gear snaps during pushback (http://pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=176811)

[A-FLOOR]

http://aviation-safety.net/news/newsitem.php?id=1445

[ClickRich]

Bravo to all those backing JAL's honesty. OK, there is a suggestion that they may not have been as open on previous occassions, but credit where credit's due.

Safety prevention progress often hits a glass ceiling when the "safety is our top priority" brigade hit the streets. Get real- safety costs money. Money is a scarce resource. Money is the top priority.

An example of contrasting safety reporting. I was recently talking to two people about Foreign Object Damage at two airlines (both traditional, major, long haul players). One claims not to have had a single FOD incident in the last decade at Airport X. The other says that at the same airport they have scores of incidents each year costing millions of USD.

How can the airport operator justify safety prevention measures when the size of the problem is such an unknown? Please get the data out there!

[A-FLOOR]

http://www.japantimes.com/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20050615h1.htm

BREAKING NEWS
JAL plane loses nose wheel tires in Haneda landing

Compiled from Kyodo, AP
A Japan Airlines passenger jet lost the tires off its two nose wheels Wednesday morning as the aircraft skidded to a landing at Tokyo's Haneda airport, airline and airport officials said.


A Japan Airlines Boeing 767 sits on a runway at Tokyo's Haneda airport without tires on its nose gear after skidding to a stop Wednesday morning.

Airport authorities closed the runway -- one of three at Haneda -- where the Boeing 767 landed at around 10 a.m. with 222 passengers and crew on board from New Chitose Airport in Hokkaido.

Two passengers on the flight complained of neck pain, but no other injuries were reported.

It had been raining in Tokyo for about two hours before the accident.

[Kaptin M]

......after skidding to a stop Great newspaper headlines...just because it's wet, it doesn't mean tyres "skid".
If journos bothered to do even just a little investigative work, they would find that airline transport aircraft have ANTI-SKID systems incorporated into their systems - even the old F27's that All Nippon operate.

Nosewheels on ALL aircraft, have NO braking system.

If the aircraft took off with no problems - at speeds higher than the touchdown/landing speeds - then one can only assume that, perhaps, there was something on the runway that caused structural tyre failures. eg. a rock, or other debris, or a failure of the tyres themselves due to expansion/contraction at altitude and temperature. (Hokkaido is frequently 20 - 30 degrees at variance from Tokyo).
Two passengers on the flight complained of neck pain, but no other injuries were reported.Americans (looking for compensation??)

[A-FLOOR]

I imagine a 767 with all tires missing on one U/C strut doesn't exactly smoothly coast to a stop either ;)

Video footage of what a locked wheel on a medium-sized airliner (CV-990) looks like from the outside (http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Movie/LSRA/Medium/EM-0005-01.mpg)

BTW: This is a wheel mounted to a testing fixture under the fuselage... not one of the aircraft's own main wheels.

[Kaptin M]

Do you happen to work for a newspaper, A-FLOOR?? Because that footage is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT to the subject under discussion :\

[A-FLOOR]

I know that Kaptin, but I tought it would be nice to share it anyway.
And to make a point; how exactly is it totally irrelevant? This is just what a landing gear with no tires looks like when it's scraping along the runway, and to be honest I thought it was perfectly relevant for illustration.

Yes, I know it's not a 767 and yes I know it's probably not the same way as this happened, but I'm puzzled as to why you have to slam the door on me this hard.

And if you'd taken the time to look in my profile you would have known I am not a journalist. Sorry if I hurt anyone's feelings :rolleyes:

[Kaptin M]

It's irrelevant, because the video footage is of locked MAIN gear.

Why try to sensationalise a press release of a B767 that has (apparently) experienced a failure of its nose tyres, by providing a link to an aircraft of an unknown type, blowing its main tyres?

Gosh, with all the extra posts, why not let's try this one?

[A-FLOOR]

No, it's not.

I already mentioned it was a CV-990, and that the footage is of a test with an 11th wheel mounted between the main gears for just this purpose. Not, I repeat NOT the aircraft's own main tyres.

For what it's worth, this is a picture of the setup on the old smoker, in-flight:
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/LSRA/Medium/EC93-41018-6.jpg

I still don't see why you're getting so worked up over a stupid video. Hard day at the office, perhaps?

[Conan The Barber]

Nosewheels on ALL aircraft, have NO braking system.

Using capital letters does not make it right.
In fact, it's WRONG.

[Kaptin M]

So precisely"Why", did you decide to post this IRRELEVANT TO THIS TOPIC video here?

The video is all about locked/blown MAIN tyres/ wheels.
Nothing at all to do with the subject in hand - NOSEWHEELS!

At least we agree on ONE thing - "a stupid video......under the current debate topic!!

Okay, JAL B767's - the aircraft under discussion - have NO braking system on their nosewheels. :rolleyes:

[A-FLOOR]

I posted it because I remembered looking at it when I saw the picture on the JT website. And so I looked it up on the Dryden website.

Next time I find a video of blown nose gear tires I'll remember to post it right here, okay? Lighten up. :hmm:

[Kaptin M]

Hmmmm, I saw a video of a Japanese tea ceremony - maybe I should post a link to that too! :rolleyes:

[A-FLOOR]

You're not funny, and mind you you're not being too "moderate, modest and mild" here either.

If you stop adding to the thread derailment maybe I'll think twice about posting "TOTALLY IRRELEVANT" videos next time.

[ClearedIGS]

While not being aircrew and having no experience with CRM in Asian airlines, I thought that it was about time that this thread got back on track. As a controller of 36 years experience, half in Australia and half in Hong Kong, I have watched landings/take-offs, radar vectored, and talked to hundreds of thousands of pilots in that time. While being an ‘outsider’ from the flight-deck, I think my observations and interface with crews from all over the world allow me to make a comment about safety and JAL.

From my experience at work, I have to say I would have no hesitation on flying with JAL from a safety standpoint. They are certainly one of the better airlines flying into Hong Kong. If they are unsure about anything, they ask. They have no hesitation in going around if they are unhappy about anything. They are, if anything, more conservative with weather. I’m not saying that there are not cultural issues here. I’m just saying that from my outsiders point of view, they don’t seem to manifest these issues in the safety interface of every day operations. There are a number of airlines that operate into Hong Kong, I wouldn’t fly with if you gave me a free ticket. JAL is certainly not one of them.

[A-FLOOR]

In other news:

http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=1&id=340547NARITA — A Japan Airlines plane's rubber component to connect the engine with the wing was found to be missing after the plane arrived at Narita airport from Incheon, South Korea, on Thursday morning, the airport operator said.

Narita International Airport Corp closed the 2,180-meter runway for eight minutes to search for the 11-by-2 centimeter component but could not find it. The incident caused no apparent damage or injury to passengers or crew of the Boeing 767-300, and the plane left Narita around 12:30 p.m. for Busan, South Korea. (Kyodo News)