Here are some facts to consider;
Captain Komar, 45, had been a Garuda captain for five years and had 22 years' experience as a pilot, Captain Stephanus said.
Which mean, he would have been performing this landing to perfection and knowing the landing check list by heart.
- The head of Garuda's pilot association managed to interview Capt. Marwoto last night, and he quoted that there was a "minor problem" with the aircraft "which was solved and acted upon prior to the landing. Flight conditions appeared normal until the aircraft was about 1000 feet above the Yogyakarta's runway, Captain Komar and his co-pilot told Captain Stephanus yesterday.
- Captain Stephanus said. "They said there was a problem, there was something wrong with the flaps, the flaps cannot extend normally.
The problem could not have been flap asymmetry for two reasons; firstly he would not have been able to act upon "minor problem" prior to landing and fix it. Secondly flap asymmetry is not minor problem as he would have sudden roll in the aircraft and as he stated everything was normal up to 1000 feet. The gauge with comparator switch would have told him that. This tells me that the flap at 30 would have been already selected and I could assume there were no asymmetry until then.
- According to his chief pilot
"The captain felt a downdraft and the aircraft sinks so rapidly," Captain Stephanus said. "They just felt the aircraft hit the runway and bounce and then because the speed is very fast the aircraft overran. Then the engines hit the ground."The pilot did not explain why he was travelling so fast, I would've thought there is a common approach speed,Such an experienced pilot like Mr Kumar, He must know the approach and the landing configuration by heart and even if he had one of these days what about his FO??!
If the hard landing would have been the cause of such damage ( I think not) you could only go back to Adam Air and see the difference. Unless of course he landed the aircraft nose first which could definitely cause the nose gear to smash. Also such landing would have reduced the engine clearance to the ground. Just to remind you of the A320 in the USA when it landed with the nose wheel completely off to the side.
- Loss of hydraulic fluid do not cause the aircraft to veer to the side or catch fire. The hydraulic system has fuses which seal the affected area downstream of the leak after a few drops of leak have been detected. Hydraulic power from system A is used to turn the nose wheels to either side from zero to 78 degrees. In addition, on some airplanes system B may also be used to turn the nose wheels. An alternate nose wheel steering system, activated by a switch on the captain's forward panel (Fig 1), allows power from hydraulic system B to turn the nose wheels if power from hydraulic system A is lost.
The captain said after the crash the crew followed standard emergency procedures, opened all the exits and managed to evacuate most of the passengers.
I think the Cabin Crew did a magnificent job under the circumstances, but I cannot see how the pilot would have been doing this, especially when the cockpit section ended up separating from the rest of the fuselage.
Finally, my sincere sympathies go to the families who have lost their loved ones and can't help feeling sorry for the flight crew. I am sure nobody would want to be in that situation no matter what the reason is. I salute the cabin crew for their heroic efforts.