plane talking article on Jetstar safety concerns pulled?

[ejectx3]

Just noticed the Ben sandilands piece slamming Jetstar safety has gone. Qantas heavies in action?

[drpixie]

Could be - but those articles sometimes change or disappear for more mundane reasons (like fact checking...)

[ejectx3]

This was it....
'raided' by CASA
blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/.../...
Jetstar chief pilot's office 'raided' by CASA. June 16, 2012 – 8:36 am ...

[Sarcs]

Ben is probably sick of being put through the blender by various company and Federal agency legal eagles....rumour is that some years ago Ben had a bevvy of lawyers chasing his tail over some home truths he published about the LHR inquest!:{

Being a blogger these days means he no longer has the protection of a legal department...and besides he probably got his point across. :ok:

[Kharon]

There is a similar J* piece here. (http://www.aviationadvertiser.com.au/news/2012/06/jetstar-in-another-safety-flap/)

Gives you the general idea.
Tiger, tiger burning bright. etc.

[Cargo744]

Where is that alfoil hat?

[ejectx3]

The chemtrails guy is borrowing it

[training wheels]

Quote from that article ..

At this point, the pilot in command called for “go-around flaps,” which is a standard call in an Airbus in a go-around situation, and the pilot not flying (or “support pilot,” depending on which school you went to) will normally move the flap selector from “flaps full” to “flaps 3″, however in this case the co-pilot selected the flaps to the “flaps one” position.

Why doesn't Airbus modify the standard call to 'flaps 3' for a Go Around ?.. That way, there's no ambiguity and no excuse for not knowing what the go-around flap position should be.

[Wally Mk2]

"TW" I guess its seems obvious that a call for 'flaps 3' would be logical in this case but a 'go-around' can be made at any point during an approach (not necessarily in config full) inc in a clean config for that matter so calling 'go-round,(should be alight pause here) flaps' is a generic call as such to allow for all contingencies.:-)
Also the PF will be busy during the escape maneuver (especially in a break out maneuver during a PRM)& this is a time where the PF could call the actual flap setting he/she wanted incorrectly where as the PNF can allow more of his/her attention for this simple task of moving the flap lever up one stage:-)

Wmk2

[Ollie Onion]

You can't just call 'Flaps 3' as you may be landing in Flaps 3, or you may commence the go around from Flap 2. It is hardly rocket science to just move the flap lever up one stage. Mistakes do happen though, an ANY pilot is capable of making such a mis-selection.

One of my 'mates' was involved in a situation departing a major airport (UK) where he asked for 'gear-up' and the very experienced First Officer promptly retracted the flap to Flap 1. It was a co*kup but didn't result in either crew being stood down, it simply resulted in a notice to all aircrew reminding them to think about what they are moving before they move it.

This seems to me to be a bit of an over-reaction....... again.

[ejectx3]

Minor you say? A flap selection instead of gear departing cairns a while back almost wrote off a ba146 from memory

[pixelatedman]

Bing (http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=jetstar+chief+pilot+raid&d=27025567841322080&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=b725b19e,563cb90e) is your friend.

[DirectAnywhere]

Here's the rewrite.

Jetstar refutes reports of NZ and head office incidents | Plane Talking (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2012/06/17/jetstar-refutes-accounts-of-nz-and-head-office-incidents)

While there is apparently nothing in any alleged 'raid' on the CPs office, there was clearly an incident on a SYD-CHC flight, the substance of which is as was alleged previously.

This is the fifth landing/ go-around config incident I can recall. Systemic issue?

Jetstar has refuted the reporting of an incident involving one of it jets which made a missed approach to Christchurch airport earlier this month and about an incident in its Melbourne head office which it says didn’t happen.

Plane Talking referred to the claimed Melbourne incident and also linked to a report concerning it in a different publication in an article on Saturday morning, and when Jetstar said it challenged the information and would reply in writing as to its particular concerns it was agreed that the article published here would be withdrawn ahead of that statement, which is published in full below.


[INSERT JETSTAR STATEMENT HERE]


The Jetstar statement doesn’t deal with ongoing concerns the writer has with a number of other incidents involving the airline which have been raised in ATSB reports and before Senate committees, but as a matter of fairness, and no doubt further argument those are matters for another day, and not in relation to a story in which key elements were wrong, as they were in the article which had been linked to in the Aviation Advertiser.

In a statement a CASA spokesman said:

Consistent with normal regulatory practice, Jetstar has reported a recent landing incident to CASA, and CASA is reviewing Jetstar’s investigation into the event.

On the completion of its review, CASA will ensure that any appropriate safety actions are taken.

Note the Jetstar statement is a jpg and didn't copy across. You'll have to follow the link to read that.

[PPRuNeUser0198]

The chief pilot does not have an office - no one does.

[Capt Snooze]

Jetstar pilots stood down after NZ incident (http://www.theage.com.au/business/jetstar-pilots-stood-down-after-nz-incident-20120618-20ivc.html)


FWIW

[Normasars]

Is it just me, or is this kind of event becoming routine at Jetstar?

I know that the reporting cultures and "just cultures" are being fostered and encouraged nowadays perhaps more than in previous days, but the the frequency of these events at JQ seems to me to be quite concerning.

Every operator has "events", but it just seems to me that this is all too common and accepted as "going with territory" at JQ. The PR machine seems to be trotting out all kinds of excuses and rhyme and reason why these events are common place and all part of the safety culture at JQ.

If this was TT, this would be a totally different scenario. The term Double Standards certainly comes to mind.

[chimbu warrior]

Why doesn't Airbus modify the standard call to 'flaps 3' for a Go Around ?.. That way, there's no ambiguity and no excuse for not knowing what the go-around flap position should be.

Exactly.

In a Boeing go-around, the required flap setting is called for (varies for single- and 2-engined go-arounds, according to the model).

As Jeremy Clarkson would say "Why can't they just get it right?"

[neville_nobody]

If this was TT, this would be a totally different scenario. The term Double Standards certainly comes to mind.

Pulling the Jetstar AOC would be a lengthy and protracted legal process and that's a legal battle that CASA doesn't want to or can afford to get into

[waren9]

Hmmm.

Bust MSA a couple of times (in VMC?) and you'll get shut down.

But repeatedly and regularly put your aircraft in undesirable and inappropriate configurations and modes with respect to thrust lever positions, landing gear and flap positions close to the ground seems to be no big deal.

[Ollie Onion]

Wasn't the Tiger 'show clause' due to failures in dealing with the incident(s) (i.e. a below average safety system) not the actual incident.

If you read the wording from CASA above, they say that Jetstar reported the incident as they would expect and are only investigating if the Jetstar internal investigation followed the approved process.

I read into those statements that CASA is not concerned with the actual incident but about the safety system in place and how the airline 'rectifies' these issues.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

and CASA is reviewing Jetstar’s investigation into the event

That sounds like CASA outsourcing their job to the very airlines they are supposed to be keeping an eye on to me :ooh:. And so if the airline says that the incident has been investigated and found no fault or deficiencies, we hearby declare ourselves are off the hook. CASA are going to believe that?

Also, are other operators around the world experiencing the same fvck ups that J* are? Or is it unique?

[Wizofoz]

Just a question for background- this seems to be a case of descending to DA while conditions were below minima.

Do the like of J* and Tiger use "Approach ban" rules these days (I believe QF does)?

[halfmanhalfbiscuit]

Gframsey

Take a look at the 2012 senate inquiry and you will see that ex casa staff are now running jet stars safety systems group. Questioning did raise concerns re possible conflict of interest at the time.

[wheels_down]

Tiger was grounded for many reasons, most of which the public should never know, certainly a few low approaches and some dodgy paperwork were the least of CASA's worries.

[Capt Claret]

Ejectex,

Sorry old son, i think your memory's failing you. If you're talking about the late 90's the aircraft didn't come close to being written off, lost about 80', and the incident looked worse than it actually was because essentially the aircraft flew almost level until it reached the real flap retract speed and climbed away.

[Sarcs]

Take a look at the 2012 senate inquiry and you will see that ex casa staff are now running jet stars safety systems group. Questioning did raise concerns re possible conflict of interest at the time.

In Geoff Klouth's submission he was fairly scathing of Jet* incident investigation system and he also gave a fairly concise description of how it all worked, see here from his submission:

Geoff Klouth: Whilst I am not familiar with the Tiger Airways incident I was working in the Jetstar Safety department when the Jetstar incident occurred although I was on leave during August 2007. The incident was reported by the pilots to Jetstar Safety and it was
subsequently reported to the ATSB. The data recorded by the aircraft during the incident was stored on a Quick Access Recorder which had to be removed from the aircraft and the data sent to Qantas. Qantas processed all Jetstar QAR information as Jetstar do not have the resources to conduct this process.

Qantas informed Jetstar in August that the QAR data indicated that a Ground Proximity Warning had occurred. Jetstar Flight Operations Management then requested further information and commenced an internal investigation although at this stage the investigation focused on incorrect use of the TOGA function and the June 2007 incident was one of three incidents. The other two incidents involved a missed handled go-around in Avalon and a long landing in Adelaide.

I do not believe that there was a deliberate attempt by Jetstar to conceal information from the ATSB but that there were no protocols that required the ATSB to be informed of subsequent information.

When I returned from leave in September I was tasked with preparing a report that only focused on the June 2007 incident. The Fleet Investigator who had been preparing the report on the three incidents briefed me on what had been done and then he went on four weeks leave.

It was during this time that the incident was reported in the media and the ATSB decided to investigate the incident. It was then accorded significant priority in Jetstar. While I was trying to put together an investigation using my ATSB experience I was diverted from the task when I was advised that the Captain involved in the incident had been contacted by persons claiming to be from the ATSB and were seeking further information regarding the event. This resulted in me having to contact Qantas Security and the ATSB to try and discover who was responsible for the call. The ATSB referred the matter to the AFP but
they decided that it was not worth the resources required to pursue the matter.

My position as a Fleet Investigator was a part-time position and I was also required to fulfil my duties as a First Officer. Significantly I was still subject to the Duty Time limitations that governed how many hours in a 14 day period that a pilot could work. At the end of October I reached 100 hours duty in 14 days so I was taken off one day of flying duty.

I submitted a draft report of the June 2007 incident in November. I stopped performing the duties as a Fleet Investigator in January as I was preparing for a promotion to Captain.

The main limitation in my attempt to conduct the investigation was the lack of resources in the Safety Department. The investigation should have been conducted by an investigator who was able to devote themself full-time to the task. Part time investigators should be limited to minor investigations. As a part-time investigator I was not provided with a computer and had to provide my own and I was not even allocated a desk and had to take whatever desk was available when I was in the office. An airline safety department should be audited possibly by CASA to ensure that sufficient resources are provided based on the size of the airline. My understanding is that the Jetstar Safety Department is still the same size as it was in June 2007 and the Fleet Investigators are still rostered on a part-time basis.


So have there been any changes to the system since the inquiry, if so is it a better system?? I thought at the time of the inquiry that his submission and subsequent evidence given was very good and relevant and also very brave, so is GK still flying for Jet*?:ok:

[Mstr Caution]

But repeatedly and regularly put your aircraft in undesirable and inappropriate configurations and modes with respect to thrust lever positions, landing gear and flap positions close to the ground seems to be no big deal.

Bought to you by the same organisation that..........

Did a risk assessment & grounded an airline because of an impending lockout.

Justification being.......

Can't have a POSSIBLE situation where a pilot MIGHT put an aircraft in an undesirable & inappropriate configuration.

:ugh: MC

[Flava Saver]

I think if people dig a little (The Kelpie??) they will find most, if not all, the 5 or so flap issues in recent times involve "2 stripers". The holes are lining up folks.. :ugh:

[WB Bach]

1. Convince CASA that at Jetstar, safety is of the highest priority!

2. Produce a flood of glossy magazines and posters, promoting "Jetstar Safety".

3. Do NOT let the staff know, under any circumstances, about safety incidents. Regardless of whether it may help in preventing a repeat incident, the risk of the media finding out and effecting Goal No 1 is to be avoided at all costs.

[RENURPP]

Nothing to do with gear in this instance. It was the wrong flap selection.

[Lookleft]

WB Bach has summed it up perfectly. Airline safety departments are all about brand protection. Jetstars benchmark for how safe they are is the number of safety reports they receive. Under their strange logic the more reports they receive the safer they are! If they think that keeping quiet about incidents is good for the "Brand" then that is just confirmation of the warped thinking that permeates HO.

Last time I saw GK he was still working for Jetstar.

[gobbledock]

Take a look at the 2012 senate inquiry and you will see that ex casa staff are now running jet stars safety systems group. Questioning did raise concerns re possible conflict of interest at the time.
Correct. So these CASA individuals leave CASA, go to Jetstar and run Safety over there. Then one of their colleagues from CASA resigns from CASA, comes back as a Consultant to CASA and then takes part in Jetstar's scheduled AOC audit! The happy team are all back together for a short time, albeit under interesting circumstances!!
I think the executive management team at CASA should be walked out the door for sanctioning such a disgraceful event.

Now, where can I be a container ship loaded with polish, as that is how much is needed to shine up this tainted industry.

[haejangkuk]

Jumping jeepers, these all really happened? Wow, our Aussie expats up in Korea say no such things can ever ever happer down under because pilots there are so well trained, disciplined and naturally gifted. This certainly is confusing!

[SpaceNeedle]

Oh oh haejangk...see what you have done? You caused a black out of this " plain talk " and now it looks like they have removed your post!

[gobbledock]

1. Convince CASA that at Jetstar, safety is of the highest priority!
2. Produce a flood of glossy magazines and posters, promoting "Jetstar Safety".
3. Do NOT let the staff know, under any circumstances, about safety incidents.
Regardless of whether it may help in preventing a repeat incident, the risk of
the media finding out and effecting Goal No 1 is to be avoided at all costs.
Naughty naughty staff.
Well after all, when you are 'ex CASA' and working in safety and still friends with the people at CASA it is certainly easier for you to 'play the system'. Not that I am saying that the dedicated safety professionals at Brucestar are doing that.
TICK TOCK

[Lookleft]

If it is the case then it is another example of the "lack of resources" mantra that permeates the upper levels of Jetstar.

[tontinewarrior]

In a galaxy far,far away certain people ingratiated themselves into positions of power by promising future utopia. They are not interested in making it better for all, but they will tell us they are.
Managing the message is more important than managing the business.
Mess with this mantra at your peril. Hopefully there are enough people left to do the right thing.
Wake up CASA, it is your vocation if you are in that organisation.
We need another 20 Nick Xenophons.

[waren9]

If it is the case, then IMO it is a serious lack of competence.

fixt it for ya