Indonesian airliner skids off runway

[jetjockey696]

Garuda Indonesia flight #GA618 from Jakarta overran runway on landing at Makassar Airport.
The Boeing 737-800 landed at Makassar Airport during severe thunderstorm.

ILS 13 at Makassar require a minimum visibility of 900m, METAR at/near time of #GA618 #PKGFA occurence was 500m in thunderstorm.

#GA618 flight was a Boeing 737-800 with 144 passengers and 8 crew members.

AirLive.net: BREAKING Garuda Indonesia #GA618 overran runway on landing at Makassar Airport, no injuries reported (http://www.airlive.net/2015/06/breaking-garuda-indonesia-ga618-overran.html)

[320busdriver]

Your Headline should read - ANOTHER INDONESIAN AIRLINER SKIDS OFF RUNWAY - honestly what is wrong with the Indonesian pilots, absolute disregard for safety, landing in severe thunderstorm conditions with reduced visibility, these guys grow up and train in conditions like that and yet can still screw it up royally:=
I`ve flown into Makassar on numerous occasions with heavy thunderstorm on finals and over the airfield, its simple, hold over the sea normally 20 - 25nm from the airfield for a short while and it will clear - wow that was hard:ugh:

[Centaurus]

Garuda Indonesia flight #GA618 from Jakarta overran runway on landing at Makassar Airport.
The Boeing 737-800 landed at Makassar Airport during severe thunderstorm.


Same old - same old....:eek:

[JanetFlight]

http://s21.postimg.org/pzdo4fpw7/10406601_10203276280148414_7296384834978770812_n.jpg

Ladder&Umbrella evacuation..?

[Cubs2jets]

LOL !! Do you know how much it costs if you deploy the emergency slides? Garuda does !!

[Doors to Automatic]

What is wrong with these idiots? It is almost as if they want to crash :mad:

[Grizzz]

Nice new drainage ditch beside the runway. I think the wrong farming implement was used for it though!

[Machinbird]

LOL !! Do you know how much it costs if you deploy the emergency slides? Garuda does !! So that is why they are using a step ladder to disembark the passengers?
Clever.:D

[captjns]

Just another day and another runway excursion in Indonesia. What else should one expect?:ugh:

[Fris B. Fairing]

Looks like the gent with the brolly is already airborne.

[ACMS]

1/ yet another Indonesian Jet lands in a heavy rain event and fails to stop in the LDA.......either they need to stop landing in heavy rain or they need to groove the runways ( preferably both )

2/ they decide not to use the slide ( fair enough ) but use a ladder????? Surely a mobile set of steps are available at that Airport???? They had a bus there to take the pax away.

The mind boggles again.....

[Zapatas Blood]

"Just what facts do you know about the crew and/or this incident to come to this judgement?"

Repetition maybe?

[CISTRS]

That ladder is at an unsafe angle - should be more vertical than that.
Is the bottom of the ladder chocked? Top of ladder lashed?
Absolute culpable stupidity.

[Doors to Automatic]

Just what facts do you know about the crew and/or this incident to come to this judgement?

Enough - and enough about aviation in Indonesia in general given the sheer number of these sorts of incidents.

[Sam Bee]

For those interested as to WHY the landing may have been attempted, i'd recommended having a read of Mandala999's post on this (spotters) website.

GA618 Overruns Runway At UPG — Civil Aviation Forum | Airliners.net (http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/6414888/)

(Note Gerry is a well respected analyst on Indonesian aviation).

I find comments like this not at all surprising:

It is also alleged that a Garuda crew has been grounded due to going around somewhere to avoid a Silk Air jet that was still on the runway. The grounding came as an instruction from the minister after he received an SMS from a pax on the Garuda jet. Whilst we do not know how true this is, pilots in Garuda are greatly disturbed by this and is the hot topic of discussion amongst them.

[HIALS]

It seems that the ladder has been angled to let the passengers step directly onto the asphalt and keep their shoes clean. If it was steeper, it would require walking in mud. Which would be messy and inconvenient when disembarking from an aircraft that has run off the side of a runway. Creative customer service!!

[Sam Bee]

Right, I've been searching for a thread so this one can be tied up, but cannot find, so putting this here.

Some people may remember the strange story of an Indonesian governor who was so furious that he was unable to get on a fully booked Merpati flight from Bajawa to Kupang he ordered his staff to blockade the runway for two hours before the circling plane had no option but to return whence it came.

Anyway, full justice has been served yesterday, with authorities coming down on hard on the governor and his staff that blockaded the runway -

Court Hands Down Suspended Sentences in Runway Blockade Case - The Jakarta Globe (http://thejakartaglobe.beritasatu.com/news/court-hands-suspended-sentences-runway-blockade-case/)

Spoiler - no charges against governor, his staff fined 38 cents (US).

[PEI_3721]

Paulus705, I share your frustration (#7) Unfortunately it follows from the human condition, which we would hope that professionals can put aside – avoid hindsight, have a willingness to learn, have an understanding of human behaviour, and avoid complacency – (it won’t happen to me).

“We are a culture without the will to seriously examine our own problems. We eschew that which is complex, contradictory or confusing. As culture, we seek simple solutions. We enjoy being provoked and titillated, but resist the rigorous, painstaking examination of issues that might, in the end, bring us to the point of recognizing our problems, which is the essential first step to solving any of them”. (David Simon)

And from the reports above, this culture can also be found in management.

[enola-gay]

Hobby horse of mine, I know, but the pax were evacuating by ladder with cabin baggage on their backs. This is an unstoppable human reaction in the absence of a direct threat to life. The lovely Garuda cabin steward with the brolly clearly has no concerns about this.


The emergency evacuation instructions in this respect are never ever followed, and understandably so.

[WingNut60]

Reply to JammedStab from thread for Montreal excursion.


Current incident was on old runway 13 (2500 m) and aircraft was 2nd to land following or during reported thunderstorm.
Certainly lots of water about.

Does anyone remember the GA DC-10 that ran off the same runway at UPG (Hasanuddin) in about 1980 with a senior KLM secondee at the helm and sat for about a year while Douglas engineers put the missing engines back on?
Can find no record via Google.

Aircraft landed long and bounced during torrential downpour of type frequent to that airport.
Sat without No 1 & 3 for a long time. They (I think) became detached when the nose wheel collapsed or sunk into the paddy.
The only injuries were from evacuation from rear door where the slide only went half way to the ground.

Strange that this relatively serious incident gets no mention anywhere - or not that I can find.

[JammedStab]

This link has a list of any serious DC-10 accidents or incidents such as overruns. As you can see, the only Garuda DC-10 accident was in Fukuoka where a high speed reject was initiated after the start of rotation(yes, the nosegear was airborne) was done due to an engine failure(it was only the #2 engine).

Aviation Safety Network > ASN Aviation Safety Database > Type index > ASN Aviation Safety Database results (http://aviation-safety.net/database/types/McDonnell-Douglas-DC-10/database)

[WingNut60]

Certainly did happen.
I can give a list of witnesses or a couple of evacuees if you prefer?

I have one reference to the incident DC-10-30 PK-GIB MSN 46919-226 - and replacement of WINGS and engines.
I'd be careful about using the registration number alone as Garuda / Indonesia tend to re-use numbers on occasion.
I remember the engine replacement but not the wings.

These repairs all happened on the apron at Hasanuddin - 100 metres from the old terminal - over about a 12 month period; maybe more.
A team of Douglas engineers identified and occupied most of the UP night spots for most of that period.
And all passengers walking out for boarding got a good, close-up look at progress.


That is why I find it so strange that there seems to be no real record of the event.
Maybe because no fatalities - just a couple of broken legs.
But if replacing wings and engines is correct then this should rate somewhere alongside the QF A380 incident for potential loss of life.

[JammedStab]

Thanks for the info. You can send any solid evidence of such an incident to this link from the earlier website I posted. Then it will be available to anyone. They are always keen for updates and accuracy.

Aviation Safety Network > About ASN > Contact (http://aviation-safety.net/about/contact.php)

Frequently a government investigation agency will provide further info into past investigations which would be quite helpful if you could take the time to approach them.

Please keep us up to date.

[WingNut60]

Aaah .... solid evidence. There's the rub.
Particularly when my note mentioned lack of records.

Other than having seen it and walked past it about 20 times myself, the "solid evidence" is what's missing.
Since it was in about 1980, that pre-dates cell phone cameras, selfies and the like.
I MAY have a photo or two somewhere but wouldn't guarantee it.
Anyone who worked at Soroako around that time would know about it, and our HR Manager was on it, as a passenger of course.

I'd have thought that Boeing (nee McDonnell Douglas) must have records but probably not too keen to share them, in case I want to blame my hip replacement on the long drop from the aft door.
And I doubt that the Indonesian authorities a) have such records OR b) are willing to share them.
Hopefully there is an MD engineer or two out there who remembers the case.

I also found this article: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg05679.html

which says "Kecelakaan pesawat di Indonesia bukan hal baru. Lihat saja data berikut ini
berserta lokasi kejadiannya: Januari 1981, DC-10 Garuda tergelincir di Bandara
Ujung Pandang; 23 November 1992, DC-9 Garuda tergelincir di Jogjakarta ......, etc"


And from a blog site "Regulator Indonesia pernah meng-grounded enam armada pesawat badan lebar
DC-10 Garuda Indonesian Airways sekitar sebulan, menyusul kecelakaan DC-10
terperosok roda depannya di ujung landasan pacu Bandara Hasanuddin,
Makassar, awal tahun 1980-an."


Translates to :- The Indonesian regulator previously grounded a fleet of six wide-bodied DC-10 aircraft for approximately one month following an incident in which a DC-10 "blew a front tyre" (sic) at the end of the runway at Hasanuddin airport, at the beginning of the 80's"

[Greenlights]

pay to fly ?

[gerago]

How about this one?

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/562522-westjet-737-skids-off-runway-montreal.html

[Machinbird]

Nah,
Nothing exceptional about that one. They used a regular airstairs to deplane.:}
Which country has more air carrier flights on an annual basis? Indonesia or Canada? That would begin to provide a basis of comparison.

[Terry McCassey]

Curiosity now has the better of me. Can anyone confirm a 'wing' change on a DC10 occurred as suggested in the '80s. Such a task, even for an approved MRO of the time would have been a significant event and if this actually happened, I am surprised we heard nothing of it at the DC10 operator I worked for at the time. My caveat is, as always, I stand to be corrected.

[WingNut60]

Terry McCassey : Try this link

https://www.flickr.com/photos/saints09/3961489187


After opening, wait for the comments from Chris Geddes to appear

I have good recollection of the event occurring, if not the exact detail.
I do remember the aircraft parked on the apron under the attention of the MD engineers for a long, long time.
If it occurred in January 1981 (and that fits) then it was definitely gone before May 1983.
I distinctly remember it without engines and have a very vague recollection of one wing being flown in.
Anecdote was that the 1 & 3 engines were detached in the incident though they may have just swallowed swamp water and rice.

The Indonesian links that I quoted seem to indicate that I am not the only person who knows about this incident.
But it now seems even more incredible that it doesn't appear on any of the "incident lists" for DC-10's globally.

[Heathrow Harry]

Found it!!! Listed in Flight's mid year accident list

1981 | 2336 | Flight Archive (http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1981/1981%20-%202336.html)

Jan 12 1981 - Garuda DC-10-30 PK-GIB 11 crew +196 pax - ran off runway on landing. Substantial damage

[Terry McCassey]

WingNut/Harry - great find and thanks. I am not ready to sprinkle the salt and pepper on the hat, not just yet. Substantial repair on a wing can really mean anything. I had the pleasure of watching the Boeing field repair rebuild a technically scrapped B742F in Hong Kong and the job I am told, would not have been attempted without securing the aircraft in a hangar, levelled and secured. This was done in about 40 days and did not require any wing work so to attempt a substantial wing repair in the open, and keep it from prying eyes, still raises my interest. I guess some Google searching required.

Thanks of course, Terry

[Heathrow Harry]

appears to have gone to Continental afterwards and then back to Garuda......

[DaveReidUK]

Briefly leased to both COA and then MAS in the mid-late 80s.

[Super VC-10]

That accident at Ujung Padang seems to have been kept quiet from the press at the time. Had a search of The Times and the National Library of Singapore archives for 1982 and nothing showed up.

[standbykid]

Hang about. A WestJet 737 skids off at Montreal and there is one throw away reply. Indonesian aircraft does more or less the same thing and it's; "when will they learn?, not surprised", etc.

[WingNut60]

StandByKid : There were several very pointed replies.

One only left following "MODification"

[WingNut60]

Terry : No real alternative at that time

Hasanuddin was one paved runway and an unpaved cross-runway.
I flew out of that one in a Merpati F-27 as late as about 1997.
Certainly nowhere to hide a DC-10

I seem to remember being told that this WAS reported in Australia at the time - 12 Jan 1981.

Is this matter worth putting on a different thread somewhere?
I still have some contacts and opportunity to follow up for details / confirmation.

[Heathrow Harry]

Hasanuddin often has a large cloud over one end (the eastern, mountain end), where it is chucking it down and there are all sorts of wind changes and the other (western, seaward) end is in brilliant sunshine

I have a vague memory that some of our guys were delayed by this event for a day or two but it's a longgg time ago

and in the early 1980's Pres. Suharto and friends kept the Indonesian media on a very short leash

[punkalouver]

Hang about. A WestJet 737 skids off at Montreal and there is one throw away reply. Indonesian aircraft does more or less the same thing and it's; "when will they learn?, not surprised", etc.

Obviously it must be some sort of racism that appears to be hinted at in a couple of posts here. Yet I can find an example of similar for an Indonesian incident. Two replies to this overrun. Proving of course that no bigotry is involved, just reality.

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/247068-mandala-737-off-runway-indo.html

So the reality is that it is not surprising when there is another serious incident in Indonesia. One has to wonder why almost every airline in the country is banned from entering Europe.

Now one can choose denial and leap at the occasional incident in another country as some sort of indicator that the other country must therefore be just as bad or bring up the fact that some incident 35 years ago was captained by an expat(as was originally done on the other thread concerning an overrun in another country before the subject was repeated here and deleted there). But that just shows the depth of denial of the serious problem.

Here are some highlights from a recent NY Times article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/01/world/asia/airasia-flight-8501-indonesia-airline-safety.html?_r=0

"JAKARTA, Indonesia — When a team of United Nations auditors visited Jakarta in May to rate the country’s aviation safety, they came to a troubling conclusion: Indonesia was well below the global average in every category, and scored just 61 percent in airworthiness.

The audit reinforced the fact that Indonesia, which scored far worse than impoverished neighbors such as Laos and Myanmar, has a chronic problem with aviation safety."

"One symbol of its dismal aviation record is a mountain near Jakarta that has been the site of a half-dozen fatal crashes by planes large and small over the past dozen years."

"Insurance companies charge Indonesian airlines nearly double the global average for premiums per passenger because of their poor safety history. Airlines in only a handful of countries in Africa and Latin America pay more, while most other Asian carriers pay considerably less."
"

"The European Union currently bars 62 Indonesian carriers from flying to Europe for safety reasons. That used to include the Indonesian subsidiary of AirAsia, but the European Union has cleared Garuda, Indonesia AirAsia and a few other carriers over the last several years as they have worked to improve safety."

"Yet Indonesia has long ranked at or near the top of every list of developing countries with an aviation safety problem. "

"It is one of nine countries currently listed as failing a safety assessment by the United States Federal Aviation Administration. (The other countries are Bangladesh, Barbados, Curaçao, Ghana, India, Nicaragua, Saint Martin and Uruguay.)"

[Global_Global]

The problem in Indonesia is not so much aviation but more the fact that corruption is everywhere... Everybody expects and is able to pay it's way. This combined with a racist society that rates itself very high and a culture that encourages to pay respect to the higher person (read in this case the captain) is a recipe for disaster... :suspect:

So instead of embracing foreign knowledge and staff they have decided that Indonesians are the best even if they are not... and the persons that are doing the checking are willing to accept payments to pass people who should fail. Now dont get me wrong there are some excellent aviators and regulators in Indonesia but unfortunately they are a minority :ugh:

This is the one country where I refuse to fly on any local airline... :}

Rant over

[WingNut60]

There are those who see racism and bigotry everywhere.

I brought up the DC-10 topic because I found it strange at the very least that 34 years after the fact I could find no reference to it having occurred.

I also mentioned the KLM pilot along with every other major feature of the incident that I could recall.
I mentioned it as a fact (or what I believe to be a fact, aging memory aside) that was relevant to the event.
At the time GA had very little exposure to wide-bodies and I believe that it was common to have Dutch pilots flying on secondment to GA.

I'm sorry if that fits your very broad measure of bigotry. It does not fit mine.

As for Indonesia's aviation safety record, it speaks for itself.
I know. I live here.
Your comments on that are well founded.
But that does not mean that any one event in Indonesia is any more or less damning than a similar event in any other country.
I average about 40 domestic flights per year. We don't get a lot of choice to use other than domestic carriers.
Oh yeah, there is the occasional Air Asia flight available.

The DC-10 topic was moved over here because it was definitely off-topic for the Montreal thread.
It has progressed to the point where it is probably off-topic here too.

[UAV689]

Garuda regularly take on cadets, fresh out of school with only a single engine cpl, no if, to fly a 737.

I have witnessed an IR renewal, with a dgca inspector by flying one visual approach, the guy was at the controls from 1500ft (took over from another pilot) to touch down and ir renewed.

I have seen a "cpl" holder, not know how to put on an aircraft harness, not know what a power lever is, the cpl was brought by his brother.

Thank god this over run was not at Bandung when I flew there last, a school fair ground was happening less than 20 meters from the edge of the runway! Not even a barrier!

Have a look at the safety record of the guys that fly from sentani to wamena, probably once every few months a freighter written off.

The dgca, and country is completely incapable of flying safely.

Ps - to be fair to the crew, perhaps atc told them viz met the minima, I had a flight into Jakarta where the 5min old atis gave the viz to low to shoot approach,on initial contact their first comment to us was viz was the exact minima to shoot approach, as they knew we would hold otherwise...! But they totally neglected to tell us both the dme and gs where in op..:ugh:

[arba]

< I have witnessed an IR renewal, with a dgca inspector by flying one visual approach, the guy was at the controls from 1500ft (took over from another pilot) to touch down and ir renewed.>. But they have simulators for PPC, are you sure ?

[UAV689]

Ah sorry he was not a garuda pilot nor was the airline in question garuda, was just trying to get across the mentality of the country.

[Heathrow Harry]

I've worked on and off with Indonesians for years

many of the comments re the cultural problems are true but I've also seen some amazing piloting skills in really dreadful conditions - especially in backwoods helicopters

[JammedStab]

Inadequate Training Key To Garuda Indonesia Excursions

WASHINGTON—Final reports by Indonesia’s National Transportation Safety Committee (NTSC) on two 2015 Garuda Indonesia Airlines runway excursions point to inadequate training for pilots and, in one case, for air traffic controllers.

The first serious incident, in February 2015, involved an ATR72-600 landing at the Lombok Praya International Airport on the island of Lombok, Indonesia,after a short flight from Bali.

According to the final report, the pilot-in-command (PIC) most likely used improper flight control inputs to counter a crosswind after the aircraft bounced three times upon landing, causing the twin turboprop to exit the right side of the runway.

While no passengers or crew members were injured, damage to the aircraft included a collapsed nose gear and damage to the right propeller.

The aircraft had experienced a tailwind and crosswind from the right side during landing, which would normally require left rudder and right aileron input to maintain directional control. However during the bounces, the PIC applied right rudder and left aileron input, causing the aircraft’s nose to turn right about 15 deg.

Contributing to the incident was the PIC taking control from the second-in-command—a first officer in training who was on the controls initially—during the final stages of the landing without making “clear statements” on who was in control.

NTSC recommendations included two for Garuda, calling on the airline to emphasize crosswind handling in its training and to review its policy for transfer of control. After the incident, the airline independently issued an instruction to its pilots to “strictly follow” stabilized approach criteria, procedures that typically call for a go-around after a botched landing.

The second runway excursion involved a Garuda Boeing 737-800 landing at the Sultan Hasanuddin International Airport in Makassar, Indonesia, during a thunderstorm in June 2015.

The crew had prepared for a landing on Runway 3 at the airport, calculating a landing distance of 6,890 ft., which would use 84% of the 8,200-ft. runway. Controllers later routed the aircraft to Runway 13 due to a thunderstorm in the approach path to Runway 3.

On its final approach to Runway 13 the aircraft was in a stable condition with a 10-kt. tailwind and 10-kt. crosswind. However, an unanticipated wind change to a headwind—created by the mature thunderstorm ahead—resulted in the aircraft floating for 13 sec. before touching down 4,700 ft. down the runway. Upon landing, the aircraft entered a heavy downpour from the thunderstorm.

As the end of the runway appeared, the captain turned slightly left, which resulted in the nose gear and the left main landing gear becoming stuck in mud off the end of the pavement.

The pilots told investigators that they did not consider a go-around “as they were aware that the takeoff area of the Runway 13 was a mountainous area and might jeopardize the flight.”

Safety recommendations for Garuda include reviewing its pilot training with respect to cumulonimbus development stages and emphasizing go-arounds when a safe landing cannot be made.

For AirNav Indonesia, the air navigation service provider that staffs the tower, the NTSC called for providing all controllers with meteorology training that includes understanding of cumulonimbus clouds and wind shear, training which controllers had not previously received. “The controllers assumed that the cloud formations were cumulonimbus, however they did not understand what stage of the cumulonimbus,” the NTSC said in the final report. “The controllers also did not recognize any visual sign of wind shear as they had never been trained for wind shear.”

Immediately after the incident, Garuda independently revised its ground and simulator recurrent training for the 737 to include wind shear avoidance and recovery.

Inadequate Training Key To Garuda Indonesia Excursions | Commercial Aviation content from Aviation Week (http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/inadequate-training-key-garuda-indonesia-excursions?NL=AW-05&Issue=AW-05_20170105_AW-05_942&sfvc4enews=42&cl=article_1&utm_rid=CPEN1000000624045&utm_campaign=8083&utm_medium=email&elq2=740de2c056d24ea5be773343e3e076ed)

[fox niner]

But despite these shortcomings, there is no reason to place Garuda on the Black List.

[Midland63]

I'm just SLF (and haven't read the reports) but "The pilots told investigators that they did not consider a go-around “as they were aware that the takeoff area of the Runway 13 was a mountainous area and might jeopardize the flight.”" seems to imply a runway that cannot be gone around from.

Should landing on such a runway ever be permissible in any circumstances or part of the world or has something been lost in translation here? Is it perhaps the case that what the pilots really meant was that they hadn't briefed the GA from R/W 13, which they knew to be tricky, and thus would rather land at any cost than fly off into the (to them) unknown?

[Heathrow Harry]

interesting JammedStab - that's exactly the sort of conditions I refered to on page 2 of this thread - Makassar has some very strange meteo conditions for sure

Another one is Ambon................................

[ATC Watcher]

For AirNav Indonesia, the air navigation service provider that staffs the tower, the NTSC called for providing all controllers with meteorology training that includes understanding of cumulonimbus clouds and wind shear, training which controllers had not previously received. “

During our inspection visit in 2012 and 2013 in Indonesia, , Tower controllers were paid between 200 and 400 USD a month depending on the location and who employed them Training received was absolute minimum , and all had at least one , if not 2 second jobs on the side to make ends meet. You get what you pay for. :hmm:

[evansb]

I have never read an aviation safety report citing rate-of-pay as a primary cause or contributing factor in an incident or crash.

[WingNut60]

During our inspection visit in 2012 and 2013 in Indonesia, , Tower controllers were paid between 200 and 400 USD a month ........ :hmm:
Your salary scale estimates seem about right for such a position at that time.
But also be aware that almost all salaries in Indonesia are stated as NETT.
That is, after tax, pension fund (JAMSOSTEK), etc, and excluding what can be significant additional payments or incentives. Those additional payments frequently include a housing allowance or free housing, travelling allowance for daily travel to / from work, and government mandated meal while at work.

[rob_ginger]

I have never read an aviation safety report citing rate-of-pay as a primary cause or contributing factor in an incident or crash. Before you can comprehend the air safety problem you have to have an idea of the "culture" in the country. It's a long time (~25 years) since I spent 6 months living there (current residents feel free to contradict me), but I was just amazed at what I saw then.

There is poverty everywhere - catch the train in to Jakarta and for the last few miles the sides of the track are packed with the carboard and tin "houses" of people who can't afford to live anywhere else. So a permanent government job is like gold - so much so that the employees at the bottom of the ladder generally contribute some of their monthly pay to their supervisor to say "Thank you" for their continued employment.. The supervisor in his turn says "Thank you" to his boss, and so on up the pyramid.

This "culture" means that a lot of people worry about doing something that will lose them their job, and sometimes this consideration overrides safety considerations. So it's not really "rate of pay", but more worry about "no pay any more", and that's not conducive to good decision making.

I refused to fly domestic when I was there. Especially after a colleague (with a PPL) told me about his flight into Bandung on Merpati. They were in a old Fokker circling waiting for the fog to clear. On the third circuit the pilot saw the runway diagonally ahead through a hole in the fog, sideslipped all the way down, neatly straitened up and greased it on. Great flying, but not exactly a "stabilised approach". But getting there is more important than all those silly rules and regulations.

[ATC Watcher]

evansb : I have never read an aviation safety report citing rate-of-pay as a primary cause or contributing factor in an incident or crash.


Of course not . That is not looked for. Reports are made by people employed by same organisation as the controllers . My point is that if you do not pay your training is going to reflect that. Because if you train high and pay low, people leave and use the training they got to move to a better paid job. So if you train high and want to return on investment and retain your staff , you pay accordingly . basic principle. World wide applicable , not only in Indonesia.

The remarks made here by rob_ginger and WingNut60 are very true for Indonesia. there people use the training received ( mostly English language ) to do another job on the side to make ends meet , and the ATC job becomes only a mean to cover for such things as housing , medical insurance and most importantly a pension. The problem we saw is that, for many controllers, ATC was not their priority the other job was. Having worked 8 hours on a job + spent another 2 of horrendous traffic to get to/from that job , to start another 7 h duty at the Tower or ACC is not what I call safe.
Most said if they received enough money to be able to sustain a family , they would quit the second job. That is the message we tried to pass to the (highest) authorities back then .
So yes salaries and working conditions of any professional in Aviation are part of, and affecting Safety .

[Heathrow Harry]

Well there is a sizeable middle-class these days and Jakarta has changed dramtically - all cars and shopping malls rather than tin huts

But the people are still the same - as I've said in other threads it can be frustrating, even dangerous, given some work practices - on the other hand I've also seen some really excellent local pilots operating in conditions that would have 99% of western pilots in real trouble

At the end of the day it's their country