SIA plane hits equipment while in Taipei airport

[Lithgow]

Just seen from The Straits Times website in Singapore (if it is in The Straits Times then it must be true....).

Here is the link (it will normally not hyperlink after 27 July 2002 because stories older than 1 week are archived):

http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/storyprintfriendly/0,1887,132685,00.html?

For posterity, here it is:

JULY 19, 2002

SIA plane hits equipment while in Taipei airport

TAIPEI -- The wing of a Singapore Airlines jet hit a piece of equipment on Friday morning as the jet took an unauthorised turn while taxiing to a runway at Taipei's international airport, Taiwanese airport officials said.

The control tower informed the pilots, and they decided that it was not serious enough to stop the Singapore-bound flight, airport police said. The plane landed safely in Singapore.

The minor incident attracted wide attention because when Singapore Airlines previously used the wrong runway in Taipei for a flight to Los Angeles two years ago, the plane smashed into construction equipment and debris, killing 83 people.

Taiwanese officials reported the incident to Taiwan's Aviation Safety Council, which is still investigating it and would not comment.

An SIA spokesman told The Straits Times later on Friday that the Taiwanese air traffic control had told the captain of the flight -- 15 minutes after it had left the Chiang Kai Shek Airport -- that it believed that the wing of the aircraft had made contact with two tailstands while it was taxiing towards the runway.

But after some inflight checks, the captain found no abnormalities with the aircraft's performance and decided to continue to Singapore.

On arrival in Singapore, the aircraft was inspected, and minor damage to a wing panel was found.

The SIA spokesman added that the flight crew were being interviewed by SIA Flight Operations management and the investigators of Singapore's Ministry of Transport, to find out how the incident occurred.

Among the issues to be discussed is the route the aircraft took while taxiing.

Singapore Airlines has a reputation for being one of the world's safest carriers. The Taipei crash in October 2000 was its first fatal crash in about three decades of service. -- AP

Copyright @ 2002 Singapore Press Holdings. All rights reserved.

[Prong Wallop]

Unbelievable. Simply unforgivable. A collision on ground ignored by the crew and damage confirmed once landed. Any aircraft damage has to be investigated. To proceed with this flight was tantamount to criminal negligence. SIA culture really needs some re-appraisal.
Brush brush whisk whisk under the (coverup) carpet.

[BlueEagle]

You may well be right Prong Wallop,

but we don't know the facts yet.

[seasiadriver]

You need the facts? Here are the facts.

Fact 1. The crew of SQ029 took an incorrect taxi route through the parking bays and not via the taxiway they were directed to be on.

Fact 2. ATC advised the crew of SQ029 that they had taken the wrong taxi route and the crew admitted their mistake.

Fact 3. Whilst taxing in the parking bay area SQ029 had a collision with 2 pieces of ground equipment.

Fact 4. Seven minutes after takeoff the crew of SQ029 was informed by ATC of their ground collision. The crew decided to continue the flight to Singapore and not return to Taipei for a precautionary landing to check for damage. The crew placed the lives of the passengers and crew in grave danger as they had no way on confirming the structural integrity of the aircraft.

Fact 5. When the aircraft landed in Singapore the aircraft was inspected and it was confirmed that a collision had occurred and that they wing had suffered damage.


Comment: Everyone makes mistakes, there are not many of us who have been flying for a while who could admit that they have never taken an incorrect taxi route but to be informed of a ground collision whilst on the climb out and then not return for a precautionary landing is inexcusably bad airmanship and it is shocking that this culture still exists in first world airlines.

This incident needs to be studied in depth by SIA and this ever present unwritten SOP that schedules and profits are more important than safety needs to be abolished before another avoidable accident occurs.



Straighten up and fly right SIA

[MAStake]

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Can we presume that the pilot of SQ29 was a non-national and maybe from a country up North?

[Farside]

We should start a PPRUNE baseball team. For one thing we got enough monday morning quarter backs!!!!

[Rollingthunder]

That would make for an interesting baseball game. QBs pitching footballs from the mound.

[Farside]

Sorry Lah,football game!

[Senso]

MASTake you have to realise that SIA is an airline run by guys from the North. We ARE what makes up this great airline. Locals should realise that WE are SIA. If everyone who was from the North walked out tomorrow, you would have no airline left. Our CEO was from UM!

Another thing you should realise is that its the Locals who bitch about the airline more than anyone else. SIA is an airline operated by us guys and girls from the North, remember that.

Accidents do happen and coming into contact with ground equipment is nothing new. There are "incidents" that take place every day and is not isolated to SQ alone.

Just because the Singapore gomen are such brown-nosers to the Taiwanese, this has to be blown out of proportion. Taiwan has a third rate safety record in all aspects of its aviation industry.

In addition to that the press report is not by any means factual and one should refrain from making fact out of fiction. No doubt there was an "incident" but did not warrant immediate action. This was a Command decision and we should respect that.

Face facts, SQ is also just lining itself up for one of our aircraft to be impounded on a safety issue by the Taiwanese.

--------------------
777 Rules!:cool: :cool: :cool: :cool:

[smiths]

What type of aircraft was involved in this incident?

[seasiadriver]

Senso, yes it was a command decision! A very poor one and that is everyone’s point!

They hit something on the ground, they was informed of this collision either just prior to take off or just after and they did not stop or return to find out if anything had been damaged that might affect the safety of the flight.

This was very bad judgment and if you can't see that I guess it proves my point that there is a widespread problem that has infected the airlines safety culture including yourself.

SIA CRM = "completely right master"

I wonder if the SQ029 crew will get a bonus for keeping the schedule. I know they will get less of an ear bashing than if they had returned and screwed the schedule only to find a few scratches on the wing.

SIA straighten up and fly right!
:mad:

[Senso]

smiths the aircraft involved was a 744. :p

seasiadriver I totally agree viz CRM = Completely Right Master... Also poor airmanship, yes I agree. The Commander was probably afraid of the following factors;

1. Having to explain why the flight was delayed because of a couple of scratches on the wing.

2. Having to face the Taiwanese CAA who will want to arrest him and suspend his license for knocking over some ground equipment, thereby giving them a reason to hold the aircraft.

3. Having to face the Taiwanese press who will be out for blood and say "Look they did it again!"

4. Having to face the MAJOR GENERAL and explain why he stopped the aircraft for a couple of scratches and create an incident out of it.

From the circumstances I'd say poor airmanship and a wonky command decision BUT ~ The Commander saved his arse and the arses of his crew to FLY another day. :p

The many Generals will understand... Save your arse, live to fly/fight another day. Flee the scene and face the music at home is probably better than facing the Taiwanese!

Comon guys you got to give him credit for that.
:p :p

----------------------
777 Rules!

[Lee]

Senso,

Sorry, I disagree with you completely.

The commander shouldn't flee the scene. That's a bad command decision, if you ask me.

BTW, you must be an Indian, since you said "gomen" in your ealier post. That's not English!

Also, I'm from the "North" but I don't think I run the airline. I rather think I work for SQ and I don't think SQ should be indebted to any of us (from the North) like the way you claim. Please speak for yourself.

Capt Lee

[Senso]

Captain Lee Sir!

You missed my point Sir! ~ I am indeed an Indian and also from the North. My point was to MAStake who commented earlier that the pilot involved in the 029 incident was from the North i.e. slamming us guys from the North.

o.k. I stand corrected... Half of the people (tech crew, boys & girls) who WORK for this airline are from the North, we are just numbers in the whole grand scheme of things. The chap who currently Runs the show is also from the North. I am very happy Northerner and thankful to this country for giving me the job and letting me fly with them on their most modern equipment.

My point was aimed at the locals i.e. those who have half of what we do and get ahead of us because they are locals. Which other airline allows first command on a 744? Is this not a safety issue and disaster waiting to happen?

The issue at hand is indeed Safety Orientated and my guess is that the Commander of 029 could have been a LocMgt pilot?

Comon Sir! You should know exactly which bay "ahem" i mean taxiway he turned into, thinking it was the taxiway?

I agree that he should face the responsibility of stopping the aircraft and having a good look at the damage sustained. No problems with a two hour delay, but the fact remains that he fled the scene Sir! ~ The ang mohs and all are laughing at us yet again!

I was merely poking fun at the fact that he actually did that and got caught in the process.

None of us will actually dare such an act as we only WORK for the state carrier and in an essence Singapore Gomen property. We scratch it, we have to answer for it. We delay it for a safety reason and its perfectly o.k..

My skipper once delayed the aircraft by two hours plus because we had "ELEC AC BUS R" and it was perfectly o.k. the airline knows that its cheaper to rectify on the ground rather than have to divert right Sir? Who ever said we have to stick to the schedule to the death? When ever has the schedule overidden a safety issue? Comon Sir, you know where that comes from?

No doubt that I did poke fun and stick my big blue turban into the issue by saying that the fleeing crew lived to fly another day is such a typical act that can be found only in SIN. You should lighten up a bit or you'll become like one of them.

You will agree with me that;
1. 029 should have stopped immediately return to bay to assess damage sustained.

2. Filed the incident with Ops before TPE departure and taking responsibility for damage to equipment on apron (probably some stairs and other junk).

3. Had damage to aircraft o.kayed to fly before leaving.

4. Being a responsible commander and sorting out the mess created (with broom and dust pan if appropriate).

The CRM is indeed flawed, I have experienced Commanders who don't like to be told things by their low life from the North F/O's who have more flying time and one extra TR than they do. :rolleyes:


F/O Singh a.k.a. Ba-yee (turbanless):cool:

------------------

777 rulez and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

[start sequence 312]

Hey buddies, by the way, how is SIA going? Any opportunity for expat captains in a near future?
Thanks.

[Senso]

Start sequence 312 Sir!

We just got a bunch of guys from South America on the 777. I met some chaps ex-Saudia, which fleet I'm not sure, but they were Indian nationals.

SQ is always looking out for Skippers check out their current ads on their web site www.singaporeair.com

----------------
777 way to fly and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

[Lee]

Senso

Well I have a better impression of you now. I'm glad you are thankful to SQ for giving you this chance to fly their latest aircraft and safest aircraft (young fleet) too. Our fellow Northlanders, many, cannot even get into MAS, let alone fly with them.

BTW, are on the 777? Keep up the good work, I see a great deal of potential in you.


Start Sequence 312

SQ is always recruiting expat Direct-entry Captains. So why don't you give it a try?

[MAStake]

I wish to correct the impression I might have given that I thought the pilot of SQ29 was from up North.
In SQ's last incident at TPE the PR dept was extremely quick to point out that the Captain was from up North, notwithstanding the fact that he had been trained by SQ right from cadet days to command of a 744. He had never flown for the airline up North and the only connection to the North was the passport he held.

I guess that the second incident occurred under the command of a local (read Singaporean) captain. Why else was the nationality of the Captain not mentioned?

It is very disheartening to find that Airlines are more than willing to point out nationalities when accidents occur. But to all sensible pilots maybe the omission of facts speaks more about this particlar airline than all the PR hype.:mad: :mad: :mad:

[Senso]

Captain Lee Sir!

The ethos in this airline viz the local pilots applies very much across the board and is the culture in SIN.

Only in SIN can you become a General in the armed forces before you are old enough to even be a father or face any other battle apart from the one at home.

The poor chaps who start as Cadets have it in their head that if they are good at brown-nosing the chaps upstairs that their chances of becoming Captains with a position be it a management one or a supervisory post can be achieved armed-forces style. I have flown with some Captains who are far more experienced than the young supervisory ones who frankly don't have the experience at all, they have a "supervisory" role????

I see some serious flaws in the fact that this airline will allow first command on a 744, every Cadet aspires to be on that fleet as they think "its more money". I believe if its money they are after, they should have become bankers or stock brokers.

I was one of the very lucky few F/O's that SQ picked, started my career on the 737 then briefly 744, then was pulled back to 737 where I was told I would be selected for 777... Needless to say, my seat was taken away from me to fulfil the famous NEP that exists UP NORTH. I left with the others and was offered to join the fleet here.

Upon arriving I was thrilled at my new position, but shocked at the attitude that the younger local pilots had about being on say A310 fleet. I told some of them, who later became good friends that, you can't and don't regularly get 4 sectors on any of the other "Heavies". So how do you build up flying experience? One chap said "Isn't it more money????" :mad:

If only some of my fellow F/O's had as much 737 experience as the guys up North do, their whole attitude will be very different.

I would have thought that the young pilots here go do their Command training on the A310 or over at Silkair on the A319 and A320 before being selected for any of the "Heavies". Earn your first command on a twin jet and see if you can manage a "Heavy" from there.

I hate to say; its an accident waiting to happen. The ethos viz blame culture with the 006 incident and press release saying that he was a Malaysian was so very wrong. Does it even matter what the Commanders nationality is? The fall into the blame game so easily if they are not Local.

The % of "other" nationals vs "local" is so much higher. Is that why ALPA-S is so afraid of giving us voting rights? Afterall we do pay our dues, why should we not be allowed to have our say? We are all flying for the SIN Gomen anyway, and operating their equipment so why this Ethos?

I have probably opened up a Pandoras Box here, but I know what I have said is nothing new. Being an outspoken Ba-yee in SQ and a Northerner... I'm already outnumbered!

Be safe!
Peace!
--------------------
777 way to go and don't let anyone tell you otherwise!

[Lee]

Senso

I can only say "sabar" to you. Wait till you get your captaincy, then try to change things.