plane talking article on Jetstar safety concerns pulled?
Did I read that right?
and CASA is reviewing Jetstar’s investigation into the event
. 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?
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)?
Do the like of J* and Tiger use "Approach ban" rules these days (I believe QF does)?
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Bottums Up
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.
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.
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.
GeoffKlouth: 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.
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.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
MC
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..
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Long White Cloud
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Jetstar Safety Department Goals
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.
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.
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.
Last time I saw GK he was still working for Jetstar.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sachon
Age: 44
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Queensland
Age: 53
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
