|
Garuda Pilot Jailed
An Indonesian pilot whose plane crashed, killing 21 people including five Australians, has been jailed for two years.
Marwoto Komar's Boeing 737 slammed onto the runway at Yogyakarta airport, careered into a field and burst into flames on March 7, 2007. Investigators say Komar ignored a series of warnings not to land the plane as he brought it in at twice the safe speed. Despite initially blaming the disaster on strong winds, Komar during his trial sought to blame problems with the plane's steering and stabilisation systems. But prosecutors - who wanted Komar jailed for four years - say there is no evidence to support his claim that the plane malfunctioned. Prosecutors abandoned a charge that Komar deliberately crashed the Garuda Indonesia plane, conceding they did not have enough evidence to back it up. If proved, that charge could have seen Komar jailed for life. Komar's pilot licence was suspended and he was sacked by Garuda after the crash, which was one of several fatal Indonesian airline crashes in 2007. The Australians killed in the crash were diplomat Liz O'Neill, AusAID official Allison Sudradjat, Australian Federal Police officers Brice Steele and Mark Scott, and Australian Financial Review journalist Morgan Mellish. Five other Australians survived the crash, some of whom were seriously injured. Despite some improvements since 2007, Indonesia, which relies heavily on air links across the archipelago, still has one of Asia's worst air safety records. |
He got off very lightly
|
Indonesian "Justice" says he will be out in 6 months. :rolleyes::ugh:
|
Okay I cannot shut my mouth over this one.
You blow up a pub and a restaurant and get off lightly (apart from the ones that got shot - that's still a 'light' punishment in my book. You land a B734 @ almost 230 kts and get 2 years. You smuggle a boggie board in a 'hemp made cover' and you get 20+ years. What a f****d up country it is. |
I find it hard to believe that someone as negligent as this has been sentenced to only two years.
Unbelievable, quite unbelievable. If he'd been a terrorist he would have received the death sentence, but being qualified grants him a lighter sentence. Astounding! |
There has been a great deal of pressure around this decision. You have to remember that there is unfortunately a different mindset, absolutely wrong but slowly (glacial pace really) changing. I have met a Pilot who was extremely proud of his 'battle scares', they were from a Twin Otter crash but still indicative of the attitude that permeates the industry.
Komar is still blaming faulty flaps, so what? He should have gone around or diverted to a longer runway if that was the case. A colleague was on a flight a few months ago that nearly over-ran the runway because they couldn't get full landing flaps. They elected to continue a landing at the destination with a 1.5km or more shorter runway and floated down the runway nearly overrunning They could have returned to the departure airport 45 minutes away with a much longer runway. Have seen a morbidly funny photo of a Lion Air MD flight deck with a sticker on the captain's side saying "Not Stabilised? Go-around". Here's hoping this sentence sends a message. |
Screwed?
As sad as it sounds, the Indonesian concept of losing a life is not the same as ours. Call it screwed up (it is!) or call it local culture, but that is not going to change anytime soon.
The only thing to change the Indonesian system is someone at the top telling the rest of them that it is wrong and they need to pick up their game.....I am still waiting and suspect I will be waiting for someone at the top for a long time to say this on air safety.... and all other matters in Indonesia that need direction from the top!:ugh: |
I could NOT agree more with beaver_rotate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Garuda are banned in Europe. Why the hell are they not banned here. Remember all the events that occured at Perth recently? From the 2 go arounds that required ATC intervention, and the other disappearing to the east out of radar coverage?!?! Why are they not banned here? Oh, it's the Indo's.. don't want to upset the indo's... lets give them money. |
"Not Stabilised? Go-around". Interesting sticker. Not a bad idea in every flight deck. |
Double standards
Last January, the Indonesian authorities sentenced an Aussie pilot to 2-3 years in prison because he landed on a province of Papua without the required VISA.
Aussies jailed over joy flight Today, the convicted Garuda pilot got 2 years in jail. Something is wrong here. This makes my blood boil.:ugh: |
All the press reports blame the Captain, saying he ignored automated alerts and warnings from the First Officer. But surely the First Officer is just as culpable as the Captain in this instance. In that he knowingly allowed the Captain to land in a grossly dangerous condition.
Maybe a stint in jail for him also would go a little to breaking down that "loss of face" attitude that has no place in aviation. Maybe some mandatory training in "Taking Over" control of the aircraft from the captain wouldn't go astray. |
It's called FACE.
Mustn't lose it. Most Asians are that way. Pretend it ain't happening. Sentences for us/them... Blame the Dutch. They were such bast*rds for so many years. "It's their turn now". |
Geez, I copped an earful of Ben Sandilands on 2CC in Canberra this morning and did he slam into Garuda and the government. Says the airline should have been in the dock, as well as the pilot, and attacked the Australian government for concentrating on the pilots when it wasn't game to deal with the crappy state of airline safety in Jakarta and the responsibility of the airline for standards.
|
Originally Posted by ultergra
Remember all the events that occured at Perth recently? From the 2 go arounds that required ATC intervention, and the other disappearing to the east out of radar coverage?!?!
Basically they busted altitude, got a little disorientated and had to do go around in Darwin. Sure it's probably human factors. They used to park in the next bay to us almost every morning in Darwin in the wee hours in a 737-400. Let's just say you wouldn't have gotten me on one of their planes, and this is pre Yogyakarta around 2004... |
Garuda are banned in Europe. Why the hell are they not banned here. Apart from the political decision of placing a ban on the airlines of a near and powerful neighbour, there's the consideration of some form of reciprocity. A ban on the use of Indonesian airports probably wouldn't cause much of a ripple (except for the loss of adequate airports for ETOPs operations), but the major impact on Australian aircraft woulkd be the loss of overflight rights - flights cannot avoid Indonesian airspace on routes to Asia and Europe without major impact. Think about it! |
Garuda are banned in Europe. Why the hell are they not banned here. A fair question but the answers are not necessarily logical. I think if you read the post by Ultergra again ,you'll find that his question is a rhetorical one .... If Garuda flights are banned in Europe then there is obviously a problem with Garuda ops from the EU governments point of view and Ultergra is saying that Australia should be concerned with them as well....Think about it! Obviously,The EU don't have as many concerns regarding Indonesia as we do otherwise we would be doing the same.Sometimes it is more prudent to work with someone instead of going head to head. It is ridiculous by our standards that someone (if guilty) receives 20 years plus for a bag with an illegal substance but someone who kills because of incompetence gets 2 years..... Culture has a lot to do with it but so does the home ground advantage....I wonder what the outcome would have been if the pilot had not been a muslim and an Indonesian but instead an Australian christian and maybe a female on top of that...??? |
First Officer Culpability
MrWooby suggests the First Officer should be given a gaol sentence because he was culpable "in that he knowingly allowed the Captain to land in a grossly dangerous condition". He also suggests the F/O should have "Taken Over" control of the aircraft. Just how do you suggest the F/O should have taken control MrWooby? Maybe he could have belted the Captain over the head with a blunt object, or maybe wrestled with the Captain on the controls so that neither had control and everyone perished? The F/O did all he could reasonably have been expected to do in this instance, by expressing his concern with the continued approach and landing, backed up by the aural warnings generated by the aircraft systems. That the Captain ignored both the F/O's concerns, and the automated warnings, is why the Captain was on trial and not the F/O. Pity is the Captain received a mere slap on the wrist and the families of those killed have life sentences.
|
They should have shot the bloody monkey. :mad:
|
and now an Indo Air force F27 down...:ugh::=..these guys are crazy...
|
A first Officer in Garuda would rather rape the Captains wife than mention those dreaded words "Captain you must listen to me" in their culture and religion he would be committing a cardinal sin to take over the controls of the A/C without permission from the Captain. This is a tragedy in itself, as we now all know. I doubt if it will change anything, as it is virtually impossible to seperate state, religion and culture no matter what your job, hard for us to understand, and you have to wonder with all the clackers going nuts, what he was thinking, but loss of face must have had something to do with it, and now with their pilot training going to Bali, they lose the chance of their young pilots understanding that safety and training comes before religion, state or culture, so expect more of the same.
|
7e7100 - agree 100% that the Garuda captain deserves a more severe punishment however you cannot compare the two crimes. The West Irian Jaya (Papua) incident was a border incursion / illegal immigration issue handled under associated laws. Also the pilot (who really did know better than to do what he did) and his passengers were released several weeks ago.
Sadly barrybeebone is correct - the Indonesian culture places a very different value on human life and this will not change in our lifetime. |
The First Officer taking over control is an occurrence which does happen. Most airlines have a set procedure to do this. Usually, manage upwards try to get the Capt to recognise the error and correct for it, if the FO is still not happy with the situation, then a command "YOU MUST GO AROUND", if the Capt doesn't go around, then the FO states "taking over and executes a go-around".
Old Fella, you seem to be saying that it is ok for the FO to just just sit there, knowing that the situation is extremely dangerous and accept the inevitable crash. The above procedure also picks up subtle incapacitation, for example, what if the Capt has a mini stroke on approach and lets the nose drop, airspeed and descent rate increase, the ground starts to rise quickly, we get SINK RATE and GLIDE SLOPE warnings, the FO starts calling out errors, at what stage do you think it is acceptable for the FO to take over ? Qantas had an incident a while back where on approach to a short runway the Capt was going to touchdown well down the runway, not sure about managing upwards etc, but in the end the FO took over, executed the go-around. Sure its a tricky situation, but better to go-around, hand back to the Capt and fly a better approach next time. Any Capt worth his salt will accept the situation for what it was and get on with the job. Taking over is not an easy thing to do, you have to be sure of your situation. But this is what the travelling public expects, competent, and assertive FO's and Captains. By not jailing the FO, the Indonesian authorities have emphasised that they consider the Captain to be totally responsible, and your duties as an FO are limited to advising the Capt. A jail term would have sent a message to FO's that they too are responsible. As others have said on this forum, that ain't gonna happen in Indonesia. But the travelling public need to be made aware of this. Remember, this crash wasn't an approach that was a bit unstable and the Capt had slight handling problems, this was a grossly unstable approach that should have been abandoned very early on. It was a criminal act to continue such an approach. |
one man is responsible for the deaths of 21 people and gets 2 years in prison,
schapelle Corby (guilty or not who really cares) cops 20 years for importing 4.3kg of Canabis, its not as if she hurt anyone. How can you call that a Justice System? |
F/O responsibilities
MrWooby, I did not suggest that the F/O should just sit there and accept the inevitable crash. In fact, I said that the Captain ignored the F/O's expressions of concern with the approach and landing. He did call for a "Go-around", he did point out the instability of the approach. He did not attempt to physically take control, which given his lack of training and the importance placed on the hierarchy in Asia, I can understand. There have been many times where the handling pilot has screwed up the approach and has conducted a missed approach before subsequently landing.
This aircraft left the runway at 110 kts, and unlike the Qantas B744 at Bangkok, which made a "long and hot" touchdown on a contaminated runway and which went off the end at 88 kts, did not have a quagmire to bring it to a stop. The Qantas accident could have been much worse had there not been a very wet and soggy over-run area. Maybe the Garuda F/O could have been more forceful, but to suggest he was culpable is a bit too strong in my view. His situation was not one of taking control from a physically incapacitated handling pilot, although one may contend that he was mentally incapacitated. |
Given the other issues at Garuda I doubt that they have a world leading CRM program in place to help the F/O get through to the Capt let alone guidance on when or how the F/O should take over.
I was in that movie as a junior pilot when the Capt put us in an increadibly dangerous position and I was giving serious consideration to wrestling for control. In the end I did the best to stop us from crashing but short of fighting for control. 15 years on I still don't know if I did the best I could but after many discussions with other pilots I've never had any better suggestions. At the end of the day the Capt must be held responsible for the safety of their aircraft. And when they have been warned by their crew and the aircraft's safety alerts there is no excuse for deliberately crashing their aircraft. |
Lowerlobe you are right, it is better sometimes to work with someone than to go head to head. The EU and US actually have legislated systems where they go around the world looking at country's aviation safety and security systems and then if they are not up to scratch, ban them. The Australian approach is to work with those countries that make these lists if it is in Australian interests.
Rightly or wrongly, this is Australia's role as a middle power. Australia is the nice guy. Being the nice guy has it's benefits and disadvantages, just like the EU and US approach. |
Not read all the posts but....
Jail the Captain and problem solved, management is absolved. Did the Captain behave erratically beforehand? If so why was nothing done? What was in the orders to crew in these circumstances, etc, etc It is a bad outcome for flight safety |
As far as I'm aware this is the first time a pilot has been put in jail here (willing to be proven wrong, and not including pilots that assasinate pax)
If you read most of the accident reports here external factors such as weather are given the majority of the blame. "wind blew the plane off the runway" not "pilot lost control of the aircraft" The 'battle scars' culture is alive and well (that scarred twin otter pilot I think is a B737 pilot now) and that's going to take years to rectify. Also remember when it rains here it's like someone tipping Sydney Harbor on your head with massive CBs and then lots of sharp pointy mountains and short runways so the weather / terrain environment IS inherently more dangerous. Small steps boys and girls ... they ARE trying ! |
aseanaero: quote: "Also remember when it rains here it's like someone tipping Sydney Harbor on your head with massive CBs and then lots of sharp pointy mountains and short runways so the weather / terrain environment IS inherently more dangerous."
Look at the photo's on the day mate, where is the rain? It's clear blue skies. What a lame excuse for actions taken by a captain that killed people!! Once you are holding such a position, you should surely understand the basic concepts of a "stable approach"... "Small steps boys and girls ... they ARE trying !" Clearly not hard enough. This is a pathetic demonstration of their law at work. Inconsistant, illogical and let's wait and see what happens next Ramadan, his sentence will be halved, but others in jail for lesser crimes will have NO reduction in sentences. Pathetic! :ugh: |
Look at the photo's on the day mate, where is the rain? It's clear blue skies. What a lame excuse for actions taken by a captain that killed people!! Once you are holding such a position, you should surely understand the basic concepts of a "stable approach"... My point was weather is a factor here for other types of accidents which is magnified by poor PIC decisions to continue approaches, the Indo accident rate would be statistically higher given the poor infrastructure and bad weather compared to Australia for example Clearly not hard enough. This is a pathetic demonstration of their law at work. Inconsistant, illogical and let's wait and see what happens next Ramadan, his sentence will be halved, but others in jail for lesser crimes will have NO reduction in sentences. |
The whole system failed.
No Flight Data Analysis Program which could have spotted a pattern of unstabalised approaches and alerted the training department to do something about it. Chief Pilot either not aware of unsafe operations or turning a blind eye. Regulator, as above Inadequate CRM training Inadequate aircraft training Poor checking and testing Poor maintenance Etc etc etc In this case there were more holes than cheese and it was almost impossible for them not to line up. BTW Garuda are one of the better Indonesian operators.:uhoh: |
The easiest way to understand their system, I have found, is to imagine the logic of a 10 year old in this country, then transpose it across to almost any system in their country.
|
Old Fella,
I completely DISAGREE with what you are saying. The FO has a responsibility to his crew and passengers to, in this situation, take control of the aircraft and execute a go around. I would expect that of an FO flying with me if I were to place the aircraft in a dangerous situation such as this. The FO must also be punished for failing in his responsibility for passenger and aircraft safety. If it's meant to be 51%/49% in the flight deck, then why does this suddenly change when it comes to culpability.... The FO isn't just there for the ride and should not be allowed to walk away. The incompetence of BOTH crew members resulted in the loss of life, so BOTH should be held responsible. |
In the absence of incapacitation, and there's no evidence of this, the F/O taking over is simplistic.
Just imagine the stoush as two pilots fight over the controls. More than 21 deceased, I'd say. |
I wouldn't fly on Garuda even if they held a gun to my head. I am constantly amazed that Australians continue to fly on what is CLEARLY a very dangerous airline. I feel very sorry for the ones that have no choice (like the one's on that flight) but for the others that do it by choice. Darwin's theory of evolution kicks in. I would rather see the Australian government ban the bastards but if no one flew on them!! Its not going to happen.
That captain should of been put up against the same wall as the Bali bombers. |
Why would there would be a fight for control, I would think that the Captain would be more shocked that his presumptuous FO has taken control than anything else. In that state of initial shock I believe that the Captain would initially just let the FO fly. There would most likely be a bit of heated discussion later and the Capt would demand control, but all the FO is trying to do is to upset the train of events from happening. By starting a go-around you would hope that the capt would continue the MAP and come back for a second attempt.
How did the FO know that his captain wasn't subtly incapacitated incapacitated, the fact that he is awake and flying the aircraft doesn't mean that he is in control of his senses. Surely a pilot who is approaching very high and very fast and not in the landing config, so far out of the slot that it is not funny, displays a complete lack of situational awareness would start to ring alarm bells with the FO. This comes back to the crux of the matter, loss of face. How do you train asian FO's to have enough balls to take over in life and death situations. Western airlines seem to be able to do it. |
Well local Indo pilots didn't think he should be jailed at all
(News) Garuda Indonesia pilot charged with 'deliberately' crashing jet - VR-Zone IT & Lifestyle Forum! Garuda Indonesia pilot charged with 'deliberately' crashing jet YOGYAKARTA, (Indonesia) - THE pilot of an Indonesian passenger jet that crashed last year, killing 21 people, was charged on Thursday with deliberately causing the disaster when he appeared in court. Marwoto Komar, a former captain from flag carrier Garuda Indonesia, could face life in prison if convicted of the charge. He was named a suspect in February over the March 2007 crash of the Boeing 737 with 140 people on board in the central Java city of Yogyakarta. Prosecutors Mudin Aresto and Jamin Susanto charged Komar with three counts of negligence and one of 'deliberately' destroying or damaging an aircraft causing death. The charges carry a maximum sentence of life in prison. The hearing opened with the charges being read out and was then adjourned until August 4 when the defence will get a chance to reply. Komar's lawyer Muhammad Assegaf said his client would fight the charges on the grounds that international civil aviation codes rule out criminal liability for pilots in crashes. 'We will at the very least question why the pilot is being criminalised for an accident. This has not yet happened anywhere in Indonesia or in the world', Mr Assegaf said. 'Punishing the pilot would give rise to fears among pilots that one day they could be treated as a criminal over an aircraft accident', he added. 'It's impossible that a pilot could do this deliberately'. An official government report in November found Komar ignored 15 automated cockpit warnings not to land as he brought the plane in at roughly twice the safe speed, causing the jet to bounce and career off the runway and burst into flames in ricefields. Four Australian government officials and an Australian journalist were among those killed in the crash while following a visit by then Australian foreign minister Alexander Downer, who was on a seperate plane. The Garuda pilot's arrest has angered Indonesian pilots, who have staged protests arguing only aviation experts and not the legal system have the right to determine who was at fault in an accident. Komar was sacked by Garuda in February and has had his pilot's license suspended. Indonesia, which relies heavily on air links across the archipelago, has one of Asia's worst air safety records. -- AFP I couldn't believe there were protests in support of this guy. |
This comes back to the crux of the matter, loss of face. How do you train asian FO's to have enough balls to take over in life and death situations The FO must also be punished for failing in his responsibility for passenger and aircraft safety. If it's meant to be 51%/49% in the flight deck, If you look back into history into some of the accidents in the 50's to 70's there would have been similar accidents where an ego maniac captain totally ignored other members of the crew . The worst one that springs to mind was the KLM 747 accident that took out another jumbo , check and training captain that was god at KLM and initiated a take off without a clearance. A lot of Indonesian cockpits are still in the 'captain is god' era. The rumor mill here mentioned the incentive to try and land off such a stupid approach was a fuel saving bonus , go arounds burn fuel. As Metro Man previously posted in this thread the system failed at all levels. |
F/O "Taking over"
MrWooby and Sockedunnecessarily, please try and understand that in Asian airlines with Asian crews, the Captain is God. You each are totally correct in expecting your F/O to take over from you if they believe you are placing the aircraft and passengers in danger. Neither of you, I presume, are flying for an Asian airline. The Garuda F/O should have felt able to take control, however I would bet he did not because he believed his attempt to take control would be resisted and his career would be in jeopardy. My whole point was that it could have been much worse if there had been a wrestling match over control of the aircraft at a late stage in the approach. Sure, the approach was grossly fast, the aircraft was not properly configured and a go-around should have been carried out. As I said before, it is not the first case where an approach was allowed to be continued when the normal parameters were not being flown. Qantas pilots allowed an approach to continue when the threshold crossing height was high, the airspeed high, the touchdown point well down the runway etc. The F/O, in this case the handling pilot, initiated a go-around which was then aborted by the Captain without advising the F/O, leaving a throttle forward at a value of around 1.50 EPR whilst retarding the other three to idle-reverse. Result, directional control difficulty initially and left the end of the runway at a speed of 88 kts. Flap 25 was used and no thought of full reverse or flap 30 on a contaminated runway. So, even in our flag carrier where "losing face" is not the problem it is in Asia, inappropriate procedures have been used and confusion has occurred. Training was also found to be deficient and Operating Procedures inappropriate. Where do you think the B744 would have ended up had it not been for a very wet and boggy overrun area?
|
A simple and firm yell..... GOING AROUND....AND GEAR IS UP as he pushes the gear lever up and pushes the throttles to 100%.....does the 737 have a TOGA button?
By the time a second or two had elapsed the Captain would not have even had the possibility of trying to land anymore and he would have been forced to go around as the runway disappeared behind them. They were high and fast anyway, so it would have taken very little to get that result. Sure the Captain may have beome very pi$$ed off, but it may have yielded a better outcome...........we will never know! |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:07. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.