APNG dismal record
 

The APNG Accident and death list:

• 15 December 1992. A Britten-Norman Islander aircraft struck a mountain near Alotau, Papua New Guinea. 6 people killed.

• 12 July 1995. Shortly after takeoff from Dagura Airport, the Twin Otter aircraft exploded and crashed into shallow water. 13 people killed.

• 11 May 1996. Britten-Norman Islander flew into a valley surrounded by high terrain near Oumba. Pilot attempted a 180 degree turn, but crashed into trees. 1 passenger killed.

• 9 July 1996. Twin Otter aircraft struck a mountain in cloudy conditions on approach to Mendi. 20 people killed.

• 29 July 2004. Twin Otter crashed near Ononge, in cloudy conditions. 2 people killed.

• 11 August 2009. Flight 4684, a Twin Otter, made a failed go-around in cloudy conditions near Kokoda. The aircraft crashed into a mountain at an altitude of 5500 feet (1676 metres). All 13 people killed.

• 13 October 2011. An Airlines PNG Dash 8-100, registration P2-MCJ, operating flight CG1600 from Lae to Madang (Papua New Guinea), crashed about 20 km south of Madang and caught fire, 28 of the 32 people aboard killed.

Plus;
• One incident in which a plane veered off the runaway during take off.

• An incident where a plane becoming bogged in wet ground.

• And another aircraft that had a flat tyre and damage to a wheel fairing.

Total = 82 dead.

I wonder whether some of these statistics are included in tomorrow's Board Report along with all the financial statistics? The last 2 accidents they have had has seen an increase in the amount of people killed. And the CAA is going to allow them to add ATR's?? The stakes get higher?

without splitting hairs, there is a difference between MBA and APNG which is not mentioned in the APNG dismal record post

But, Troppo, was it not the same family directing the show in both cases?
APNG grew from MBA.
Corporate 'culture' begins at the very top. This includes pilot selection, training, checking, promotion, the application or otherwise of commercial pressure, and so on.
Not wishing to defend pilots when they make fatal errors of judgement, but all too often the investigators stop simply with 'pilot error' and don't delve far enough into other underlying causes.
Cynics may consider their fatality rate to be acceptable, given the domestic hours and number of passengers flown, but to the bereaved it is no doubt far from acceptable.

paragraph377,
I have first hand knowledge of both the in flight fire accident in 1995 and the CFIT near Mendi in 1996.when the PF collided with the only piece of cumulus granite masked from view, the medical report stated the possibility of heart attack. The company I worked for recovered the body bags. In the Mendi case, 19 souls in 7 or 8 bags.

Niether of these can be slated to the Wild family or company.
The other accidents listed, especially the recent fatalaties at Madang and Kokoda were pilot error, no matter what the excuse for they making the error.
How can you make this the responsibility of the Wild family?

Mach
There was at the time more to it though and that statement is a bit of a stretch in some respects. There are however some lines being blurred. A company is a company, a legal entity. I don't see how any of the accidents prior to 1997 can be called APNG accidents.

Tolakuma manki
Your lack of understanding about accountability and root cause and contributing causes is concerning. Both accidents in which you refer to as being 'crew error' being the cause, does not absolve a company's CEO or Board of directors from accountability under the corporations act. The causal factors in both of these accidents involves crew ability, training and other factors that lead up to their errors. For some of those errors the company is very accountable, namely its senior people.
As for the Wild family, I'm not singling them out. In fact I didn't even mention their names and I really don't care who owns, part owns, or doesn't own APNG. I'm talking about the company and its accountable people which as I said before includes a Board (not all are part of the Wild family), and the then serving CEO and the current CEO (also not Wild family members).

Even if we remove the MBA accidents you still have Madang and Kokoda with a total of 41 deaths, in 2 high profile accidents in just over a 2 year period and both under the APNG airline name.
By my books that is a shocking record, no matter how one might try to dress it up.

Finally somebody understands. Well done Mach E Avelli.

Sorry, I just deleted my post because you more or less beat me to it.
I have added a bit to post #220 to reflect original thoughts.

Para377,
From researching your posts, it seems you have an inbuilt antaganism toward aviation operators and owners.
Be that as it may, you would be aware that the corporate entity is not the accountable manager for aviation.
APNG employs many PNG countrymen and women as well as foreigners, you may do well to temper your bias against them on this a public forum.

Most in the industry here know, understand what occured, you are being purposely obtuse.

Not familiar with the Kokoda accident but a manager should not be held responsible for intentional or stupid actions of a pilot unless there was real reason to believe that it was inevitable and the manager was aware.

I doubt you would be telling the authorities to put yourself in jail if your child decided to sexually assault someone.

tolakuma manki
No, wrong again. I have an inbuilt hatred of any government body or company that lies, deceives, twists, perverts or covers over the truth. Dead pilots can't speak. Dead passengers can't speak. I try to defend the innocent and if that means my comments about some airlines lack of accountability upset some folk then so be it, I make no apologies.
Also
How dare you play that attempted trump card. I hold no bias against the good people at APNG, none whatsoever, never have and never will. And just in case the racist card gets played, I married someone from the middle east, have flown in Australia, NZ, PNG and the USA, and some of my best friends are from the same countries I have mentioned, as well as Singapore, Alaska and China.

JammedStab
Hard for you to make a comment about Kokoda if you are not familiar with it? So here we go again. Pilot error is rarely the sole cause of an accident. Just as an example only, if pilot error is determined to have been caused by fatigue (shoddy rostering), inadequate or incorrect training, organisational bullying or pressure, or other organisational factors then the organisation is accountable, not just the pilots.

To assist you, please refer back to the Concord crash (link below). An Air France Concord crashes in Paris, yet Continental Airlines and one of its Engineers narrowly escape jail;

Continental Airlines and engineer John Taylor fined over French Concorde crash | Mail Online

Sorry guys, you need to start looking outside the box and start drilling down. And while you are criticizing me, please don't forget the families, friends and loved ones who eternally mourn the loss of the forever departed. And yes, I do know how that feels.

I don't intend on starting a slinging match, but if you two guys serve in management roles in any airline....well something like this will happen again.

Para377
You are wrong as well as being purposely obtuse.

APNG Voluntary suspension from official quotation 4/7/14
 

Latest update below:

http://www.pomsox.com.pg/dimages/com...fs/28_2326.pdf

Some other media reports on the accident:

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2014-0...-crash/5530664

http://www.emtv.com.pg/news-app/item/airlines-png

http://pidp.org/pireport/2014/June/06-17-14.htm

http://www.jacdec.de/2014/06/16/2011...of-madang-png/

Now you are just making yourself look like an idiot with stupid statements.

As a former Dash 8 pilot and retired after 43 years of flying, I have been following this thread with great interest.
All I can say guys is; there but for the grace of god go I.
If lucky you will never be faced with anything like this in your entire career. If not so lucky, be ready for it, know your re-call drills and aircraft systems. Practice a glide approach occasionally. You are only as good as you are on the day. And that applies to all of us.

Crackup...first sensible post I've seen...didn't know any one with common sense still existed...be careful the thought police will get you...

However what you say is very true we are only ever a nano second away from disaster, the real issue here in my view was that the aircraft should never have had the ability to do this in flight and when it was first brought to light it should have been fixed

E&H, I agree with you 100% that the real issue of this thread is the lack of corrective action taken as soon as the design fault was discovered. In fairness to the company I was flying for at the time, they started the process of fitting the beta lock-out system immediately after becoming aware of the severity of the problem. I do not wish to go into the debate regarding airworthiness bulletins and directives. The message of my previous posting was purely intended as helpful advice to the up-coming young guy, or young lady, who one day may be faced with having to deal with a catastrophic outcome resulting from a shortfall in the system they work under or any other cause.
Not saying that this is how it happened, but I can see how easy it would be to inadvertently select beta in the Dash 8, given the situation: Hand over the power leavers, large positive G bump, followed rapidly by a severe negative G bump. The out of control fingers would only have to catch under those latches and the rest is history. Prior to the APNG accident, like most, I was blissfully unaware of that potential.

Hear Hear.

It makes you wonder about the original Type Certification, and then the subsequent reluctance of the OEM to address the situation when it became apparent. It took several years before the National Authority mandated a fix, which became available in the form of a Service Bulletin. The FAA required it much earlier, and with hindsight the other jurisdictions should have followed suit in the name of Safety.

Regards to ya all, Big E.

Some Common Sense
 

Gents

We must all realize that aircraft of this vintage, that were designed around the PW100 Series engines, were capable of this.
Some of these Types ran into problems in the early days when PT6 experienced pilots "assumed" the PW100 engines governed props all the way to max reverse as the PT6 did.
Fast forward 25 or so years...and BINGO, it happens again. While the decision to protect the pilot from inFlt Beta has been taken by the Regulators, it does not excuse the pilots who routinely use it during flight from being the cause. In the case of the PNG accident, there was no significant turbulence, and why would he have his fingers near the triggers at 10,000 ft anyways (not to mention it is an unnatural arm position to have your fingers grip the triggers). UNLESS, of course, that it was common practice.
If he had used this little 'trick' in the circuit, and didn't understand how the prop controls worked and repeats the 'trick' at Vmo...BOOM!
Let's use a little common sense and follow the instructions.
Pilots shouldn't ALWAYS need automation to be protected from themselves.

Hi Poncho73,
I was not aware that this “little trick” was ever practiced knowingly and willingly. Thanks for filling me in on it but I don’t think I’ll try it. I’m no fan of Airbus philosophy and heartily agree with you that pilots shouldn’t always need automation to be protected from themselves, but giving this particular design flaw to pilots to play with seems akin to giving a loaded pistol with no safety catch to children.