SQ006 Revisited
Guest
Posts: n/a
Insider,
Sources have it that the rosters are out for the 1st flight SIN-AMS-ORD, B777 crew named, subject to changes off course. You should know how to verify would you?
Btw, this is way off topic. Can we start a new one, moderator?
[This message has been edited by 7times7 (edited 10 June 2001).]
Sources have it that the rosters are out for the 1st flight SIN-AMS-ORD, B777 crew named, subject to changes off course. You should know how to verify would you?
Btw, this is way off topic. Can we start a new one, moderator?
[This message has been edited by 7times7 (edited 10 June 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
I wonder if the Taiwanese authorities will nail the DFO of SIA who has conveniently changed his title who in my opinion is culpable for this accident beacause of the intimidatory bullying arrogant attitude displayed by him and his lackeys which by ruling by fear meant that airmanship decisions were disregarded rather than accept the consequences of not getting airborne that night.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: berlin
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm new on this forum but I've been following the Singapore Airlines threads with some interest over the past few months.
It seems to me that the MI 185 cover up is merely a precursor to the one about to be attemted over SQ006 and which contributors to the relevant threads have very well documented, presumably in an attempt to prevent such cover up. I do hope that things work out along the lines hoped for by these people who in the main seem professional and well informed, as I hope things turn out well for the SQ006 relatives and survivors - as I think they will if litigation takes place in a US court but I know will not if the action takes place in a Singapore "court".
It seems to me that the MI 185 cover up is merely a precursor to the one about to be attemted over SQ006 and which contributors to the relevant threads have very well documented, presumably in an attempt to prevent such cover up. I do hope that things work out along the lines hoped for by these people who in the main seem professional and well informed, as I hope things turn out well for the SQ006 relatives and survivors - as I think they will if litigation takes place in a US court but I know will not if the action takes place in a Singapore "court".
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Belgium
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you Insider for again an excellent post. Having run around the last 20 years on 4 engines makes me a complete zero on Etops, so I find your postings very educational. I still beleive strongly that a man with your obvious talents should be used in this company. Put in the letter and I know you will get a lot of support!
Guest
Posts: n/a
I can definitely empathise with this pilot as at the time I was employed by SQ this same philosophy was very evident. A couple of times I was called in to see the chief pilot to answer questions which should never have arisen. Had he been anything like a good executive he would have stood up for my decisions, not asked me to explain them. SQ has lead a charmed life over the years, mainly because of the expats who are not subject to the same mind-sets as the locals, plus an incredible amount of luck. The latest two accidents (SilkAir & SQ) have broken the impeccable record and this was bound to happen. It is likely an anathema to SQ to think that any accident to one of their aircraft will in all probability occur in a foreign country where SQ cannot control the investigation or the issuance of findings.
As an example of company thinking, I asked one of the local training captains (who differed radically from the others), what would happen in the event that a copilot deemed it necessary for safety reasons to take over command from a local captain. The reply was “ if he did that and the subsequent lengthy and probably secret investigation found that he (the F/O) was correct in his action, his reputation would be ruined because, to the other locals, he had caused a captain to be disgraced and to lose face. On the other hand if it was found that he was wrong and the situation was not so serious as to warrant his action, he would be declared incompetent and his reputation ruined, along with any promotion prospects”. A “catch 22” situation !
One has only to look at the SQ Flight Safety publication. Whilst full details of other company accidents and incidents are published, no details of any SQ incidents (and there are many) are ever printed – brief references, yes, but full details – never. This on the premise that “other companies might make commercial or political gain from that knowledge”. SQ pilots learn very little from their own company’s safety investigations and this goes against all recognised flight safety philosophies.
When the Flight Safety Foundation held its annual conference in Singapore (hosted by SQ) they were urged to look deeply into the SQ safety philosophy and to ask questions of the line aircrew personnel as well as the management. This was probably not done due to the possible embarrassment it might have caused to SQ.
Until and unless SQ Operations management realise that “saying something does not necessarily make it so” and get behind their crews, demonstrating confidence and loyalty to locals and expats alike, there can never be a true safety culture in this airline.
As an example of company thinking, I asked one of the local training captains (who differed radically from the others), what would happen in the event that a copilot deemed it necessary for safety reasons to take over command from a local captain. The reply was “ if he did that and the subsequent lengthy and probably secret investigation found that he (the F/O) was correct in his action, his reputation would be ruined because, to the other locals, he had caused a captain to be disgraced and to lose face. On the other hand if it was found that he was wrong and the situation was not so serious as to warrant his action, he would be declared incompetent and his reputation ruined, along with any promotion prospects”. A “catch 22” situation !
One has only to look at the SQ Flight Safety publication. Whilst full details of other company accidents and incidents are published, no details of any SQ incidents (and there are many) are ever printed – brief references, yes, but full details – never. This on the premise that “other companies might make commercial or political gain from that knowledge”. SQ pilots learn very little from their own company’s safety investigations and this goes against all recognised flight safety philosophies.
When the Flight Safety Foundation held its annual conference in Singapore (hosted by SQ) they were urged to look deeply into the SQ safety philosophy and to ask questions of the line aircrew personnel as well as the management. This was probably not done due to the possible embarrassment it might have caused to SQ.
Until and unless SQ Operations management realise that “saying something does not necessarily make it so” and get behind their crews, demonstrating confidence and loyalty to locals and expats alike, there can never be a true safety culture in this airline.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Straits Times. 23 March 2002.. .. .Extract from a front-page piece, preparing the Singapore population for the final report of the Taiwanese Aviation Safety Council’s (ASC) analysis phase of its investigation into the SQ006 disaster of 31 October 2000, to be published on or about 30 April 2002:. .. .“Pilots and aviation experts have accepted that the pilot must ultimately take responsibility for his actions, but many will be disappointed if the report fails to highlight the factors that could have contributed to the fatal error.”. .. .Would any of these factors include the effect of a punitive, meritorious Company culture, on the clouding or otherwise of the captain’s judgement, when considering either delaying take-off or departing on schedule, in the middle of the prevailing severe typhoon conditions?
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure whether this thread has been closed down or not - It was last time I looked but maybe the new software has opened it up again?
If it's still active that's good on acount of the fact that there's still plenty of stuff to come out that will need airing, post the Taiwanese final report and the SQ response to it.
If it's still active that's good on acount of the fact that there's still plenty of stuff to come out that will need airing, post the Taiwanese final report and the SQ response to it.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, your post was most infomrative Insider.
Unfortunately I am not, nor try to suggest that I am, in a position to comment on anything said.
I have been folowing up the tragic events on that 31'st day of October in Taipei. One detail escapes me, this may seem a little morbid to be asking and at the risk of offending people I feel compelled to ask this question.
Did any of the flight crew survive this horrible accident?
Any and all reports I can get my hands on do not state whether or not they did.
I would also like to take the time to convey my condolences to any and all involved in the incident.
AR.
Unfortunately I am not, nor try to suggest that I am, in a position to comment on anything said.
I have been folowing up the tragic events on that 31'st day of October in Taipei. One detail escapes me, this may seem a little morbid to be asking and at the risk of offending people I feel compelled to ask this question.
Did any of the flight crew survive this horrible accident?
Any and all reports I can get my hands on do not state whether or not they did.
I would also like to take the time to convey my condolences to any and all involved in the incident.
AR.
