Silk Air MI 185 - Court commences in Singapore
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Singapore
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder whether Capt Ganapathy and Capt Leong had felt embarrassed in the way they defended SilkAir and themselves in the court. Ganapathy had been pretty consistent in giving tha same answers since the release of interim report in April 1999 though.
Perhaps both of them felt helpless as well since whole SilkAir management had changed guards after the crash and left 2 of them to fend for themselves.
Perhaps both of them felt helpless as well since whole SilkAir management had changed guards after the crash and left 2 of them to fend for themselves.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Pathetic and very sad...
The whole entire event and the past three plus years actions and words by all involved are simply, to say the least..in my humble opinion, a tragedy.
If it wasn't so serious and lives had not been lost and lives of hundreds of relatives and friends of the deceased so tragically effected, it would make a good comedy of errors..
The whole entire event and the past three plus years actions and words by all involved are simply, to say the least..in my humble opinion, a tragedy.
If it wasn't so serious and lives had not been lost and lives of hundreds of relatives and friends of the deceased so tragically effected, it would make a good comedy of errors..
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Madras,India
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pathetic is an understatement. Their whole attitude is pitiable.
But look at the plus points!! The aviation world has learnt a lot from experts of Wright Brother vintage.
1) We have a French expert who is probably the only one in the world who has ever flown in a simulator with "Presuurised" cabin. If not , how would he have been scared along with his co-pilot, when the pressurisation failed , during a SIM session? Or, as the experts have stated in their deposition, "scaring co-pilots" is acceptable!!
2) We have a Geriatric expert from UK, who questions the veracity of the "Ugly Americans"!!
First, he says that the NTSB has cooked up the Radar plot. Then, he questions the Boeing procedure!! If Boeing is to follow his expert opinion, they have to re-write the Non-normal procedure for cracked window pane. The Boeing 737 QRH has no restriction for "outer"pane crack. But the Silkair expert says that has caused an explosive decompression.
Probably, the co-pilot was too scared ( just like many of the others who flew with Tsu), to react to a series of failures caused by imaginary electrical failures--CVR/FDR/Autopilot/Autothrottle/ thrust levers moving to full thrust position/ stab trim moving to full down position/ outer window pane crack resulting in pressurisation failure. Well, I think all of us who are flying around haven't learnt anything!!!
But look at the plus points!! The aviation world has learnt a lot from experts of Wright Brother vintage.
1) We have a French expert who is probably the only one in the world who has ever flown in a simulator with "Presuurised" cabin. If not , how would he have been scared along with his co-pilot, when the pressurisation failed , during a SIM session? Or, as the experts have stated in their deposition, "scaring co-pilots" is acceptable!!
2) We have a Geriatric expert from UK, who questions the veracity of the "Ugly Americans"!!
First, he says that the NTSB has cooked up the Radar plot. Then, he questions the Boeing procedure!! If Boeing is to follow his expert opinion, they have to re-write the Non-normal procedure for cracked window pane. The Boeing 737 QRH has no restriction for "outer"pane crack. But the Silkair expert says that has caused an explosive decompression.
Probably, the co-pilot was too scared ( just like many of the others who flew with Tsu), to react to a series of failures caused by imaginary electrical failures--CVR/FDR/Autopilot/Autothrottle/ thrust levers moving to full thrust position/ stab trim moving to full down position/ outer window pane crack resulting in pressurisation failure. Well, I think all of us who are flying around haven't learnt anything!!!
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Singapore
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From www.news.com.au
SIA shifts suspect directors
By ERIC ELLIS
26 July 2001
SINGAPORE Airlines has made a subtle but telling power shift to its
board of directors that seems designed to assuage regulatory concerns
about its bid to win Air New Zealand and Ansett Airlines.
As criticism mounts about the connections between Singapore's government
and the island's premier companies, as they diversify into more rigorous
regulatory environments, three directors with close government links
have quietly resigned.
Gone from the SIA board are Moses Lee, the permanent secretary of
Singapore s Health Ministry, Major-General Raymund Ng, the recent former
head of Singapore's Air Force, and former head of Singapore's secret
police Tjong Yik Min.
Their departure will go some way towards advancing Singapore's claims to
Canberra and Wellington that government and business are not connected
here, despite the ownership of strategic operations by government
investments companies.
The military man Major-General Ng and internal security apparatchik Mr
Tjong seem the most telling departures.
The executive president of Singapore Press Holdings, Singapore's
near-monopoly print media company, Mr Tjong is also the chairman of
Singapore's aviation regulator, the Civil Aviation Authority of
Singapore.
The CAAS has been a bidder to manage Sydney Airport and owns a stake in
the company that manages Auckland Airport. Sydney and Auckland are the
main hubs of Air New Zealand and Ansett, the two Singapore Airlines
targets.
Mr Tjong has been criticised by foreign analysts for sitting on both
boards simultaneously, given that SIA monopolises Singapore's aviation
sector.
Singapore Airlines public relations officer Innes Willox has denied Mr
Tjong had any conflict of interest but some analysts have argued there
would be very few matters before either board that would not affect the
other.
Mr Tjong is one of Singapore's more controversial figures, a former
schoolmate of Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and a long-time head
of the Internal Security Department, which has frequently used its
state-sanctioned powers of arrest and detention without trial to round
up local dissidents.
A career civil servant, he joined both the SIA and CAAS boards, as well
as that of SPH, without previous experience in aviation or publishing.
It is quite common in Singapore for civil servants and parliamentarians
to sit on the boards of big government-owned companies such as SIA and
Singapore Telecommunications, both now bidding for strategic Australian
assets.
The management and board of SIA is littered with ex-Singapore military
personnel. Air force chief Major-General Ng was also a director of the
aviation regulator.
However, as so-called Singapore Inc companies push offshore there is a
move under way on the island to open up the notoriously cosseted
business world.
[ 26 July 2001: Message edited by: Picard ]
[ 26 July 2001: Message edited by: Picard ]
SIA shifts suspect directors
By ERIC ELLIS
26 July 2001
SINGAPORE Airlines has made a subtle but telling power shift to its
board of directors that seems designed to assuage regulatory concerns
about its bid to win Air New Zealand and Ansett Airlines.
As criticism mounts about the connections between Singapore's government
and the island's premier companies, as they diversify into more rigorous
regulatory environments, three directors with close government links
have quietly resigned.
Gone from the SIA board are Moses Lee, the permanent secretary of
Singapore s Health Ministry, Major-General Raymund Ng, the recent former
head of Singapore's Air Force, and former head of Singapore's secret
police Tjong Yik Min.
Their departure will go some way towards advancing Singapore's claims to
Canberra and Wellington that government and business are not connected
here, despite the ownership of strategic operations by government
investments companies.
The military man Major-General Ng and internal security apparatchik Mr
Tjong seem the most telling departures.
The executive president of Singapore Press Holdings, Singapore's
near-monopoly print media company, Mr Tjong is also the chairman of
Singapore's aviation regulator, the Civil Aviation Authority of
Singapore.
The CAAS has been a bidder to manage Sydney Airport and owns a stake in
the company that manages Auckland Airport. Sydney and Auckland are the
main hubs of Air New Zealand and Ansett, the two Singapore Airlines
targets.
Mr Tjong has been criticised by foreign analysts for sitting on both
boards simultaneously, given that SIA monopolises Singapore's aviation
sector.
Singapore Airlines public relations officer Innes Willox has denied Mr
Tjong had any conflict of interest but some analysts have argued there
would be very few matters before either board that would not affect the
other.
Mr Tjong is one of Singapore's more controversial figures, a former
schoolmate of Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and a long-time head
of the Internal Security Department, which has frequently used its
state-sanctioned powers of arrest and detention without trial to round
up local dissidents.
A career civil servant, he joined both the SIA and CAAS boards, as well
as that of SPH, without previous experience in aviation or publishing.
It is quite common in Singapore for civil servants and parliamentarians
to sit on the boards of big government-owned companies such as SIA and
Singapore Telecommunications, both now bidding for strategic Australian
assets.
The management and board of SIA is littered with ex-Singapore military
personnel. Air force chief Major-General Ng was also a director of the
aviation regulator.
However, as so-called Singapore Inc companies push offshore there is a
move under way on the island to open up the notoriously cosseted
business world.
[ 26 July 2001: Message edited by: Picard ]
[ 26 July 2001: Message edited by: Picard ]
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Less than two months prior to the MI tragedy, Singapore "gave" Indonesia 10 Billion dollars in aid, to counter an economic collapse, and to revive their flagging rupiah.
Subsequently, the then corrupt president Suharto and his cronies, were of course fully compliant with the requests from the Singapore authorities to fudge, smudge and distort the investigation into MI 185.
The money that Singapore president Goh Chok Tong gleefully handed over to Indonesia was rumoured to have come from the Central Provident fund(CPF), a retirement scheme for Singapore's workforce. The ten billion dollars has never been accounted for, nor any mention made or requested for its repayment by Indonesia. Even at the time, the "loan" was considered " much larger than expected" especially from an economy suffering its own financial hardships..
We in the West hope that the truth will be revealed. When colossal sums of money are involved in Asia, anything but is likely to be the outcome.
Subsequently, the then corrupt president Suharto and his cronies, were of course fully compliant with the requests from the Singapore authorities to fudge, smudge and distort the investigation into MI 185.
The money that Singapore president Goh Chok Tong gleefully handed over to Indonesia was rumoured to have come from the Central Provident fund(CPF), a retirement scheme for Singapore's workforce. The ten billion dollars has never been accounted for, nor any mention made or requested for its repayment by Indonesia. Even at the time, the "loan" was considered " much larger than expected" especially from an economy suffering its own financial hardships..
We in the West hope that the truth will be revealed. When colossal sums of money are involved in Asia, anything but is likely to be the outcome.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I have no doubt in my mind that the truth of what really happened will be revealed...It may take a little longer than hoped but, rest assured, whilst the families of SilkAir MI 185 are still alive, the matter will not go away...
We may go a little quiet from time to time because there is nothing we can say or do at that time, but rest assured...we will continue to persevere...We owe it to those we lost on 19th December 1997...
We may go a little quiet from time to time because there is nothing we can say or do at that time, but rest assured...we will continue to persevere...We owe it to those we lost on 19th December 1997...
