Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

18 Indonesian Pilots Suspended

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

18 Indonesian Pilots Suspended

Old 1st Nov 2006, 02:32
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: singapore
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
18 Indonesian Pilots Suspended

18 Indonesian pilots had thier Licences suspended for busting the visibility minimuns in Indonesian aiports due to the current Haze caused by land clearing by burning. Glad the Indo authorithies are doing something right for a change. Poor chaps though. May have been doing the expected.

Last edited by BYOD; 1st Nov 2006 at 02:52. Reason: adding
BYOD is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2006, 18:22
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Москва/Ташкент
Age: 54
Posts: 922
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by BYOD
18 Indonesian pilots had thier Licences suspended for busting the visibility minimuns in Indonesian aiports due to the current Haze caused by land clearing by burning. Glad the Indo authorithies are doing something right for a change. Poor chaps though. May have been doing the expected.
How many of us, in the name of "commercial expediency" have not succumbed to questionable decisions? I doubt any of us could put our hands up. Lets hope these chaps are not hung out to dry.
flash8 is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 09:25
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: A25R
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wow, a whiter than white pilot.
autobrake3 is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 09:55
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Shh... You know where!
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men".

Never was there a truer saying when it comes to aviation.

I'd guess Pininstauld is an engineer or other ground-based worker rather than a pilot. He either doesn't understand the medium we work in or is one of the 'obedient' ones for a reason.
Nearly Nigel is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 10:40
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 71
Posts: 4,143
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes on 14 Posts
I agree with pininstauld. Are those bean counters going to do your jail time or pay for your loss of licence? I don't think so! They would be the first people to say they didn't ask you to bust minima! The lawyer and jury will see it as black and white, so it's a good idea to treat it as such. Delays, etc are part of the cost of doing business, and they only own you down to the point where it is illegal or unsafe.


Phil
paco is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 11:00
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Shh... You know where!
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Pininstauld
You don't bust minimums or break the law just to save the company money.
On that we are completely agreed and I would admit to having been somewhat derisory and inflammatory in my previous post and I apologise for that.

But the fact remains that I can think of numerous examples where I have been forced to deviate from doing exactly what the rules stated, but nevertheless my (our) actions were completely, utterly and 100% safe and I would do the same thing again. Not for the company's sake, but because common sense dictated that it was the right thing to do at the time.

In the low-fuel (or other emergency) situation, the rules allow me to deviate from the rules anyway if, in my judgement, doing so would be a safer course of action. But that's not really what I'm talking about above and I haven't faced that situation yet.
Nearly Nigel is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 11:21
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Essex
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Pininstauld,as one of those "poor buggers in the back".Thanks.We will be flying from Gatwick 30/11/06 Hope you are up front!What's wrong with doing the right thing?
Gerry Mobbs is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 11:42
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't disagree with your attitudes, however it can be very easy to get on your first-World high horse and comment on what the Indonesians are doing - you do have a slightly different perspective from an Indonesian Captains USD 3,000 a month working under pressure for a crappy airline, though. Your sentiment is admirable, but you know as well as I do that you could list off a string of poor countries and airlines around the world where this can, and does, happen.
bear11 is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 12:51
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Captains USD 3,000 a month
Make that $1500 for left seat MD80

Mutt
mutt is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 13:11
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
AB3 and NN:
Thank you for your enlightening comments. I suspect my experience is not as extensive as yours, as at this point I wouldn't be able to advise others just how far they can safely go beyond limits.
On an approach in low vis, would you say 20% below min vis would be good, or perhaps we could press on to 50% below? Do you think one would be OK 160 feet below MDA on an NDB approach? I'm sorry, I'm just not sure when it gets to the dangerous bit. Could you provide some guidance?
While you're at it, are there any items not listed in the M.E.L./C.D.L. that we likely don't really need for a flight?
Thanks,
prim2

Last edited by prim2; 2nd Nov 2006 at 13:28.
prim2 is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 13:52
  #11 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: singapore
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes Pininstauld, 18 pilots would bust minimums just for fun. After all, they'r just working for fun.
BYOD is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 14:21
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Member of the 32% club.
Posts: 2,412
Received 20 Likes on 10 Posts
Many of the laws and rules in aviation are written in other peoples blood from the harsh lessons learnt after accidents. Do not bust your minima! However, as we all know in amongst all the black and white rules there are always shades of grey. These are the most difficult to judge and deal with and where a professional pilot has to apply large amounts of common sense on the day in question.
How many pilots have carried a minor interrmittant problem for a sector just to snag it at base at the end of the day? A fault is a fault which should be actioned accordingly but how many of us would put an U\s landing light into a tech log and then ADD it down route instead of snag it at home base?
Maybe not the best of examples but not all rules are black and white. If they were it would make life much easier at times. However, as written else where nobody will do you any favours if you have an accident after a mis interpretation of the law. Safety first as always.
Airbrake is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 15:55
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Москва/Ташкент
Age: 54
Posts: 922
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by flash8
How many of us, in the name of "commercial expediency" have not succumbed to questionable decisions? I doubt any of us could put our hands up. Lets hope these chaps are not hung out to dry.

Originally Posted by Pininstauld
......But what we definitely don't need in this day and age, in a public forum. is people who (sounding vaguely like they might be from the flight-deck) want to argue that it is acceptable to break the law (however marginally) to suit the needs of the bean counters. .... It's shameful behaviour, and shame on you too for making such a remark as the one above.
Did I advocate breaking the law?

I don't think you'll find I did. You seem to be making up your own questions and answers here. A Questionable decision may well be within the realms of the law. I don't advocate and certainly wouldn't execute an approach with viz below minima btw.

.

Last edited by flash8; 2nd Nov 2006 at 16:06. Reason: spelling
flash8 is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 16:08
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: A25R
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Common sense has served me well, I'll strap in behind Nearly Nigel any day.

Last edited by autobrake3; 3rd Nov 2006 at 12:26.
autobrake3 is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 16:31
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: US
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mutt
Make that $1500 for left seat MD80

Mutt
You've got to be kidding......right?
KC135777 is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 21:02
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Perth Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
Smile

The pressures placed on Pilots from many cultures are from the completely black ages as distinct from just the dark ones.
These could well have been"caught" by some buracrat looking at the ATIS and then the Pilots/aircraft who landed in the time frame of the reduced vis.
We all know the ATIS is constructed by a system sometimes removed geographically and structurally from reality in Indonesia.

There is the rub, we as Pilots do our bit, staying safe as best we know and the rest try to make it hard.
"You should not be tired Captain, you have had minimum rest"
Visibility 4000m on ATIS, Aircraft making missed approaches at Jakarta, no change to the Vis as the ATIS can only be changed by the Met man, who is at prayer!!!
VOR Notam as U/S, "make VOR approach", sorry no can do, "visibility too bad for visual, make VOR approach".
Financial penality for non completed sectors due ANY reason.
Engineer asking to look at forecast to write off Radar snag, in pooring rain!!!
Poor tyre tread, "there are at least 6 landings left Capt", the aircraft was scheduled for 14 in the day before return, "I will get Ops to reduce the landings scheduled"
Nil Barstardum Carborundum

Stay safe if you can, stay very safe if you can't.

greybeard is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2006, 21:36
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Pin:

Actually, I was in full agreement with you. My earlier post was dripping with sarcasm.

Regards,

prim2
prim2 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2006, 14:19
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Was the RVR valid?

At some of the Indonesian airports they have the RVR transmissometers that work by assessing reflected light. They only give valid readings when the visibility is reduced by water vapour. When the visibility is reduced by smoke particles they are totally useless and should not be used. The manufacturer says so.

Typically the ATIS will be Vis 8000m in smoke, RVR 400m.

If these guys have been prosecuted for busting a RVR that is not valid and should not have been reported then they have my sympathy. If they have been busting legitimate minima then "more fool them" and they deserve to be prosecuted.

Maybe we should find out the facts before we burn them at the stake.
SeniorFelineOfficer is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2006, 08:19
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Prior to 1998, Indonesian ATC had the authority to close airports if the RVR was below minima. When a number of airports remained closed for over a month, this authority was removed and given to flight crews.

Following an incident this year when an aircraft landed long following a late visual, the Indonesian VP got involved, he gave the authority back to the ATC in certain airports. It was during this period that crews were accused of busting minima.

So there you have it, the crews state that they were visual, above minima in a stable approach, ATC say that it was below minima. If the same thing happened today, ATC have the authority to close the airport but at that time the authority was with the crew!


Mutt
mutt is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2006, 03:49
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As I came from Indonesia, I have to inform that it's not 100% pilots fault. Having heard from colleagues that flying for some low budget airlines in Indonesia can be very dangerous..

It's not just about the salary that Mutt has mention before. The more difficult challanges come from the Airlines managements. So many pressure for our fellow pilots, including: lack of rest hour, "on time performance" policy, poor maintainance of the A/C, etc... And they don't have the rights to fight this situation.

I don't know with you guys out there, but me-myself can't imagine how it feels to do up to 6 landing in a day. What'll happen if the 6th approach is conducted at small airport, limited runway, and below minima visibility...? Will the pilots choose to go around and go to alternate, with the consequence that there will be the 7th landing? I don't think so, they're too tired to do that...

I choose to blame the government and authorities that allow such Airlines to operate. Well, let's hope this is the momentum for us Indonesian to learn to put Safety above all...

Regards...
Wanches is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.