Indonesian B737 runway overrun/crash

[Another Number]

The pilot of Garuda Flight 200, which crashed and burned killing 21 people in March, has now been officially named as a suspect in an investigation by Indonesian police.

A week ago police in Yogyakarta summoned the pilot for questioning over manslaughter allegations.
Now, Indonesia's National Police Chief General Sutanto has been asked whether Captain Komar is yet officially a suspect, and he replied "Yes, he is".
Under Indonesia's legal system, being named as a suspect is one step short of being charged with a crime.

(ABC News)

[blakkekatte]

air force fobs off police

From the Sydney Morning Herald http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/gar...764171806.html

PROSECUTION of the Garuda pilot who crashed in Yogyakarta last year is being hindered by the Indonesian Air Force blocking access to the air traffic controllers who supervised the landing.
Police have to wind up their investigation this month, but have not been able to interview the controllers.
The interviews could be a key element in the case against Captain Marwoto Komar, as police have been denied access to the cockpit and radio voice recordings of the landing.
An earlier air safety inquiry said the recordings showed Captain Komar ignored 15 warnings that he was approaching too fast and that the landing should be aborted. International aviation protocols prevent police from using the recordings.
The Yogyakarta chief of detectives, Aridono Sukmanto, who is heading the investigation, told the Herald he needed the flight crew and controllers to confirm the reported details of the landing.
Colonel Aridono said he was concerned that failure to interview the controllers could mean there was insufficient evidence for a successful manslaughter prosecution.
It is unclear if the controllers warned the pilot to abort, but initial reports suggested they believed the plane was approaching too fast.
Yogyakarta Airport's operations are controlled by the air force, which may be embarrassed by safety deficiencies exposed after the March 7 crash which killed 21 people, including five Australians.
Colonel Aridono said his team had just returned from a successful visit to Australia, where it interviewed survivors and aviation experts.
"On the other hand, we are still unable to obtain information from the air traffic controllers," he said.
Interview requests had been ignored by air force officials, prompting police to write to the chief of the air force more than a month ago. He had not yet replied, Colonel Aridono said.
"We must finish our work by the end of this month," he said.
The air force spokesman did not respond to calls from the Herald yesterday.
Colonel Aridono confirmed Captain Komar was the only suspect in the case, which he wanted to take to court.
"We already have a suspect but we are still collecting evidence to support our argument that he be held responsible for what he did.
"We are serious about handling this case and our police chiefs are also serious about it."
Indonesia's police chief has taken a direct interest in the case. The Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, has told Indonesian officials he expected the investigation to be "prosecuted to the absolute full".
One Australian journalist and four officials involved in a visit by the former foreign affairs minister, Alexander Downer, died when the plane overshot the runway and caught fire.
Colonel Aridono said he planned to use the co-pilot as a witness against Captain Komar and had scheduled a final interview with him this week. Captain Komar would be re-interviewed shortly, he said.
At the end of the month, police will meet prosecutors and senior government officials to decide how to proceed with any prosecution.
As well as the controllers, police are waiting to interview two air safety investigators, but they have already agreed to be interrogated, Colonel Aridono said.
The official aviation report into the crash stated the Boeing 737 was travelling at almost twice the maximum safe speed when it touched down.

[The_Steed]

How long would you have after touchdown to decide "there's not enough runway to stop" and could you still initiate a go-around?

[PK-KAR]

Well, IMHO, they do not need to interview the tower controllers.
The recording transcripts from the ATC are available (the ones used in the report, hence can be used as evidence), if they know where to look. It was already circulating around by the first weekend after the accident. The information was also signed, and therefore a legal document.

But again, whether it would be enough for the investigation to go to court, I dunno.

How long would you have after touchdown to decide "there's not enough runway to stop" and could you still initiate a go-around?

Between the time you touchdown and the time the reversers are deployed. After reversers are deployed, don't count on Lady Luck to give you a safe go-around... her job is to give you luck until reversers... *grin*

PK-KAR

[mini]

Sydney Morning Herald reporting that the Captain has been charged:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/gar...090334630.html

[exeng]

The Captains Been Charged - Bad news for him and no better for the rest of Joe Public

Clearly there are issues that need to be addressed from the 'Accountable Manager' down, including training, recruitment issues etc,etc. 'Local culture' could just possibly be an issue, maybe not.

Charging the Captain will solve nothing at all. I'll just wait for the next one to spike in. We've seen it all before and, unless I'm much mistaken, we'll see it all again.


Regards
Exeng

[captjns]

Unhappy landings for garuda skipper.

http://www.thewest.com.au/aapstory.a...oryName=457056

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...efer=australia

[IcePack]

Proves the point that in Aviation the buck stops at the Captain and he ends up carrying the can. One of the many reasons why airlines should pay decent salaries. This point seems to be forgotten by many airline CEO's.
However criminally charging crews for their mistakes, will make future air accident investigation even harder as I guess in future pilots will want a lawyer present before answering any questions. I thought this lesson had be learnt years ago.

[blakkekatte]

Pilot forced to resign

http://www.theage.com.au/news/nation...788539258.html

THE pilot who crashed a Garuda plane attempting to land at Yogyakarta Airport last year has quit, after an ultimatum from the airline to resign or be sacked.

Garuda's ultimatum came as police sources confirmed to The Age that they have recommended negligent manslaughter charges against Marwoto Komar in a case report handed to Indonesian prosecutors.

Twenty-one people, including five Australians, died when Komar ignored 15 cockpit alarms to abandon the landing as he descended at twice the maximum safe speed on March 7.

The Boeing 737 overshot the runway, crashing through a fence before bursting into flames. A final report by safety regulators said the pilot was so "fixated" with landing he ignored alarms and the pleas of his co-pilot.

Komar's lawyer said yesterday that his client had resigned. "We regret Garuda so soon giving Marwoto the option of being fired or resigning," Kamal Firdaus said.
Komar was arrested over the crash early this month. He was granted bail on February 15.

Police have recommended he face negligence charges carrying a maximum seven-year term, sources confirmed.

Komar is believed to be the first pilot to face criminal charges over a plane crash in Indonesia.

[Teal]

Yogyakarta Airport in safety breach when Garuda jet crashed

From today in crikey.com.au

Yogyakarta Airport in safety breach when Garuda jet crashed

Ben Sandilands writes:

Investigations by an aviation auditing firm that advises major firms about the risks of flying in other countries has found that Yogyakarta Airport was in breach of its major safety obligations -- and therefore effectively unlicensed -- when a Garuda jet crashed there on 7 March 2007 killing 21 people, including five Australians.
The discovery, by Flight Safety Pty Ltd, has potentially massive implications for the pursuit of compensation by those injured and maimed in the crash and the relatives of those killed.
The owner and CEO of the firm, Colin Weir, says the Australian Transport Safety Bureau is also compromised by the findings.
Weir’s statement, published below, also raises questions as to what is really happening to the $12 million worth of Australian aid pledged after the crash to assist Indonesia in repairing its air safety deficiencies:

We were called in to audit Garuda Airlines by a company that does business in the republic immediately after the accident, with terms of reference that included a systems analysis tasking to identify failures that caused the accident.
The audit findings included deficiencies identified with airport limitations and this then led into a requirement for us to audit some of the regional airports to assess the status quo. We audited Solo, Yogyakarta and Semarang Airports.
What we found was very disturbing; these three airports had invalid Airport Operating Certificates, in effect they were unlicensed. At the time of the Yogyakarta accident the Airport’s licence was null and void.
The DGCA (Indonesian Regulatory Authority) had issued a licence valid for 5 years, but subject to 5 conditions being met within 12 months. This period lapsed in July 2006 and the accident happened 6 months later. The conditions included a stipulation that the RESA (Runway End Safety Area) would be extended and that the DGCA would audit 6 months later and then at the end of the 12 month period. None of these requirements was done rendering the licence null and void.
Our client would not allow us to release the report because it was too sensitive, but eventually after about 3 months it leaked out in Indonesia, only to be quickly covered up as the repercussions were enormous.
We notified ICAO, the International Civil Aviation Organisation in Montreal and they informed us that it was under control as the ATSB (Australian Transport Safety Bureau) was handling everything in Jakarta. I then contacted the ATSB in Jakarta and it turned out that they were unaware that Yogyakarta was unlicensed as their audit immediately after the accident had not uncovered the licensing failure. The reason for this was that they had only been given the front page of the airport certificate and had missed the small print at the bottom of the page referring to the conditions in question.
We were then told by the Indonesian Director of Aviation Safety that the deficiencies had been rectified, however we have just conducted a re-audit only to find that there is no change to Solo and Yogyakarta.
The final conclusion reached is that everyone is keeping quiet; the ATSB, ICAO and Indonesian authorities are all compromised.
The families of the victims in this accident are unaware of these failings and the associated liability implications with legal action and potential insurance claims.
It should now be exposed as the safety issues remain unresolved.
Colin Weir

The ATSB has been invited to comment, but made no reply by Crikey's deadline this morning.

[cambruzzo]

ABC Aus News Report on Yogyakarta Airport licence

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...23/2283393.htm

Above reported widely on ABC news this morning

Yogyakarta airport unlicensed at time of crash: report

Posted Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:44pm AEST
Updated Mon Jun 23, 2008 9:53pm AEST
Five Australians died when the Boeing 737 bounced and skidded off the runway. (Reuters: Pentak Lanud Adisucipto)

• Audio: Yogyakarta airport unlicensed during Garuda crash: report (PM)

Indonesia's Yogyakarta airport was operating without a licence due to outstanding safety issues when a Garuda plane crashed last year, killing 21 people, an Australian air safety firm has found.
Flight Safety Pty Ltd, which carried out an audit of the airport following a request from an unnamed client, said authorities had failed to implement five conditions for a licence, including extending the runway and safety area.
State carrier Garuda's Boeing 737, with 140 people on board, bounced and skidded off the runway in Yogyakarta, central Java, before bursting into flames in a rice field in March 2007.
Five Australians were killed in the crash.
The aviation safety firm said Yogyakarta's operating licence had ended on August 1, 2006 - eight months before the crash - because it had failed to fulfil the five conditions for the five-year licence issued by Indonesian authorities.
An Indonesian safety official denied the airport was functioning without a licence.
"At that time [the licence] was still valid, but the RESA [Runway End Safety Area] was not long enough," Mardjono Siswo Suwarno of the National Transport Safety Committee said.
"But still in the [Garuda] case, even if the RESA length was adequate, the plane would have still overrun because the speed was 1.8 times normal speed."
Last year, an Indonesian safety report said the pilot ignored 15 warnings as he descended too fast, but declined to attribute the crash to "human error" or "pilot error".
The final report into the crash concluded that airport deficiencies were not responsible for the accident, although investigators concede that an adequate safety run-off area and adequate safety equipment may have reduced the human cost.
Most alarmingly however, more than a year after the crash, Yogyakarta's runway end safety area still has not been extended as required and the correct safety equipment has not been supplied.
In February this year, the pilot was arrested on charges that include manslaughter and violating aviation laws.
Brisbane-based Flight Safety owner Colin Weir also accuses the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB), International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and Indonesian authorities of being compromised because they are keeping quiet about the issue.
He says the ATSB was not aware that Yogyakarta airport was unlicensed at the time of the Garuda crash, but the ATSB says not complying with Annexe 14 amounts to the same thing.
"If there is another overrun on that airport, the same thing is going to happen. It is an absolutely untenable thing in terms of safety," he said.
"The issue here is the fact that the licence itself was null and void, now that has implications for the accident and the victims of the accident.
"They would need to know - and I think from a closure point of view - it's only fair to give everybody the opportunity to get all the information that's sitting in the background.
"In this case, because the airport's licence was in fact not current, there could be legal and insurance implications that they would want to pursue."
Airport audit

Flight Safety said it was called on by a client to audit Garuda after the crash, which led it to audit Yogyakarta, Solo and Semarang airports. It found that all three airports at the time were operating without a licence.
"When we looked at these airports we discovered that the licensing, the Airport Operating Certificate, had been issued for five years but subject to five conditions and these conditions had to be fulfilled within a 12-month period," Mr Weir said.
"The conditions included extension of the runway and safety area and that there be an audit by the DGCA [Indonesian Regulatory Authority] after six months, with a final cross check audit after 12 months.
"None of this was done in the 12-month period and that period lapsed on the August 1, 2006. When the Garuda accident happened these conditions had not been fulfilled and therefore the licence becomes null and void."
Mr Weir said Flight Safety notified the ICAO, the ATSB which helped investigate the Yogyakarta crash, and the director of Indonesia's Aviation Safety body.
"We were then told by the Indonesian director of Aviation Safety that the deficiencies had been rectified, however we have just conducted a re-audit only to find that there is no change to Solo and Yogyakarta," he said, adding that he has since been told by the director that "all conditions had been fulfilled".
"They might have changed those conditions now to make it legal, but at the time of the accident we have the audit report to show that what we are saying is 100 per cent correct."
'Old issues'

The Australian Financial Review's Indonesia correspondent, Morgan Mellish, was one of the Australians killed in the crash.
Caroline Mellish is his sister and she says she has accepted a payout from Garuda and signed an agreement preventing her from taking further legal action.
"It angers me to the point where it's obvious that the issues in regards to the runway in particular were not known previously, and they had a set time-frame to rectify them," she said.
"These weren't new issues at all, as in fact we thought they might be, they were old issues that were already known and not fixed.
"So it was even more so a preventable accident, which is makes me angry and sad."
'No problems'

Budi Mulyawan Suyitno, director general of air transportation at Indonesia's transportation ministry, has told ABC radio's PM program that directions had been given but local authorities did not have the budget to implement the recommendations.
But he also said there did not appear to be a problem with Yogyakarta's licence.
"We don't see there's any licence problem [for Yogyakarta], but I will check again," he said, adding that authorities had been responding to safety concerns by declaring a RESA for 140 metres of the 2,250 metre runway and adding fire trucks.
Rapid growth in air travel in Indonesia has raised questions over whether safety has been compromised and whether the infrastructure and personnel can cope with the huge increase.
- ABC/Reuters

[Crosshair]

The captain's trial begins.

From the Sydney Morning Herald. Highlights mine:

A GARUDA jet continued its ill-fated landing despite "running wild" and becoming uncontrollable early in its approach to Yogyakarta Airport's in March last year, its captain, Marwoto Komar, confessed under police interrogation.


Komar's trial for criminal negligence over the deaths of 21 people in the crash, including five Australians, begins today. He has never spoken publicly about the Boeing 737's descent, but his police interrogation report, which is central to the case, has been obtained by Herald.


Under questioning, Komar said there had been arguments with his co-pilot during the landing. He admitted the plane touched down at an unsafe speed.


He said he was concerned about conserving fuel - one of the possible reasons advanced as to why 15 automated alarms telling the pilot to "go-around", were ignored.


Asked by police why he did not land visually after experiencing problems with an instrument landing, Komar said he did not tell his co-pilot he was continuing to use the instrument landing system "because at that time I was the only one in control of the plane that was already running wild".
"The plane nose was always going down and it was difficult for me to bring the plane nose up ... [one of] the reasons for that was the malfunction of the plane's stabiliser which is located at the tail of the plane. However, I could not be sure of the reason," he said.


"So it can be said that the plane's performance ... was not stable," Komar said.


He described unsuccessful attempts to bring under control a plane that was descending too quickly. He admitted he never achieved a safe speed.
"It was impossible for me to go around because it was difficult to lift up the plane's nose, so my last attempt was trying to put the plane on a glide path, reasoning the plane would not touch the soil that was ahead of the runway. In other words my only hope was to reach for the runway."
On landing, the plane was travelling at 150 knots (270kmh), he said. "I do know the possibility of the risks but at least at that time I thought that my attempts carried the least risk."


Police have called for Komar to be jailed for life for the crash. His is the first criminal prosecution of an Indonesian pilot.


Air safety investigators determined the plane landed at nearly double the safe speed, bouncing off the runway, through the airport fence and across an embankment. Its wing was severed and the plane caught alight with many passengers trapped inside.


The airport's safety run-off did not meet international safety standards and its fire-fighting equipment and practices were heavily criticised by investigators.


Komar said he compromised with his co-pilot, Gagam Rahman, on the level of flaps the plane was using on descent because "by using a flap of 30 degrees the usage of fuel was relatively not much". Garuda had introduced large bonuses for conserving fuel shortly before last year's accident.
Komar faces charges of negligence causing injury and death and flying an aircraft which endangered the safety of people on the plane.

[Flintstone]

On landing, the plane was travelling at 150 knots (270kmh)......... Air safety investigators determined the plane landed at nearly double the safe speed,

[RWA]

"On landing, the plane was travelling at 150 knots(270kmh), he said."

That's a straight lie. The investigators are on record as saying that it was 410 km/h - more like 225 knots.....

AM - Report blames high speed for Garuda crash

"Asked by police why he did not land visually after experiencing problems with an instrument landing, Komar said he did not tell his co-pilot he was continuing to use the instrument landing system "because at that time I was the only one in control of the plane that was already running wild".

"The plane nose was always going down and it was difficult for me to bring the plane nose up ... [one of] the reasons for that was the malfunction of the plane's stabiliser which is located at the tail of the plane. However, I could not be sure of the reason," he said."

That's incredible. Sounds as if he left the autopilot engaged and the ILS on all the way into the ground.........?

[PK-KAR]

150kts? OMFG... it's amazing how quickly people and journos forget that the NTSC accident report is available online... with 190kts shown as the landing speed.

IMHO, if someone is to be held criminally negligent in this case, it's the F/O... he knew something was up with the Captain, said "go-around", but just stayed quiet... he failed his job as PM, which is to protect the PF from making these kinds of mistake.

I guess the author of the SMH article is committed in focusing on someone getting sentenced due to this accident, and since it's always easy to can the Captain, looks like he's fallen to the same bandwagon trap. *Sorry MF, but IMHO, this is not the way to avenge your friends' death... if you want to chase someone, you chase the ones failing the system*.

---
Let's see if the Pilots Association here has sent observers to the trial and I wonder if calls for strikes (as they previously threaten) will happen...

[fox niner]

Hi PK-KAR,

I don't think blaming the co-pilot is the right thing to do.

The captain is always responsible for the safety of the airplane. If the captain is not sure whether he is able to take that responibility, for whatever reason, he should have called the company and report himself temporarily unfit to report for duty. And that is also primarily the captain's own responibility!
And blaming the co-pilot for not spotting the troubles that might be going on inside the head of the captain is not right. Co-pilots are unable to do that. Maybe a psychiatrist would have been able to do that, but not a co-pilot.

Also, the co-pilot actually told the captain to make a go-around several times! This is especially commendable considering the cultural obstacle he had to overcome. I suppose it is immensely difficult for a south east asian co-pilot to tell his south east asian captain to go-around.
For me, as a european co-pilot, that is easy. For him, is wasn't.

And solely blaming the captain is not going to work either. Management of Garuda have to answer some questions as well. (fuel-saving pressure???)

[Fizix]

Interesting New Development

It seems that testimony is being changed. Just posted on the Australian ABC website.

Garuda copilot withdraws claim plane going too fast - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

[sleeper]

What does he (do they?) hope to accomplish by withdrawing a statement that is proven by flightdata recorders? Nobody is fooled by that.
"unconsious after calling go-around"

This reeks of corruption. I do not think he is making these statement on his own free wil.

[Tee Emm]

I suppose it is immensely difficult for a south east asian co-pilot to tell his south east asian captain to go-around.

Thanks for that information. While some of these airlines have spectacular brochures of beautiful smiling flight attendants accompanied by immaculately uniformed flight crew with big pilot hats with impressive gold pilot wings and gleaming gold braid on their shoulders - it is a shock to know that their culture transcends flight safety.

[captplaystation]

What a shower of Muppets FDR will show the speed easily enough, now he says he passed out so can't say Jeezuz that is a novel way to try and say don't blame me. Maybe the Capt should say he passed out too , then they would both be in the clear