Lion Air 734 off runway at Pontanak

[ReverseFlight]

I think the pilots performed well given the critical circumstances. No one was injured. Contrary to speculation earlier in this thread, the approach speeds were all correct and the overrun (on a wet runway, note) was very likely as a direct consequence of mechanical failure of the thrust reversers.

[PT6A]

I think I would have to disagree the approach was not stabilised, this is why the report makes reference to the fact Lion Air training is failing in the area of ALAR (among other areas)

[BOAC]

Originally Posted by RF

the approach speeds were all correct

- that may well have been so, but they do not appear to have been flown!

Anyone know if LA have ANY stabilised approach criteria at all? Loc intercept at 1300'/180kts is sporty too!

[PT6A]

The bits that stand out to me are:- they were planning and briefed for a F40 landing, however due to a problem F40 was not available, so in IMC they continued an approach, flaps 40 finally became available at 600 feet.

I think this alone should of been enough to trigger a go-around find a nice place to hold see if they could fix the problem, if not look at the data for the airport... (short runway and wet) decide if it is still a good idea to land there.. If not bugger off to another airport with a longer runway.

Then, they land beyond the TDZ in an aircraft the commander knew had a history of speed brake / reverser problems.

This is why I conclude the crew fell short of what should be expected. But the biggest failing is that of the airline and its regulator for allowing the company to be operated in this way.

It was by the grace of god that nobody was hurt, not piloting skill.

PT6A

[BOAC]

due to a problem F40 was not available

- without seeing the complete FDR trace my guess is that F40 WAS available, but they were too fast for it and the F40 flap load relief was operating. Still,.as you say, g/a country.

[PT6A]

Actually many reasons for a GA, but that is not the "Lion Air way" fast landings outside the TDZ that float are the norm.

I actually got that information out of the Boeing reps mouth after they had been looking at the flight quality assurance data....

I don't have that aircraft in my Lido/takeoff but I had been informed by others that the perf would not of been legally met for that landing. (I am informed that at the time of landing the runway would of actually been contaminated with standing water) easy to understand as the runways are not level and not groved... Thus easy to see how these situations arise!

PT6A

[BOAC]

I defer.of course, to your official Boeing source, but privately I wager that the speed was above 162kts when the flaps reached 30 and finally reduced below 157kts at 600'.

[PT6A]

The Boeing rep was referring to the trend in Lion Air (not just this accident) that the data shows they have a habbit of landing long and overspeed.

There have also been many cases where they have landed despite it not being legal to do so for perf reasons.

PT6A

[mutt]

The Boeing rep was referring to the trend in Lion Air

So a Boeing representative has made a statement that opens them up to massive liability................. I can just imagine those Gulfstream 5's leaving New York right now with a flood of lawyers

PT6A, you really appear to have a problem with Lion Air.... what is it?

Mutt

[PT6A]

Not just with Lion Air, but with these cowboy operators. Infact the attitude of the whole country as far as the aviation sector goes when it comes to safety.

Innocent passengers can't be expected to know what's going on, they place their trust in the authorities.

Sadly these in Indonesia are lacking, the EU has already banned them so there is not much more that can be done externally.

And would they not use a BBJ?

I don't see how it opens Boeing up? They don't tell Lion to land long and above speed....


PT6A

[mutt]

I don't see how it opens Boeing up? They don't tell Lion to land long and above speed....

If Boeing can be shown to have known about the lack of procedures and done nothing to change the procedures in the airline, then it makes them responsible.

Europe didn't ban Lion Air as they didn't fly there! Regardless of what that list states, it only affected Garuda. Lion then went on to get additional audits conducted by some of the countries where they flew long haul flights, they passed these audits!

I'm impressed with your tenacity against Lion Air..... you never mention Mandala, Air Asia Indonesia or any of the others...... Strange

Mutt

[A37575]

Hey chaps - it's Indonesia. Prangs are SOP in that country

[jetjockey696]

Batavia... if you fly with these guys as pax,.. you dont want to see the cockpit... so many yellow stickers MEL.. they dont have the money to buy the parts.. so they just move the parts around. so the the aircraft doesnt exceed the MEL date..

Another problem with Indonesia flight safety.. is the loading of excess cargo on to a flight which is not authorised by the company..last minute extra tonne of cargo. Capt making a 1million rupiah (95dollars per trip) and Fo 45usd... per trip... this practice is common among many operators... just hope nothing happens to these guys.

Good luck besides its a new year. Happy flying.. be safe, and aleast follow some SOPs.

[robtheblade]

I have flown with Lion Air many times. Don't think they have time to load cargo.