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

Missing Indonesian Aircraft

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

Missing Indonesian Aircraft

Old 24th Aug 2015, 06:23
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: JAKARTA
Posts: 16
I 've accepted because I got written clearance from management...But I m already looking around to leave ASAP.....by the way lot of westerners use Indonesian domestic flights without any warning from their country, worst they can feel confident because EASA has removed ban on some Indonesian airlines.I'm wondering what type of audit has been performed by EASA
cris95123 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 09:20
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
"lot of westerners use Indonesian domestic flights without any warning from their country,"

welllll - there isn't any choice TBH

I think you'll find most expats are fully aware of the risks - tourists to Bali may be less so but then they often arrive on international airlines anyway

I'd guess the risks are roughly the same as flying in the USA or W Europe in the 50's and 60's TBH

but if you're going up-country to a small strip............ especially in Indonesian Papua - you are bush flying with all the attendant risks
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 10:23
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: turn L @ Taupo, just past the Niagra Falls...
Posts: 584
Quite honestly, the EASA ban on "58 Indonesian airlines operating in European airspace", which has been quoted ad nauseum this week -is utterly irrelevant to the vast majority of the 58 airlines so afflicted. There are 2 immediate reasons for that:

1. The airlines do NOT now and have no intention of ever operating in European airspace -or indeed for most, in any other countries airspace, and
2. The EASA ban is applied automagically to pretty much every Indonesian AOC issued in recent memory, without reference to or from any EASA authority. In other words, the EASA issue is not necessarily anything to do with the airlines named, but rather more of an EASA issue with the way Indonesian DGCA goes about its business. Hence, a blanket "ban". Makes great headlines though, doesn't it?

Take that for whatever it's worth.

Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry
but if you're going up-country to a small strip... especially in Indonesian Papua - you are bush flying with all the attendant risks
Agreed -to a point. I am one of a diverse group of expat pilots flying in that area. There's not one of us that I can point to and say "he wants to have a crash", as I'm sure you would struggle to do also.

There's a raft-load of issues that we, as expats, struggle with here that are not common in other parts of the world... things like the world's most dense bureaucracy and the daily frustration of dealing with that; corruption at every level of that bureaucracy and indeed the core of just doing business at any level. Then there are the operational matters that tend to be relatively unique to Papua, to us as pilots... I could seriously go on for hours.

My point is, we are generally doing as much as we are able to make operations here as safe as we can. We are hamstrung by an indifferent regulator, tripped-up by corruption (a loader can make a months wages on One flight -if he can sneak an extra 200Kg on board -quite a temptation) and have to be on our very toes, all day every day to guard against things that just wouldn't happen anywhere else in the world.

This Trigana crash could possibly be characterised as an accident looking for a place to happen. Indonesia -and certainly Papua- does NOT have the infrastructure (airways/navaids etc) taken for granted in Europe. Flights are generally on a "magenta line" at a known safe level with descents, especially in the mountains predicated on going visual at a known, safe place. Trigana however had their own "IFR Procedure" at WAJO which took them West of the airport -into rising terrain, no less- where they would start their descent in the base-turn. Seeing my point yet? My guess is he started down either too soon or too quick. I doubt he saw what was coming at all.

Rather than simply tar every Indonesian operator (and by extension, their pilots) as irredemable idiots as seems to be the fashion, perhaps delve a little deeper.

Not one of us is idiot-proof. We all do the very best we can with the resources at our disposal. **** knows, the very next thread could be about me...

God forbid.
RadioSaigon is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2015, 14:10
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Radio S

Just to be clear I have great respect for everyone flying in Indonesia - as you say it's not like anywhere else

I've also come across some excellent Indonesian pilots out there - and a couple of seriously brave ones involved in an emergency some of our guys were involved with E of Flores

The system, the terrain, the infrastructure - all a major challenge
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2015, 18:20
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
Preliminary report released.

PT. Trigana Air Service, PK–YRN, ATR 42-300 Preliminary Report

Some info from the report:
The flight was the 5th flight of the day for the crew and the aircraft and the second flight on the same route of Jayapura to Oksibil.

Oksibil weather at the time: broken clouds, cloud bases at 8,000ft MSL (4,000 ft AGL), 4-5km visibility on final, winds 110 at 9 kts.

Crew had contacted the airport's AFIS officer 5 minutes before the crash, stating intention to enter left base RWY 11.

Crash site was found at 8,300 ft MSL altitude, bearing 306 degrees 10nm from the airport.

The CVR did not record any GPWS warning up to the impact.

The CVR also did not record any crew briefing and checklist reading.

Data retrieval from the FDR was unsuccessful. They will try to again at the BEA facility in Paris.
peekay4 is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2015, 09:42
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,623
I am one of a diverse group of expat pilots flying in that area. There's not one of us that I can point to and say "he wants to have a crash"
...except for a few take-a-chance macho pilots always willing to take a "closer look" in marginal VMC, as obviously in this CFIT.
GlueBall is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2015, 12:05
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: turn L @ Taupo, just past the Niagra Falls...
Posts: 584
Why, thank you GlueBall for the ringing endorsement... not.

May I assume from the tone of your contribution that you have some personal knowledge and experience of what you state? Would you care to provide evidence of that?

Or are you just running off at the lip?

I am one of a diverse group of expat pilots flying in that area...
The devil is in the details...
RadioSaigon is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2015, 16:02
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,623
"RadioSaigon" . . .

PK-YRN, while on a supposedly visual approach, had descended into the trees atop the ridge of Tanggo Mountain at 8,300' on a heading of 195-200° during left base with gear & flaps down, ten miles from Rwy-11. A broken cloud layer was reported at 8000' (4000' AGL).

It is self evident that the pilots had insufficient or no ground contact over the ridge, but had continued in IMC rather than abandoning the approach and climbing to minimum safe altitude in their sector.

The violation of this basic VFR/VMC flying discipline had little to do with your claims about Indonesia's "indifferent regulator" "corruption" or "dense bureaucracy."
GlueBall is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2015, 16:57
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 544
Culturally speaking

Where corruption exists at a regulatory level, the mindset is sadly reflected in those who are supposed to be regulated, but think that the rules somehow don't apply to them. Been there, seen it. Radio Saigon has a valid point.
Teddy Robinson is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2015, 04:25
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: turn L @ Taupo, just past the Niagra Falls...
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by GlueBall
The violation of this basic VFR/VMC flying discipline had little to do with your claims about Indonesia's "indifferent regulator" "corruption" or "dense bureaucracy."
Clearly, GlueBall you have never experienced the circumstances I'm outlining and as a consequence have little or no idea of what you're talking about. Regrettably this crash and many before it have much to do with the regulators' indifference, corruption and the nigh-impossibility of achieving any sort of regulatory compliance or competence where the regulators' functionaries make "findings" against individuals and organisations solely for the purpose of receiving an unmarked, stuffed envelope. Upon receipt of an appropriate gratuity, the "finding", the functionary -and apparently the regs- go away. Some pilots so imposed upon, as a consequence then do things like overload, pocket backload money or by other similar means recover their losses... and the cycle self-perpetuates.
Pilots born, raised and trained in cultures other than that predominant here tend not to participate in this cycle, hence becoming victims of the dense, impenetrable bureaucracy alluded to earlier. Their non-participation in the cycle means they do not have any financial incentive to push beyond common sense, commit acts unwise -or risk their lives unnecessarily.

As it was my words which you so comprehensively disparaged in your original contribution, I personally take exception to your attitude -and you have still (3rd time now) missed one very key word, despite the fact I have highlighted it for you. Had you any basis of knowledge from which to speak, you would have seen -and understood- that critical element of my discussion.

To speak briefly now and more specifically of the incident in question:

The usual (homegrown IFR) approach for this operator was to join overhead WAJO, to finals on about a 10NM final (in the rising terrain I have mentioned before) from a RIGHT Base. This crash was from a non-standard LEFT base.

Make of that what you will.

That's as much as I have to say on this thread now. I'll no longer discuss the matter in the face of GlueBall's apparent wilful ignorance.
RadioSaigon is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2015, 07:21
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,623
RadioSaigon . . .

But you have choices. If survival instinct & personal self preservation doesn't supersede the reckless, intimidating culture that you describe, by flying into clouds over high terrain looking for the airfield, then you're dangerous & stupid, if not suicidal.

I pity the needless deaths of the innocent passengers.
GlueBall is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2015, 08:40
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Darwin and PNG
Posts: 1,032
Simple rule is don't fly below LSALT in IMC, if you do it enough and get away with it you will eventually meet the golden bee bee.

DIY approaches - quick way to get yourself splattered over the rocks.

I am very qualified to speak on this issue having spent most of my flying career in the highlands of PNG. I have lost some good mates in CFIT accidents, and I am absolutely sick of hearing about these stupid wasteful accidents.

It's pilot discipline that prevents these accidents - the buck stops with the Captain. If the Captain hasn't got enough guts to stand up and make the correct decision, he or she shouldn't be flying....

Forget the rules, this stuff is what you must do to survive.
Duck Pilot is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2015, 00:10
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Canada
Age: 33
Posts: 630
I think that glueball will eventually click onto the fact that it is the Indo pilots that tend to (Not all of them!) trust their GPS's and go below MSA/LSALT while in IMC.
There is a few cowboy expats but they tend to not last that long.

I have heard of that famous phrase being uttered quite a few times now. "God wills it."
lilflyboy262...2 is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2015, 14:40
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lancing, Sussex
Age: 89
Posts: 255
how many tourists realise their insurance cover is probably not valid on any other than scheduled airlines. Have been tempted by local sightseeing flights, but thought, better not
Exnomad is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2015, 17:18
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: world
Posts: 1
its a wonder there aren't daily crashes


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnFonu_0xdE
costalpilot is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2017, 20:35
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hadlow
Age: 57
Posts: 593
Final report published.

http://knkt.dephub.go.id/knkt/ntsc_a...l%20Report.pdf
Super VC-10 is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2017, 22:09
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Москва/Ташкент
Age: 50
Posts: 829
The management had identified some pilots including the accident pilot with behaviour of pulling EGPWS CB.
Not exactly recommended....
flash8 is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2017, 23:46
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: asia
Posts: 7
From the Report

Two kinds of explanation could be considered:

1)....

2)....The wreckage was found at elevation approximately 8,300 feet, higher than the 8,000 feet MSA published, which they may have believed they were safe.
One would hope to believe you were safe above the published MSA.

It appears you cannot rely on the published MSA.
Wombaticus is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2017, 02:22
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 195
That’s a very valid point ! Wombat. Sort of makes the the other causes superficial.
Fluke is online now  
Old 31st Dec 2017, 11:17
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,739
Originally Posted by flash8 View Post
Not exactly recommended....
I don't know about the type in question, or at the accident location, but on other types I have flown in mountainous territory EGPWS got triggered even when accurately flying a published approach due to terrain ahead before intercepting the loc, or else terrain directly ahead on the go-around. I remember this being the case at Berne, Sion and Chambery. Where we knew that EGPWS would be triggered we (after a careful briefing) also pulled the CB because there being no cockpit door it could clearly be heard by pax.

I am not saying this is a recommended practise, but we considered the risk of having a panicking passenger bursting into the cockpit greater than the risk of a true alarm on approaches that we knew well and had flown recently.
Trim Stab is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.