SQ-368 (engine & wing on fire) final report out
Sully vs SQ
Ditching generally presupposes loss of thrust during cruise with plenty of time to run checklists. TS 236 had 19 minutes after both engines flamed out before landing at Lajes.
Sully's situation left precious little time while he was fully occupied finding a ditching spot in a congested location. The George Washington bridge and marine traffic were concerns.
The Changi crew, most fortunately, had a number of minutes after coming to a stop on a runway.
We may disagree over which crew made the best use of their time.
Sully's situation left precious little time while he was fully occupied finding a ditching spot in a congested location. The George Washington bridge and marine traffic were concerns.
The Changi crew, most fortunately, had a number of minutes after coming to a stop on a runway.
We may disagree over which crew made the best use of their time.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ???
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He declined equipment on arr
he obviously had some 'other information' that we were not privy to, that allowed him to be so confident that a severely damaged engine, fuel leak + fuel smell in the cabin was nothing to be alarmed about. As a result there was no need to bother those nice chaps in the red trucks.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 1°21'10.20"N - 103°56'36.21"E
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FYI, again, the local CC forums are filled with info about the event and the names and titles and all can't be that hard to figure out. It wasn't like there were a 100 crew on board.
So how many were fired so far ? Or are they all silenced and cremated ?
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FYI, again, the local CC forums are filled with info about the event
We are just second guessing here not knowing SQ 777s have ceramic tiles glued to their fuselage.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Bangkok / San Francisco
Age: 58
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny you should still insist on that line of thinking .. that Singapore is a police state and all.
FYI, again, the local CC forums are filled with info about the event and the names and titles and all can't be that hard to figure out. It wasn't like there were a 100 crew on board.
So how many were fired so far ? Or are they all silenced and cremated ?
FYI, again, the local CC forums are filled with info about the event and the names and titles and all can't be that hard to figure out. It wasn't like there were a 100 crew on board.
So how many were fired so far ? Or are they all silenced and cremated ?
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Reading
Age: 41
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't help wondering if for some of the less assertive captains, it's in the back of their mind what the company thinks of any bad PR. I know it shouldn't, but there is no way of stopping that pernicious thought from influencing your thinking, even subconciously.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Reading
Age: 41
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guess which version is considered fact in the city state?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 1°21'10.20"N - 103°56'36.21"E
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These key factors are glossed over in the ASC's analysis of the accident. What happened to the flight crew of SQ006 could have happened to any other flight crew - in fact, the investigation team recorded testimonies from two other pilots who nearly made the same mistake, one of them as recent as the day before the accident.
The SQ006 accident should not be seen as an isolated event specific to CKS Airport. Rather, it is a symptom of the global problem of runway safety. The confusion of runways and taxiways is an increasingly serious problem facing the airline industry worldwide. The US FAA has specified runway safety as one of its top five priorities. We hope our alternative analysis would enable the international aviation community to benefit from the lessons learnt, and help to prevent similar tragedies in the future.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I certainly will agree that a trap was set with the non-standard runway markings on TPE runway 05R which was mainly used as a taxiway. As I recall, the touchdown zone had circles instead of piano keys, maybe it was a military motif.
Still, I have a hard time believing 'that the crew had no part in the event'.
Still, I have a hard time believing 'that the crew had no part in the event'.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rushing to Die: The crash of Singapore Airlines flight 006 - Part One, Airline Safety, Airline crashes
SQ will be forever tarnished by SQ006. But it may be said that is was not completely SQ's fault too. The closed runway should not have been used as a taxiway for part of it, at all. To avoid confusion.
The SQ pilots if I recall said the taxiway was lit up like a runway, but the TPE authorities said the active was lit up like a Christmas tree and should not have been missed.
It was a sad situation and made up of several holes lining up in the swiss cheese.
1. Night time, storm coming literally within the hour (TPE was due to shut down very soon when SQ006 departed). The anxiety this causes for flight crew.
2. TPE had no ground radar. The coming storm already reduced visibility to the point that the tower could not see SQ006 taxiing.
3. SQ006 should have but did not request a "follow me" truck.
4. IT was a relatively "easy" mistake to make turning from the taxiway onto the closed runway instead of going just a bit further to the active and then making a right hand turn. It should not have happened but a mistake that has happened before and will happen again, taking off from the wrong runway or taxiway.
5. The construction equipment was very far down the runway and could not be seen in the rain and darkness when they started their takeoff roll and was too late to avoid when they did see it.
Taiwan released the flight crew with the Singapore government's promise that they will return for the trial after keeping them on the island for several days. Pilots worldwide were going to boycott flying to TPE if the Taiwan authorities sentenced the pilots to jail as was the talk then.
They were not jailed and free to go after the trial. SQ initially, just when the accident happened came on to say it was their plane and their pilots and accepted at least some blame. Later they strongly contested the findings of the final report, blaming the airport more then accepting that their crew made a fatal error.
The airline itself is to blame for putting pressure on flight crews to press on even in the face of a huge storm coming and the edge of it had already arrived. This pressure was implied not stated as fact.
TPE was wrong to NOT shut down earlier. It generally shuts down for major storms. It was also wrong to use the closed runway as a taxiway for part of it. Leads to confusion.
IIRC the Captain and co-pilot of SQ006 never flew again. And the closed runway later became an active TAXIWAY.
Changes were made to not repeat this accident. SQ doesn't fly this route anymore either (SIN - TPE - LAX).
One of my best friend's best friend was on this flight and did not survive.
An account from someone who had a relative onboard :
http://bohtong.com/sq006-the-last-flight-from-taipei/
SQ will be forever tarnished by SQ006. But it may be said that is was not completely SQ's fault too. The closed runway should not have been used as a taxiway for part of it, at all. To avoid confusion.
The SQ pilots if I recall said the taxiway was lit up like a runway, but the TPE authorities said the active was lit up like a Christmas tree and should not have been missed.
It was a sad situation and made up of several holes lining up in the swiss cheese.
1. Night time, storm coming literally within the hour (TPE was due to shut down very soon when SQ006 departed). The anxiety this causes for flight crew.
2. TPE had no ground radar. The coming storm already reduced visibility to the point that the tower could not see SQ006 taxiing.
3. SQ006 should have but did not request a "follow me" truck.
4. IT was a relatively "easy" mistake to make turning from the taxiway onto the closed runway instead of going just a bit further to the active and then making a right hand turn. It should not have happened but a mistake that has happened before and will happen again, taking off from the wrong runway or taxiway.
5. The construction equipment was very far down the runway and could not be seen in the rain and darkness when they started their takeoff roll and was too late to avoid when they did see it.
Taiwan released the flight crew with the Singapore government's promise that they will return for the trial after keeping them on the island for several days. Pilots worldwide were going to boycott flying to TPE if the Taiwan authorities sentenced the pilots to jail as was the talk then.
They were not jailed and free to go after the trial. SQ initially, just when the accident happened came on to say it was their plane and their pilots and accepted at least some blame. Later they strongly contested the findings of the final report, blaming the airport more then accepting that their crew made a fatal error.
The airline itself is to blame for putting pressure on flight crews to press on even in the face of a huge storm coming and the edge of it had already arrived. This pressure was implied not stated as fact.
TPE was wrong to NOT shut down earlier. It generally shuts down for major storms. It was also wrong to use the closed runway as a taxiway for part of it. Leads to confusion.
IIRC the Captain and co-pilot of SQ006 never flew again. And the closed runway later became an active TAXIWAY.
Changes were made to not repeat this accident. SQ doesn't fly this route anymore either (SIN - TPE - LAX).
One of my best friend's best friend was on this flight and did not survive.
An account from someone who had a relative onboard :
http://bohtong.com/sq006-the-last-flight-from-taipei/
Last edited by armchairpilot94116; 12th Jul 2016 at 16:08.
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Singapore
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never mentioned "police state"
Funny you should still insist on that line of thinking .. that Singapore is a police state and all.
FYI, again, the local CC forums are filled with info about the event and the names and titles and all can't be that hard to figure out. It wasn't like there were a 100 crew on board.
So how many were fired so far ? Or are they all silenced and cremated ?
FYI, again, the local CC forums are filled with info about the event and the names and titles and all can't be that hard to figure out. It wasn't like there were a 100 crew on board.
So how many were fired so far ? Or are they all silenced and cremated ?
But this is not really the right forum to discuss politics. My comment was made in a positive light, with respect to a cabin crew who were put in a dangerous and difficult situation. And could do without more hassle that might result from speaking about their employer in public.
Fire outside: "Please remain seated for your own safety."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUtYwY7igj4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUtYwY7igj4
Plane at standstill. Fire raging a few feet adjacent to the 1/10 of an Inch Aluminum foil. Instruction: For your own safety stay close to the fire and fasten your seatbelts....
That makes it probably easier to identify the charred remains afterwards if everyone stayed in their seat. Saves you the expensive DNA analysis
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: localhost
Age: 25
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still can't understand how people had the time to be filming out of the window when the wing was on fire; regardless of instructions to stay seated from the crew!
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: asia
Age: 69
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
armchairpilot:
"TPE was wrong to NOT shut down earlier. It generally shuts down for major storms. It was also wrong to use the closed runway as a taxiway for part of it. Leads to confusion.
IIRC the Captain and co-pilot of SQ006 never flew again."
Your facts are wrong.
Both the Crew have their 4 BARS and one has been an instructor pilot for years .
" now everyone can fly " - AGAIN.
"TPE was wrong to NOT shut down earlier. It generally shuts down for major storms. It was also wrong to use the closed runway as a taxiway for part of it. Leads to confusion.
IIRC the Captain and co-pilot of SQ006 never flew again."
Your facts are wrong.
Both the Crew have their 4 BARS and one has been an instructor pilot for years .
" now everyone can fly " - AGAIN.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
As the New York Times put it:
Pilots' 'Dreadful Mistake' in Taiwan May Lead to Jail - NYTimes.com
Some of my former expat colleagues have their four bars in Angeles City. 
Whether the crew of this recent SQ fire on landing gets in trouble will probably depend on who the crew is and whether they were given guidance from the company, the fire crew or the manuals that can justify the decision to delay evacuation.
I'd like to think that we will soon know more so we can all learn from this incident but often little is publically said these days citing pending litigation and personnel privacy protections.
The plane's pilot, a Malaysian, Foong Chee Kong, and the co-pilots, Latiff Cyrano and Ng Kheng Leng, all survived the crash.
armchairpilot:
"TPE was wrong to NOT shut down earlier. It generally shuts down for major storms. It was also wrong to use the closed runway as a taxiway for part of it. Leads to confusion.
IIRC the Captain and co-pilot of SQ006 never flew again."
Your facts are wrong.
Both the Crew have their 4 BARS and one has been an instructor pilot for years .
" now everyone can fly " - AGAIN.
"TPE was wrong to NOT shut down earlier. It generally shuts down for major storms. It was also wrong to use the closed runway as a taxiway for part of it. Leads to confusion.
IIRC the Captain and co-pilot of SQ006 never flew again."
Your facts are wrong.
Both the Crew have their 4 BARS and one has been an instructor pilot for years .
" now everyone can fly " - AGAIN.
Whether the crew of this recent SQ fire on landing gets in trouble will probably depend on who the crew is and whether they were given guidance from the company, the fire crew or the manuals that can justify the decision to delay evacuation.
I'd like to think that we will soon know more so we can all learn from this incident but often little is publically said these days citing pending litigation and personnel privacy protections.
Excuse me if this has already been mentioned, but in the absence of trawling through 31 pages prior, I'm curious what might happen to the aircraft in so far as repair or scrap? Presumably the whole wing would need to be replaced before it can fly again? Can they do a wing change in the field? I imagine it would need a jig of some sort. Or could they do a repair to get it flyable to relocate it back to the factory. Or take both wings off and put it on a boat back to the factory. Or will it just get turned into parts?