Silkair MI 185
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The two accident with (possibly) suicidle background are not the only in aviation history. Check also Air Marokko ATR accident and Fed-Ex. Latter has also been aired on National Geographic.
Dani
(waiting patiently for Sunday evening in front of my TV...)
Dani
(waiting patiently for Sunday evening in front of my TV...)
Thermal Image, Mingalababya, thank you both for making the formal report available.
Rockhound, others, thank you for recognising that there are still unanswered questions.
The co-pilot hours, as being discussed, would have been about 110 hours total in command, assuming his log book was accurate, and about 2500 total. In his native New Zealand at the time he would normally have needed a couple of hundred hours in command to get a first commercial position, and about 2000 hours multi-engine command time to even apply for a co-pilot position on a B737.
Yes I well know about direct cadet entry schemes, but they are for carefully selected airline or military pilots with huge numbers applying for each coveted position - and only the best are chosen. The Silkair MI 185 co-pilot came from a system where you could walk in off the street, provided you have enough money and are healthy enough to pass the medicals, and fund your own training before competing for the entry level commercial positions doing instructing, joy rides etc, before working up to light twins and the 2000 command hours to compete for the airlines.
So the co-pilot was unemployable in his native New Zealand - even after getting his 2500 total - yet was employed virtually off the street with 110 hours on a B737.
So the first big question is why was the experienced Captain immediately blamed for the disaster - reverting right back to old concepts of "pilot error" and yet no similar questions were ever asked of the co-pilot?
Perhaps, with the passage of time, it is now possible to sensitively tease out the real causes, and learn from them.
Rockhound, others, thank you for recognising that there are still unanswered questions.
The co-pilot hours, as being discussed, would have been about 110 hours total in command, assuming his log book was accurate, and about 2500 total. In his native New Zealand at the time he would normally have needed a couple of hundred hours in command to get a first commercial position, and about 2000 hours multi-engine command time to even apply for a co-pilot position on a B737.
Yes I well know about direct cadet entry schemes, but they are for carefully selected airline or military pilots with huge numbers applying for each coveted position - and only the best are chosen. The Silkair MI 185 co-pilot came from a system where you could walk in off the street, provided you have enough money and are healthy enough to pass the medicals, and fund your own training before competing for the entry level commercial positions doing instructing, joy rides etc, before working up to light twins and the 2000 command hours to compete for the airlines.
So the co-pilot was unemployable in his native New Zealand - even after getting his 2500 total - yet was employed virtually off the street with 110 hours on a B737.
So the first big question is why was the experienced Captain immediately blamed for the disaster - reverting right back to old concepts of "pilot error" and yet no similar questions were ever asked of the co-pilot?
Perhaps, with the passage of time, it is now possible to sensitively tease out the real causes, and learn from them.
The Captain had a few skeletons in the cupboard from both his Military Flying and MI career.
Shortly after the investigation began there was a rumour the F/O's DNA was found on the A/C crash axe. Due to the uncertaintity of how this could have occured it was not admissible as evidence.
Another problem the Indonesian's had was accepting the possibility the Captain took his own life without regard to the Crews and passengers own lives (Similar to Egypt Air). The foundation for this was Muslim beliefs.
RIP Duncan
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: castles made of sand
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NG program
Hey all,
I've tried searching the NG site online and haven't found anything on the documentary. Is the programming and scheduling different world wide?
I've tried searching the NG site online and haven't found anything on the documentary. Is the programming and scheduling different world wide?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just saw the show on Singaporian cable TV.
First I'd like to congratulate the official Singapore for not interfering in the right of free speech. I wasn't sure, but now I have a much better opinion about the institutions. I think Democracy is on the rise!
The documentry was very balanced, it looked like the journalists were not sure themselves or afraid of jumping on one side. Basically every fact has been mentioned, including very strong possibility of Captain suicide, but also the likehood of a rudder hardover. There were specialists for both opinions, mainly US specialists. NTSB is clearly favoring the suicide theory.
For the public, one picture might be very evident, which was a superimposing of two 737 flight profiles with rudder hardover together with the SLK one. It looked really similar. As we know that pictures give a bigger impression than words, the hardover theory might have been stronger. Still the facts about heavy debts and the life insurance have been mentioned extensively.
All in all, we don't really know more - but did we expect that?
Dani
First I'd like to congratulate the official Singapore for not interfering in the right of free speech. I wasn't sure, but now I have a much better opinion about the institutions. I think Democracy is on the rise!
The documentry was very balanced, it looked like the journalists were not sure themselves or afraid of jumping on one side. Basically every fact has been mentioned, including very strong possibility of Captain suicide, but also the likehood of a rudder hardover. There were specialists for both opinions, mainly US specialists. NTSB is clearly favoring the suicide theory.
For the public, one picture might be very evident, which was a superimposing of two 737 flight profiles with rudder hardover together with the SLK one. It looked really similar. As we know that pictures give a bigger impression than words, the hardover theory might have been stronger. Still the facts about heavy debts and the life insurance have been mentioned extensively.
All in all, we don't really know more - but did we expect that?
Dani
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dani,
Can you please provide some details of this TV program, such as title and producer? Was it produced by National Geographic? Like Cochise, I have searched the Nat Geo TV website and found no mention of it. They do have a series titled "Seconds from Disaster", which includes programs on the first Comet crash, Tenerife 1977, TWA 800, etc. but nothing on MI 185.
Any info would be appreciated. Thanks.
Rockhound
Can you please provide some details of this TV program, such as title and producer? Was it produced by National Geographic? Like Cochise, I have searched the Nat Geo TV website and found no mention of it. They do have a series titled "Seconds from Disaster", which includes programs on the first Comet crash, Tenerife 1977, TWA 800, etc. but nothing on MI 185.
Any info would be appreciated. Thanks.
Rockhound
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C-F,
Thanks for the prompt response but
1. What was the actual title of the program?
2. Was it a National Geographic production or simply someone else's shown on the Nat Geo channel?
3. Was the program produced in Asia for the Asian market? If so, do you think it might one day reach the eastern hemisphere?
Sorry, I have no idea what Astro is? A satellite channel?
Thanks.
Rockhound
Thanks for the prompt response but
1. What was the actual title of the program?
2. Was it a National Geographic production or simply someone else's shown on the Nat Geo channel?
3. Was the program produced in Asia for the Asian market? If so, do you think it might one day reach the eastern hemisphere?
Sorry, I have no idea what Astro is? A satellite channel?
Thanks.
Rockhound
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just watched the video tape.
Exec Producer Mike Erder, sorry my crappy vcr doesn't allow me to pause and see the credits, rolled them several times, NatGeo appears several times as does the Singapore Government Film arm.
Interesting Points AGAINST pilot suicide.
The cockpit conversation, seemed relaxed.
The FDR had a history of momentary failure up to 11 minutes per flight.
The company that made the rudder actuator was found liable and settled with the family's, without admitting liability.
2 previous Rudder hard over events, though they didn't go into detail about them.
The Captain asked his wife to pick him up after the flight.
I have to say it was a fairly balanced film. And in the end we will never know.
Let them RIP.
ps. Astro is a Malaysian satellite channel. Dunno if its available outside Malaysia.
Exec Producer Mike Erder, sorry my crappy vcr doesn't allow me to pause and see the credits, rolled them several times, NatGeo appears several times as does the Singapore Government Film arm.
Interesting Points AGAINST pilot suicide.
The cockpit conversation, seemed relaxed.
The FDR had a history of momentary failure up to 11 minutes per flight.
The company that made the rudder actuator was found liable and settled with the family's, without admitting liability.
2 previous Rudder hard over events, though they didn't go into detail about them.
The Captain asked his wife to pick him up after the flight.
I have to say it was a fairly balanced film. And in the end we will never know.
Let them RIP.
ps. Astro is a Malaysian satellite channel. Dunno if its available outside Malaysia.
Last edited by CubaLibre; 20th Nov 2006 at 06:08. Reason: additional info
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the NGCAsia website:
"Every air disaster is news…but one of the most horrifying scenarios is a crash where a pilot is accused of bringing down the plane deliberately. Such is the case with SilkAir flight 185. On December 19th, 1997, Silk Air flight 185 suddenly goes into a steep dive from 35,000 feet and crashes full throttle into the Musi River in Palembang, Indonesia, killing all on board. A chilling rumour began circulating after the crash. Pilot suicide or mechanical malfunction? This investigation into the controversial crash of SilkAir flight 185 strives to find the answer to a puzzling disaster. "
http://www.ngcasia.com/watch/program...d_program=5677
"Every air disaster is news…but one of the most horrifying scenarios is a crash where a pilot is accused of bringing down the plane deliberately. Such is the case with SilkAir flight 185. On December 19th, 1997, Silk Air flight 185 suddenly goes into a steep dive from 35,000 feet and crashes full throttle into the Musi River in Palembang, Indonesia, killing all on board. A chilling rumour began circulating after the crash. Pilot suicide or mechanical malfunction? This investigation into the controversial crash of SilkAir flight 185 strives to find the answer to a puzzling disaster. "
http://www.ngcasia.com/watch/program...d_program=5677
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UidO
Thanks for posting this link to the NG channel. May be those of us in the West - behind the eight-ball as usual - will get to see the program one day.
Rockhound
Thanks for posting this link to the NG channel. May be those of us in the West - behind the eight-ball as usual - will get to see the program one day.
Rockhound
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having reviewed the Indonesian NTSC's accident report and the US NTSB's detailed comments on it, I am distinctly unimpressed by all five of Cuba Libre's "interesting points against pilot suicide" brought out by the NG TV program. Factors suggestive of pilot-induced flight-control and other procedural inputs, such as lack of evidence of mechanical malfunctions wrt the aircraft, strong circumstantial evidence that the CVR was manually disabled some 8 minutes before impact, complete absence of evidence that any attempt was made to recover from the upset, etc, etc, etc, far outweigh the evidence - uniformly weak - that this accident resulted from a catastrophic mechanical failure. Anyone who thinks the latter is surely dreaming in Technicolor. And I wonder if it isn't premature to conclude that we will never know what actually happened. I doubt the full story has yet been told.
I'd still like to see that TV program, though.
Rockhound
I'd still like to see that TV program, though.
Rockhound
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Australasia
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silkair MI 185
If I'd known about the imminent National Geographic documentary I'd have waited to watch it instead of asking on PPRuNe.
However the same questions are still unanswered - but maybe now this has all gone public the answer will eventually follow.
Millerscourt - I am not rubbishing the F/O. It was not an accident, and not an incident by any definition, but a tragedy that could have happened to any of us in the same circumstances.
However, when the background of one pilot has been explored so aggressively without finding the answers, why is the background of the other pilot so assumed to be out-of-bounds?
For example, B772 says "there was a rumour the F/O's DNA was found on the A/C crash axe" with the obvious implication that the captain had murdered the F/O in order to gain control of the aircraft and crash it.
I hesitate to even mention this, but why is it so completely unthinkable to even consider the faintest alternative possibility of the Captain's final desperate fight for the lives of all the other souls on board?
However the same questions are still unanswered - but maybe now this has all gone public the answer will eventually follow.
Millerscourt - I am not rubbishing the F/O. It was not an accident, and not an incident by any definition, but a tragedy that could have happened to any of us in the same circumstances.
However, when the background of one pilot has been explored so aggressively without finding the answers, why is the background of the other pilot so assumed to be out-of-bounds?
For example, B772 says "there was a rumour the F/O's DNA was found on the A/C crash axe" with the obvious implication that the captain had murdered the F/O in order to gain control of the aircraft and crash it.
I hesitate to even mention this, but why is it so completely unthinkable to even consider the faintest alternative possibility of the Captain's final desperate fight for the lives of all the other souls on board?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nortwinds,
I find the notion that the captain deliberately put the aircraft into a suicidal power dive extremely far-fetched but that's what circumstantial evidence points to. However, to suggest that the F/O was the perpetrator surely goes way beyond reason. In any event, there is no evidence that either pilot tried "desperately" to save the situation (as there is in the Egyptair 990 accident).
The notion that Muslim beliefs make the suicide theory unlikely (as B772 pointed out in his post with reference to the attitude of the Indonesian authorities) is laughable. Events in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere prove that Muslims are as likely to kill and maim indiscriminately as anyone else, perhaps more so.
Rockhound
I find the notion that the captain deliberately put the aircraft into a suicidal power dive extremely far-fetched but that's what circumstantial evidence points to. However, to suggest that the F/O was the perpetrator surely goes way beyond reason. In any event, there is no evidence that either pilot tried "desperately" to save the situation (as there is in the Egyptair 990 accident).
The notion that Muslim beliefs make the suicide theory unlikely (as B772 pointed out in his post with reference to the attitude of the Indonesian authorities) is laughable. Events in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere prove that Muslims are as likely to kill and maim indiscriminately as anyone else, perhaps more so.
Rockhound
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 846
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=Rockhound;2983712]
I find the notion that the captain deliberately put the aircraft into a suicidal power dive extremely far-fetched but that's what circumstantial evidence points to.
Rockhound Why do you find this so far fetched?
The Captain was ruined financially and so were his parents because of his financial losses ( Huge loss of face) yet he took out a large Life Insurance Policy on his life which he could not afford on a regular basis on a Line Captain's salary with Silk Air.
He had been demoted from a Line Trainer to Line Captain ( huge loss of face) and could kiss goodbye to ever getting across to Mainline. He had previously been found guilty of pulling CB's behind his seat to lose important data.
He knew that everything he said and did beforehand would be looked at very closely so to suggest as Nortwind did that as he had arranged to be collected by his wife after the flight then that absolves him I find ludicrous. Likewise he behaved totally normally on the way down and during the turnround in Jakarta for exactly the same reason.
It was not in the interest of the Singapore Govt to look too closely into this incident with all the ramifications a verdict of suicide and murder would cost them.
Why were the thrust levers at full power? Hardly what you would expect from someone trying to gain control of an aircraft in a dive in a rudder hardover.
The F/O had everything to live for whilst the Captain did not.
It was also I believe the anniversary of a flight of A4,s which he was supposed to lead but turned back due to a mechanical fault in the Airforce which crashed into a hillside killing the whole formation. Make what you want of that but that might just be a total coincidence.
I find the notion that the captain deliberately put the aircraft into a suicidal power dive extremely far-fetched but that's what circumstantial evidence points to.
Rockhound Why do you find this so far fetched?
The Captain was ruined financially and so were his parents because of his financial losses ( Huge loss of face) yet he took out a large Life Insurance Policy on his life which he could not afford on a regular basis on a Line Captain's salary with Silk Air.
He had been demoted from a Line Trainer to Line Captain ( huge loss of face) and could kiss goodbye to ever getting across to Mainline. He had previously been found guilty of pulling CB's behind his seat to lose important data.
He knew that everything he said and did beforehand would be looked at very closely so to suggest as Nortwind did that as he had arranged to be collected by his wife after the flight then that absolves him I find ludicrous. Likewise he behaved totally normally on the way down and during the turnround in Jakarta for exactly the same reason.
It was not in the interest of the Singapore Govt to look too closely into this incident with all the ramifications a verdict of suicide and murder would cost them.
Why were the thrust levers at full power? Hardly what you would expect from someone trying to gain control of an aircraft in a dive in a rudder hardover.
The F/O had everything to live for whilst the Captain did not.
It was also I believe the anniversary of a flight of A4,s which he was supposed to lead but turned back due to a mechanical fault in the Airforce which crashed into a hillside killing the whole formation. Make what you want of that but that might just be a total coincidence.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Millerscourt,
Don't get me wrong. I do believe the captain committed suicide by diving his aircraft into the ground. However, it strains my credulity that someone would do such a thing but no doubt stranger things have happened. I find it difficult to get my head around the idea that a person would take such a demented, unspeakably brutal action. Clearly, though, the evidence leads to that conclusion. The Inonesian NTSC report was far too non-committal in its conclusions.
A minor correction: It was not Nortwinds but Cuba Libre who mentioned, in defence of the captain, that he had asked his wife to pick him up from Changi.
Rockhound
Don't get me wrong. I do believe the captain committed suicide by diving his aircraft into the ground. However, it strains my credulity that someone would do such a thing but no doubt stranger things have happened. I find it difficult to get my head around the idea that a person would take such a demented, unspeakably brutal action. Clearly, though, the evidence leads to that conclusion. The Inonesian NTSC report was far too non-committal in its conclusions.
A minor correction: It was not Nortwinds but Cuba Libre who mentioned, in defence of the captain, that he had asked his wife to pick him up from Changi.
Rockhound
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Somewhere in the Tropics UTC+7 to 9
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The factors pointing to suicide or rudder hardover are equally strong and weak at the same time.
The Captain's supposed financial ruin did not extend to his insolvency, if I remember correctly from the program, they stated in the end that he was solvent by $300k and the insurance policy he took was a loan insurance, not life insurance.
The captain did have a history of pulling out the CVR CB, but this aircraft does have a history of the CVR and FDR failing often. The program never revealed the CB position, it just said that the loss of recording in the CVR "was consistent with that of power being cut from the unit"... ie: it could have been the failure, or a CB pull out... We won't know...
For the rudder hardover, as similar as the three accidents superimposed on one another, there's only one similarity, that is the roll rate to the first 180 degree, after that, the similarities are in my opinion suggestive.
The PCU supplier's settlement out of court and the court verdict does not mean that the rudder hardover happened. The out of court settlement after with the victim's families after the verdict was standard damage limitations. Some other accident court cases have led to out of court settlement despite the defendant not having liability, because it was the cheapest way out and the least damaging way out. The verdict itself was not that the PCU caused the accident, but "whether the jury believed the PCU could have caused the accident" on I think it was 70 questions or more (can't remember).
Rockhound,
Unlike other muslim nations, we're not fans of suicides... culturally... and religiously.
But one thing we can probably conclude, that the NTSC's report was a complete disgrace!
PK-KAR
The Captain's supposed financial ruin did not extend to his insolvency, if I remember correctly from the program, they stated in the end that he was solvent by $300k and the insurance policy he took was a loan insurance, not life insurance.
The captain did have a history of pulling out the CVR CB, but this aircraft does have a history of the CVR and FDR failing often. The program never revealed the CB position, it just said that the loss of recording in the CVR "was consistent with that of power being cut from the unit"... ie: it could have been the failure, or a CB pull out... We won't know...
For the rudder hardover, as similar as the three accidents superimposed on one another, there's only one similarity, that is the roll rate to the first 180 degree, after that, the similarities are in my opinion suggestive.
The PCU supplier's settlement out of court and the court verdict does not mean that the rudder hardover happened. The out of court settlement after with the victim's families after the verdict was standard damage limitations. Some other accident court cases have led to out of court settlement despite the defendant not having liability, because it was the cheapest way out and the least damaging way out. The verdict itself was not that the PCU caused the accident, but "whether the jury believed the PCU could have caused the accident" on I think it was 70 questions or more (can't remember).
Rockhound,
Unlike other muslim nations, we're not fans of suicides... culturally... and religiously.
But one thing we can probably conclude, that the NTSC's report was a complete disgrace!
PK-KAR