JET AIRWAYS Capt. lets Trainee pilot land a 737
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: unknown
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JET AIRWAYS Capt. lets Trainee pilot land a 737
Jet air capt. let a Trainee Pilot (not type rated on the 737) land a 737. Capt was suspended for 3 months and is back flying now. The airline hushed up the incident and did not inform DGCA about it.
Jet flouted safety norms; will take action: DGCA
New Delhi: The aviation regulator has asked Jet Airways (India) Ltd to explain why it allowed a trainee pilot to land a packed flight in Mumbai in October, violating safety norms.
The regulator has summoned the airline’s chief of flight safety and the chief of operations on Monday after it received a complaint this month that the airline had failed to report to the regulator that a commander allowed a trainee pilot to land the flight.
Bharat Bhushan, director general of civil aviation, said the airline “hushed up” the case and promised to take action against the carrier’s executives.
“Such a serious matter where the supernumerary was asked to land a plane full of passengers...what can be more unsafe? We are surprised that we didn’t know about it. They hushed it up. This is completely unacceptable,” he said. “We have suspended the two pilots. We are going to take action against the airline, the people who were responsible for this, including the chief of safety.”
The regulator has the authority to terminate its approval for safety officials of the country’s largest airline by passengers carried.
A supernumerary pilot is someone who has just finished his flying school training. Such a trainee pilot is taken on board to observe procedures and learn the dynamics of flying a bigger jet.The 5 February complaint to the directorate general of civilaviation (DGCA) had asked if “the airline inform(ed) the DGCA of this serious violation? If they did, what action did DGCA take and was this recorded in the list of violations in the safety audit conducted? If they did not report this to the DGCA, what action will DGCA take against the pilot and the airline?” Mint has reviewed a copy of the letter.
An airline is expected to voluntarily report safety issues to the regulator regularly, including minor snags. The incident raises questions on how many of such incidents are reported voluntarily by the airlines in India.
An email sent to a Jet Airways spokeswoman on Saturday remained unanswered. The company’s spokespersons did not answer calls and text messages sent on Sunday.
The event comes two months after DGCA’s audit of airlines found that some airlines were not reporting incidents to the regulator.
In case of Jet Airways, the audit report had noted that the airline did not have enough trainers for regulatory requirements, had a backlog of pilots and cabin crew who need training, international stations were “not audited by the flight safety department for the last two consecutive years” and the airline had not recruited pilots to cater for the 2011 operational plan.
An expert said the landing by a trainee pilot was an extremely serious offence that should result in the firing of the officials involved and the airline should be severely reprimanded.
“Anything that is done against regulations on the flight deck is considered a disregard for safety, and therefore, is a serious offence. That is why rules have been made in concert with DGCA and designed to safeguard the aircraft, its crew and passengers,” said Steve Forte, a former chief executive of Jet Airways. “The airline should fire the captain. Any incident must be reported to the office of DGCA. If it is not done, the offence becomes even more serious, and when DGCA finds out, there can be a very heavy fine imposed on the airline, a suspension for the captain in question and maybe even the firing of the director of flight operations.”
“About four months back, Jet Airways captain Sheikh Ahmed was operating a flight into Mumbai along with F/O (flight officer) Khajuria (co-pilot). There was a supernumerary pilot on board. I understand that the captain asked the first officer to vacate his seat and he permitted the supernumerary pilot to occupy the right seat for the landing,” said the 5 February complaint. “This is a very serious violation and endangers the lives of all on board. I understand Khajuria gave a written complaint. There appears to be an intervention from someone to soften the action against the captain, who was merely suspended for three months and is now back to flying as a captain.”
A supernumerary pilot has usually only flown a single-engine Cessna 172, which has a gross weight of about 1,000kg, and is not trained to fly a modern twin-engine jets such as the Boeing 737-800 that weighs about 79,000kg.
A supernumerary pilot is not equipped to handle even a minor emergency without training.
The supernumerary flights are part of the learning process to observe and get used to the speed of events before undergoing simulator training.
The other major factor is that there are mandatory call-outs on final approaches that a co-pilot has to give. The untrained pilot will not be in a position to do that, nor will the person be able to spot any deviations from a safe flight path.
Jet flouted safety norms; will take action: DGCA - Economy and Politics - livemint.com
Jet flouted safety norms; will take action: DGCA
New Delhi: The aviation regulator has asked Jet Airways (India) Ltd to explain why it allowed a trainee pilot to land a packed flight in Mumbai in October, violating safety norms.
The regulator has summoned the airline’s chief of flight safety and the chief of operations on Monday after it received a complaint this month that the airline had failed to report to the regulator that a commander allowed a trainee pilot to land the flight.
Bharat Bhushan, director general of civil aviation, said the airline “hushed up” the case and promised to take action against the carrier’s executives.
“Such a serious matter where the supernumerary was asked to land a plane full of passengers...what can be more unsafe? We are surprised that we didn’t know about it. They hushed it up. This is completely unacceptable,” he said. “We have suspended the two pilots. We are going to take action against the airline, the people who were responsible for this, including the chief of safety.”
The regulator has the authority to terminate its approval for safety officials of the country’s largest airline by passengers carried.
A supernumerary pilot is someone who has just finished his flying school training. Such a trainee pilot is taken on board to observe procedures and learn the dynamics of flying a bigger jet.The 5 February complaint to the directorate general of civilaviation (DGCA) had asked if “the airline inform(ed) the DGCA of this serious violation? If they did, what action did DGCA take and was this recorded in the list of violations in the safety audit conducted? If they did not report this to the DGCA, what action will DGCA take against the pilot and the airline?” Mint has reviewed a copy of the letter.
An airline is expected to voluntarily report safety issues to the regulator regularly, including minor snags. The incident raises questions on how many of such incidents are reported voluntarily by the airlines in India.
An email sent to a Jet Airways spokeswoman on Saturday remained unanswered. The company’s spokespersons did not answer calls and text messages sent on Sunday.
The event comes two months after DGCA’s audit of airlines found that some airlines were not reporting incidents to the regulator.
In case of Jet Airways, the audit report had noted that the airline did not have enough trainers for regulatory requirements, had a backlog of pilots and cabin crew who need training, international stations were “not audited by the flight safety department for the last two consecutive years” and the airline had not recruited pilots to cater for the 2011 operational plan.
An expert said the landing by a trainee pilot was an extremely serious offence that should result in the firing of the officials involved and the airline should be severely reprimanded.
“Anything that is done against regulations on the flight deck is considered a disregard for safety, and therefore, is a serious offence. That is why rules have been made in concert with DGCA and designed to safeguard the aircraft, its crew and passengers,” said Steve Forte, a former chief executive of Jet Airways. “The airline should fire the captain. Any incident must be reported to the office of DGCA. If it is not done, the offence becomes even more serious, and when DGCA finds out, there can be a very heavy fine imposed on the airline, a suspension for the captain in question and maybe even the firing of the director of flight operations.”
“About four months back, Jet Airways captain Sheikh Ahmed was operating a flight into Mumbai along with F/O (flight officer) Khajuria (co-pilot). There was a supernumerary pilot on board. I understand that the captain asked the first officer to vacate his seat and he permitted the supernumerary pilot to occupy the right seat for the landing,” said the 5 February complaint. “This is a very serious violation and endangers the lives of all on board. I understand Khajuria gave a written complaint. There appears to be an intervention from someone to soften the action against the captain, who was merely suspended for three months and is now back to flying as a captain.”
A supernumerary pilot has usually only flown a single-engine Cessna 172, which has a gross weight of about 1,000kg, and is not trained to fly a modern twin-engine jets such as the Boeing 737-800 that weighs about 79,000kg.
A supernumerary pilot is not equipped to handle even a minor emergency without training.
The supernumerary flights are part of the learning process to observe and get used to the speed of events before undergoing simulator training.
The other major factor is that there are mandatory call-outs on final approaches that a co-pilot has to give. The untrained pilot will not be in a position to do that, nor will the person be able to spot any deviations from a safe flight path.
Jet flouted safety norms; will take action: DGCA - Economy and Politics - livemint.com
Last edited by flyjet787; 13th Feb 2012 at 01:33.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another report written by The livement.com (WSJ) states the supy was occupying the right seat for the landing and no acting as fly pilot.
Jet flouted safety norms; will take action: DGCA - Economy and Politics - livemint.com
Jet flouted safety norms; will take action: DGCA - Economy and Politics - livemint.com
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: unknown
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@captjns
How do you arrive at the conclusion that just because he was seated on the RHS he was not actually flying the aircraft?
Even if he was not flying don't you think its a sever breach of safety to let a non type rated Trainee pilot with a mere 200-250 hrs on a C 152/172 sit on the RHS during approach and landing? What if the PIC got incapacitated? What if they had a malfunction requiring the crew to carry out recall items? What if the PIC himself was not flying a stabilized approach? Was he even remotely qualified to correct the PIC or take over under the above circumstances??
I can understand if the PIC let the Trainee occupy the RHS in cruise for a few minuted or so. But during approach and landing??
How do you arrive at the conclusion that just because he was seated on the RHS he was not actually flying the aircraft?
Even if he was not flying don't you think its a sever breach of safety to let a non type rated Trainee pilot with a mere 200-250 hrs on a C 152/172 sit on the RHS during approach and landing? What if the PIC got incapacitated? What if they had a malfunction requiring the crew to carry out recall items? What if the PIC himself was not flying a stabilized approach? Was he even remotely qualified to correct the PIC or take over under the above circumstances??
I can understand if the PIC let the Trainee occupy the RHS in cruise for a few minuted or so. But during approach and landing??
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Far Side
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right now, as far as I can tell, we have only the "real" f/o's word. I've heard nothing else, myself. I'm not in a position to.
USAir had a similar incident almost twenty years ago; there was a lot going on behind the scenes as it turned out. The initial reports were a lot uglier than what really happened.
While having the faux f/o in the seat is very serious, the paper does inflame the situation by saying s/he actually did the landing. That's a LOT MORE serious!
Most of the suits and "experts" are quite properly keeping quiet until the dust settles; the paper had to resort to comments from an executive who's been gone almost ten years. The problem (always) is that if the story is false or exaggerated the paper will just let the story die rather than updating it with facts. We'll see.
USAir had a similar incident almost twenty years ago; there was a lot going on behind the scenes as it turned out. The initial reports were a lot uglier than what really happened.
While having the faux f/o in the seat is very serious, the paper does inflame the situation by saying s/he actually did the landing. That's a LOT MORE serious!
Most of the suits and "experts" are quite properly keeping quiet until the dust settles; the paper had to resort to comments from an executive who's been gone almost ten years. The problem (always) is that if the story is false or exaggerated the paper will just let the story die rather than updating it with facts. We'll see.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
flyjet787... please read my response on the other thread concerning this matter.
No where does it state that the supy was flying the jet. I would beg to the better sense of judgement on behalf of the skipper that he/she did not permit the supy to land the jet.
No where does it state that the supy was flying the jet. I would beg to the better sense of judgement on behalf of the skipper that he/she did not permit the supy to land the jet.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rotorhead... yeah I remember that... a cabin crewmember on a flight between either PHL - TPA or was it TPA - PHL.
I'm sure the skipper got a ride of his life that night.
I'm sure the skipper got a ride of his life that night.
Last edited by captjns; 13th Feb 2012 at 12:53.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: unknown
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@captjns
The aviation regulator has asked Jet Airways (India) Ltd to explain why it allowed a trainee pilot to land a packed flight in Mumbai in October, violating safety norms.
The regulator has summoned the airline’s chief of flight safety and the chief of operations on Monday after it received a complaint this month that the airline had failed to report to the regulator that a commander allowed a trainee pilot to land the flight.
Bharat Bhushan, director general of civil aviation, said the airline “hushed up” the case and promised to take action against the carrier’s executives.
Source: Jet flouted safety norms; will take action: DGCA - Economy and Politics - livemint.com
Now whether the PIC let the trainee actually land the aircraft will remain a mystery. The PIC of course to save his a$$ would say he only let the Trainee sit on the RHS (which itself is a major breach of safety).
What I am trying to say is you can not have any tom, dick and harry sit on the RHS of a commercial jet carrying hundreds of passengers. For God's sake the Trainee was not even type rated on a 737. How would he perform the PM (assuming he was just sitting on the RHS and not flying) duties. You have a 2nd pilot in the cockpit to monitor the other pilots actions. Was this Trainee competent enough to actually monitor the approach and landing and call out any abnormalities or an unsterilized approach etc.?? And as I have mentioned before what if they had a malfunction or something of that sort on approach or landing which requires the combined effort of both the pilots?
Worst of all what if they had some sort of an incident or something and later found out in the investigation that an unqualified pilot has occupied one of the pilot seats??
YOU CAN NOT HAVE AN UNQUALIFIED PILOT OCCUPY EITHER THE LHS OR THE RHS. Especially during a critical stage like landing and approach.
He/She should not have let a Trainee pilot not rated on a 737 occupy the RHS during the approach and landing in the first place.
No where does it state that the supy was flying the jet
The regulator has summoned the airline’s chief of flight safety and the chief of operations on Monday after it received a complaint this month that the airline had failed to report to the regulator that a commander allowed a trainee pilot to land the flight.
Bharat Bhushan, director general of civil aviation, said the airline “hushed up” the case and promised to take action against the carrier’s executives.
Source: Jet flouted safety norms; will take action: DGCA - Economy and Politics - livemint.com
Now whether the PIC let the trainee actually land the aircraft will remain a mystery. The PIC of course to save his a$$ would say he only let the Trainee sit on the RHS (which itself is a major breach of safety).
What I am trying to say is you can not have any tom, dick and harry sit on the RHS of a commercial jet carrying hundreds of passengers. For God's sake the Trainee was not even type rated on a 737. How would he perform the PM (assuming he was just sitting on the RHS and not flying) duties. You have a 2nd pilot in the cockpit to monitor the other pilots actions. Was this Trainee competent enough to actually monitor the approach and landing and call out any abnormalities or an unsterilized approach etc.?? And as I have mentioned before what if they had a malfunction or something of that sort on approach or landing which requires the combined effort of both the pilots?
Worst of all what if they had some sort of an incident or something and later found out in the investigation that an unqualified pilot has occupied one of the pilot seats??
YOU CAN NOT HAVE AN UNQUALIFIED PILOT OCCUPY EITHER THE LHS OR THE RHS. Especially during a critical stage like landing and approach.
I would beg to the better sense of judgement on behalf of the skipper that he/she did not permit the supy to land the jet.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He/She should not have let a Trainee pilot not rated on a 737 occupy the RHS during the approach and landing in the first place.
I agree. Bear in mind some of my statements are "tonge in cheek" so to say. Lets face it the journos... from all over don't always report the true facts. They have a nasty habit of embellishment with the hopes of winning the Pulitzer.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Far Side
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by captjns
Rotorhead... yeah I remember that... a cabin crewmember on a flight between either PHL - TPA or was it TPA - PHL.
I'm sure the skipper got a ride of his life that night.
I'm sure the skipper got a ride of his life that night.
She was already giving rides ... and I'm not sure - oh, well, it was a long time ago.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: germany
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats the difference..this is India. NONE of the pilots in the cockpit were qualified. Two of the pilots endorsements are fake and the SNY hasn't completed training.
Incredible India....where human life means nothing to the bosses.
Incredible India....where human life means nothing to the bosses.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: unknown
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DGCA orders removal of Jet
DGCA orders removal of Jet’s chief of flight safety
Feb 14 2012
The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) ordered the removal of Jet Airways (India) Ltd’s chief of flight safety Vishesh Oberoi for failing to perform his duty as the airline’s top safety manager, a first in recent times.
The regulator took the action against Jet Airways for allowing a trainee pilot to land a packed flight on 14 October in Mumbai, violating safety norms. DGCA had summoned Jet officials for an explanation on Monday.
The airline was also found to have violated rules, including not informing the regulator about the incident, Mint reported on 13 February.
Jet Airways chief executive Nikos Kardasis, along with other officials, had an hour-long meeting with Bharat Bhushan, the director general of civil aviation, on Monday, said a government official who declined to be named.
“The head of flight safety has been ordered to be removed immediately for failing to perform his duties,” the official said. A second government official confirmed the move and added that the airline has to inform the regulator on the appointment of a new chief of flight safety.
A Jet spokesperson declined to respond to an email. Phone calls and text messages seeking comment remained unanswered.
DGCA approves the chief of flight safety for each airline. The official is directly responsible to the regulator and is required to make regular reports about matters of safety. An airline is expected to voluntarily report safety issues to the regulator, including minor snags.
DGCA came to know of the incident through a complaint on 5 February.
“About four months back, Jet Airways captain Sheikh Ahmed was operating a flight into Mumbai along with F/O (flight officer) Khajuria (co-pilot). There was a supernumerary pilot on board. I understand that the captain asked the first officer to vacate his seat and he permitted the supernumerary pilot to occupy the right seat for the landing,” the complaint said. “This is a very serious violation and endangers the lives of all on board. I understand Khajuria gave a written complaint. There appears to be an intervention from someone to soften the action against the captain, who was merely suspended for three months and is now back to flying as a captain.”
The complaint asked if “the airline inform(ed) the DGCA of this serious violation? If they did, what action did DGCA take and was this recorded in the list of violations in the safety audit conducted? If they did not report this, what action will DGCA take against the pilot and the airline?”
The licence of the commander has been suspended, according to DGCA.
It, however, remains to be seen if his flying licence will be cancelled too as DGCA has done in past cases, said Mohan Ranganathan, an air safety expert and member of the government-appointed Civil Aviation Safety Advisory Council. “DGCA should not stop with action against the flight safety head. A clear message has to go to all airlines that such violations will not be tolerated. A strong action against the airline is also warranted for hiding this incident,” he said.
DGCA orders removal of Jet’s chief of flight safety
Feb 14 2012
The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) ordered the removal of Jet Airways (India) Ltd’s chief of flight safety Vishesh Oberoi for failing to perform his duty as the airline’s top safety manager, a first in recent times.
The regulator took the action against Jet Airways for allowing a trainee pilot to land a packed flight on 14 October in Mumbai, violating safety norms. DGCA had summoned Jet officials for an explanation on Monday.
The airline was also found to have violated rules, including not informing the regulator about the incident, Mint reported on 13 February.
Jet Airways chief executive Nikos Kardasis, along with other officials, had an hour-long meeting with Bharat Bhushan, the director general of civil aviation, on Monday, said a government official who declined to be named.
“The head of flight safety has been ordered to be removed immediately for failing to perform his duties,” the official said. A second government official confirmed the move and added that the airline has to inform the regulator on the appointment of a new chief of flight safety.
A Jet spokesperson declined to respond to an email. Phone calls and text messages seeking comment remained unanswered.
DGCA approves the chief of flight safety for each airline. The official is directly responsible to the regulator and is required to make regular reports about matters of safety. An airline is expected to voluntarily report safety issues to the regulator, including minor snags.
DGCA came to know of the incident through a complaint on 5 February.
“About four months back, Jet Airways captain Sheikh Ahmed was operating a flight into Mumbai along with F/O (flight officer) Khajuria (co-pilot). There was a supernumerary pilot on board. I understand that the captain asked the first officer to vacate his seat and he permitted the supernumerary pilot to occupy the right seat for the landing,” the complaint said. “This is a very serious violation and endangers the lives of all on board. I understand Khajuria gave a written complaint. There appears to be an intervention from someone to soften the action against the captain, who was merely suspended for three months and is now back to flying as a captain.”
The complaint asked if “the airline inform(ed) the DGCA of this serious violation? If they did, what action did DGCA take and was this recorded in the list of violations in the safety audit conducted? If they did not report this, what action will DGCA take against the pilot and the airline?”
The licence of the commander has been suspended, according to DGCA.
It, however, remains to be seen if his flying licence will be cancelled too as DGCA has done in past cases, said Mohan Ranganathan, an air safety expert and member of the government-appointed Civil Aviation Safety Advisory Council. “DGCA should not stop with action against the flight safety head. A clear message has to go to all airlines that such violations will not be tolerated. A strong action against the airline is also warranted for hiding this incident,” he said.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shame that a more mature post would have been expected from you sunset_contrails_10
.
That's why I say that computers should never be used without adult supervision... including myself at times I must admit
.
.That's why I say that computers should never be used without adult supervision
... including myself at times I must admit.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Playing Golf!
Age: 46
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adam, thats a rather missleading comment.
The US license rules are not fully ICAO, but it is wrong and incorrect to suggest that untrained crew are flying 737's in the US.
That is the point here, an unlicensed, untrained and unauthorised person was at the controls of this Jet Airways flight.
The US license rules are not fully ICAO, but it is wrong and incorrect to suggest that untrained crew are flying 737's in the US.
That is the point here, an unlicensed, untrained and unauthorised person was at the controls of this Jet Airways flight.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Playing Golf!
Age: 46
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because, in the US a type rating is not required for a SIC on internal flights.
However, they are trained and tested.. It is just a difference in the US FAA licence from ICAO.
Adam has thrown this point in to stir things up, it is nothing like the situation in India.
However, they are trained and tested.. It is just a difference in the US FAA licence from ICAO.
Adam has thrown this point in to stir things up, it is nothing like the situation in India.