Garuda crash, copilot hours
 

Have just read the full report on the Garuda crash at Yogyakarta on 7th March. The copilot had 229 hours only before getting into the right hand seat of a 737. This does not warrant any further mention in the report.

In view of some criticism of his actions, it may be salutary to wonder whether he had sufficient prior experience before flying the line.

This should give some food for thought before going too far with shortened aircraft training hours.

and????????????

Is there any difference between prior experience and post experience?

HOW ARE your to get experiance when no-one is to give experiance. Catch 22 situation!

Garuda crash, copilot hours
 

The F/o did have 1300 odd hours as copilot...

yeap, fight for the controls at 50'. nice one.

229 hours before getting the right hand seat of a 737. Seems the next 1000 didn't help much

The hours are irrelevant. The culture of the flight deck more so. ie, in a non-subserviant culture the co-pilot would have been more forceful in action taken. Which leads me to -

Maggot. Not fight for the controls at 50' , but when it was 1427' too high and 90kts too fast at the IAF. Or if that wasn't enough then when they were still unable to extend landing flap. Or perhaps finally when the FIRST GPWS sounded (as opposed to the 14 others), by hitting the G/A switches and taking over. His hours on type had nothing(ok a little) to do with that - but the subserviant culture more so.

M

could someone provide a link to the report, please.

Less background experience, more subservience

Does anyone know where to downlod an english copy of the report, I can only find Indonesian. Thanks

Yeah, I wouldn't mind reading it before I put my 2c worth in...

MPL here we come.

Conversely the Captain had how many hours and still tried to land??

For the report:
Google on NTSC (National Transportation Safety Committee) then go Aviation Safety then Archives. All in English.

Agreed. Even at only 229 hours (which he wasn't), anyone should be able to recognise the gravity of such a deteriorating scenario, and take necessary action. A steep cockpit authority gradient at it's worst.

Does anyone really think the Captian would have given up control of the aircraft if the F/O said "Taking over Captian!"?? I can well imagine both pilots with their hands on the controls, fighting to over power each other.

As has been suggested here before on PPRuNe during discussions about other accidents involving fast approaches, all the F/O had to do was to select the gear UP. The Captain would then have no choice but to go around.

I think personality, self confidence (which can vary from time to time), culture (both country and company), and experience can all have an influence on how pilots assert themselves on the flight deck.

The Cost of Face. All too evident in that part of the world. And experience (or lack thereof) of the co-pilot has absolutely nothing to do with it. This is NOT a racist comment, simply a statement of fact - made after 15+ years experience in airline ops in the area.

Total hours
 

In my opinion everyone starts with "0" at some point. Hours has nothing to do with corrective actions that needs to be taken during not normal situations. If only procedures were followed (by both high or low hour pilots), we would have had lot less accidents.

Stop slagging the Co-pilot only. It was not his experience level that caused the accident. The Captain had many years of experience and still decided to continue. Does anyone understand the concepts of 'MULTICREW' and 'CRM'. Obviously serverely lacking in this incident.:ugh: