View Full Version : Breaking News Indonesia Plane Crash
Trip7-300ER
03-07-2007, 12:14 AM
This just in on the BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6425419.stm
http://www.jetphotos.net/user-uploads/_42649589_plane203.jpg
Garuda Plane involved in an accident on Landing
Unknown number of passengers on board
It is at Yogyakarta
It is a Boeing 737-400
will let you know more as i find out more
Edited for content
Passenger said that the aircraft overshot the runway
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/03/06/indonesia.plane.reut/index.html
Thanks Andrew
MAY ALL PASSENGERS WHO DID NOT MAKE IT REST IN PEACE
arifpal
03-07-2007, 12:46 AM
daMn! this is really sad.
what the hell is going on in Indonesia with all 737z.
BA747-436
03-07-2007, 02:06 AM
Dam Indonesia doesnt have a clue about aviation safety/maintanance. The Indonesian govement want to ban planes over 10 years old from flying in Indonesian airspace, and yet sh*t like this continues to happen on their own soil. Why dont they look closer to home before bringing up such a stupid remark as to ban all planes over 10 years old. If they are well maintained a good aircraft can last 30+ years. Some of the leading carriers in the world are flying aircraft way over 10 years old that are in excellent condition for their age. EG Qantas and their 747-300's. Varig on the other hand cant even manage to maintain a 777 withought wrecking it. It has a minimal amount to do with an aircrafts age and EVERYTHING to do with maintanance. :nonono:
ATLcenter
03-07-2007, 02:39 AM
Sucks that these planes keep going down, but I don't know why the Indonesian government can convince itself that the problem is with the manufacturer or age rather than maintenance. Are they oblivious to the fact that other carriers operate aircraft much older?
If such a rule is passed, doesn't it help the manufacturer? :p
Simpleboy
03-07-2007, 02:45 AM
Well, if they ban aircraft over 10 years old, then we will get a string of accidents of aircraft younger than 10 years old, will that mean they will then ban all aircraft?
Bok269
03-07-2007, 02:46 AM
Dam Indonesia doesnt have a clue about aviation safety/maintanance. The Indonesian govement want to ban planes over 10 years old from flying in Indonesian airspace, and yet sh*t like this continues to happen on their own soil. Why dont they look closer to home before bringing up such a stupid remark as to ban all planes over 10 years old. If they are well maintained a good aircraft can last 30+ years. Some of the leading carriers in the world are flying aircraft way over 10 years old that are in excellent condition for their age. EG Qantas and their 747-300's. Varig on the other hand cant even manage to maintain a 777 withought wrecking it. It has a minimal amount to do with an aircrafts age and EVERYTHING to do with maintanance. :nonono:
I agree. look at all the DC-3s still flying. I think Boeing should stop selling planes to Indonesian carriers till they get their act together. Even if the government blames Boeing, I dont think they have much to worry about because a good majority of the rest of the industry knows that it isnt the plane and knows how to maintain their own and operate them well. And if they sue Boeing, they should be ok.
Wasnt that 737-200 Freighter that crashed on landing a while back Indonesian? It was something like 35 years old and probably hadnt been washed in that long.
My prayers are with the ones that didnt make it and their families.
CathayPacific
03-07-2007, 03:02 AM
Even worse is that this time it's Garuda, the national carrier. It doesn't have a good safety record, but it is still supposed to be better than the LCCs. At least it doesn't create the record to be the first A330 crash. But this may reinforce the government's will to ban "old" planes.
BA747-436
03-07-2007, 03:25 AM
Can't really blame Boeing straight away....
If you've got a 1985 Ford and you change the oil say, once every 5 years, you'll find that sucker breaks down allot more frequently than the same car who's oil gets changed every 6 months and has a full service as the MANUFACTURER dictates.
Allot of the time it will be the airlines poor maintenance that causes the original issue with the aircraft and not an underlying problem made responsible by the manufacturer.
Trip7-300ER
03-07-2007, 03:52 AM
http://www.ndtv.com/topstories/showtopstory.asp?slug=Indonesian+jet+crash+kills+49&id=21567&category=International
as per NDTV which is the indian news channel
<IMG SRC=http://www.jetphotos.net/user-uploads/Indonesiajetliner_ap.jpg>
tsentsan
03-07-2007, 04:49 AM
Apparently, aircraft is a 1992 made B737-497 PK-GZC.
BA747-436
03-07-2007, 07:03 AM
Yes I can confirm the aircraft was indeed PH-GZC
<SCRIPT LANGUAGE='JavaScript' SRC="http://www.jetphotos.net/photolink.php?id=5914593" TYPE='text/javascript'></SCRIPT>
CathayPacific
03-07-2007, 07:05 AM
Apparently, aircraft is a 1992 made B737-497 PK-GZC.
CNN says this though?
"The plane was about 8-9 years old, according to a Garuda Airlines spokesman."
(almost at the end of the article: http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/03/06/indonesia.plane/index.html )
BA747-436
03-07-2007, 07:08 AM
CNN says this though?
"The plane was about 8-9 years old, according to a Garuda Airlines spokesman."
(almost at the end of the article: http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/03/06/indonesia.plane/index.html )
As per usual don't beleive everying you hear on CNN....
I've seen the footage of the crash and 'GZC' was very much visable as the reg at the rear of the burning aircraft.
kanehoshi
03-07-2007, 12:37 PM
It's high speed on landing (JPN TV)
Amazing the different results that occur after a runway overrun. The fact that Qantas still has their airframe operational and Air France suffered no fatalities yet people lost their lives in this case is incredible. It also seems amazing that the weather seems good, normally a factor in major overruns.
The outcome of the investigation into the loss of PK-GSC will no doubt remind operators worldwide of the fine line when all the holes in the swiss cheese line up (James Reason).
DAL767-400ER
03-07-2007, 03:00 PM
RIP :( . And here I thought Garuda was actually one of the safer carriers in Indonesia, if there is even such a thing. Really is there any really reliable and safe carrier left? Air Asia Indonesia perhaps? Seems that Adam Air, Lion Air, Bouraq et all lack safety procedures and maintenance.
Asmir Hamidovic
03-07-2007, 04:03 PM
Very sad they need to do somthing about these older aircraft in service.
screaming_emu
03-07-2007, 04:38 PM
Very sad they need to do somthing about these older aircraft in service.
has nothing to do with age...like has been said multiple times in this thread
Flughafen
03-07-2007, 04:41 PM
So sad.
Those photos remind me Garuda Indonesia DC-10 in Japan many years ago.
Chris Kilroy
03-07-2007, 04:42 PM
Very sad they need to do somthing about these older aircraft in service.
You're joking, right?
The U.S. (and indeed most of the western world) has thousands of aircraft older than this airframe flying around on a daily basis, and you don't hear about crashes here every couple of months. The problem in Indonesia runs much, much deeper than the age of the aircraft flying over there.
MELflyer
03-07-2007, 09:55 PM
Very sad they need to do somthing about these older aircraft in service.
Like others have said, it has nothing to do with age. If age was the reason and all jets over 10 years were banned, Qantas who have one of the best airline safety records in the world, would have to ground the majority of their 763's, 744's and quite a few 734's as well. Don't know anyone who has felt in danger flying their aircraft, no matter what the age. Can't say the same for indo airlines however!
BA747-436
03-07-2007, 11:40 PM
Dont forget their old workhorses - the 743's :-) - Great aircraft to fly on, looking foreward to my 6th trip on one in a couple of weeks.
TriStar-MiStar
03-08-2007, 01:19 AM
Athough I understand how grim things are in Indonesia, I'll take a wait and see attitude on this one. If it is a mechanical failure or error, it'll be even more grim. Wonder what the winds were doing, at touchdown? Thank God that more didn't perish.
Air France would have been horrific if it went further down toward the creek / river. They had a superb evacuation. Air France remiinded me of TWA 834 at JFK in 1992. The Tristar crew aborted takeoff (due to a fire in the rear of the plane) and the craft slammed back down as the fire raged on. 292 folks on board evacuated in less than 2 minutes, though only 3 of 8 doors were useable, due to the roaring fire.
By the Way: I subscribe to CNN "Breaking news" and the first email said that Garuda was a 757.
BA747-436
03-08-2007, 02:53 AM
By the Way: I subscribe to CNN "Breaking news" and the first email said that Garuda was a 757.
...My point exactly about CNN...
JordanD
03-09-2007, 02:47 AM
http://www.yougottaseethisvideo.com/labels/indonesian%20airline.html
Video taken right after the crash, don't know if it got posted already. Nothing really graphic in there but it's still kind of disturbing.
BA747-436
03-09-2007, 02:51 AM
It would seem by all accounts that the nose gear snaped off after a very hard and fast landing causing the aircraft to skew sideways off the runway, through the perimiter fence and into a rice field. The pilot and F/A survied and the black box has been found. Garuda are known for putting their most experianced crews on the Intl sectors. Will be interesting to see what comes out of this...
The pilot and F/A survied and the black box has been found..
It had two pilots, a Captain and a First Officer, both of whom survived. The chief F/A (Purser) perished in the fire.
BA747-436
03-09-2007, 05:41 AM
Sorry i meant the F/O not the F/A
Like others have said, it has nothing to do with age. If age was the reason and all jets over 10 years were banned, Qantas who have one of the best airline safety records in the world, would have to ground the majority of their 763's, 744's and quite a few 734's as well. Don't know anyone who has felt in danger flying their aircraft, no matter what the age. Can't say the same for indo airlines however!
A good example of the importance of correct maintenance is Russia.
For decades many people have believed that Russian/Soviet made aircraft are unsafe (because crash rates in Russia/CIS have been higher than in the western world).
This belief is of course ridiculous and illogical and shows a complete lack of understanding of aviation safety. There is a host of factors involved in any given crash. Anyone who understands aviation safety knows that factors such as aircraft maintenance, weather conditions, crew performance and air traffic control are far more important than aircraft design/construction or age.
The latter factors are just not relevant in the vast majority of crashes.
To illustrate this point you only need to monitor what happens when you introduce a safe aircraft into regions where maintenance procedures and safety regulations are less than optimal such as Central Africa or CIS. Or Indonesia.
Mungous
03-12-2007, 09:52 AM
Funny though, three out of the five fatal airline disasters this year were Indonesian. The other two were African (Sudan) and Russian-ish (Moldova)
I doubt age is a factor, I'd say its more like poorer maintenance and pilot training. It's hard not to stereotype with these incidents, but that is exactly how stereotypes are formed. ;-)
TriStar-MiStar
03-12-2007, 06:31 PM
One of my original comments centered on "what the winds were doing" when the plane landed. Alain's (locked) thread stated that the FO mentioned a strong downdraft. If that indeed was the case, maintanence and even pilot training maybe wouldn't make much of a difference.
Wasn't there a video that circulated on this board of a EU carrier who had their ac slammed down on the runway? Was that at Pau? They were able TOGO. They were lucky that their gear didn't shear off. That was a HARD hit, too.
Bok269
03-12-2007, 10:06 PM
Funny though, three out of the five fatal airline disasters this year were Indonesian. The other two were African (Sudan) and Russian-ish (Moldova)
I doubt age is a factor, I'd say its more like poorer maintenance and pilot training. It's hard not to stereotype with these incidents, but that is exactly how stereotypes are formed. ;-)
Adam Air on Jan 1.
Are you counting the non-fatal Adam Air flight? I wouldnt really call it a disaster.
And the incident in the Sudan ended safely.
BA747-436
03-13-2007, 03:07 AM
From what i hear they have sent the black box off to NTSB in the US as they are having trouble getting info from it.
RingwaySam
03-13-2007, 03:36 AM
Adam Air on Jan 1.
Are you counting the non-fatal Adam Air flight? I wouldnt really call it a disaster.
Any plane crash is a disaster in my opinion... Yeah it was a hard landing but still the aircraft was a w/o
DAL767-400ER
03-13-2007, 10:38 AM
From what i hear they have sent the black box off to NTSB in the US as they are having trouble getting info from it.
They can't get info out of the black box? Damn, if that's true, that's just another sad story for the Indonesian aviation "authorities"...
BA747-436
03-14-2007, 03:30 AM
Can't blame it on the Indonesian's this time, there was some issue with corrupted data or something. They flew it to Australia to try and decode it but this was in also in vein. So its off to the US for 3rd time lucky.
DAL767-400ER
03-14-2007, 11:07 AM
Corrupted data...
Hm, maybe the shoudl have the CIA decipher the black box then, they have their experience with corrupted data :twisted: .
AA 1818
03-17-2007, 09:19 PM
JAKARTA (Reuters) - An Indonesian passenger jet that crashed this month killing 21 people was coming in to land at a higher than normal speed, the chief investigator said on Saturday.
The Garuda Indonesia aircraft with 140 people on board overshot the runway in the central Java city of Yogyakarta and burst into flames on March 7. Five Australians were among those killed.
The chief crash investigator, Mardjono Siswosuwarno, said the aircraft's wing flaps failed to extend for landing and that might have been caused by the high speed.
"This could be a contributing factor, but what is more important is that the plane's speed was higher than normal. Why? We don't know yet," Siswosuwarno, from the National Transport Safety Commission, told Reuters.
Survivors of the crash have described how the aircraft approached the runway at a "crazy" speed.
Siswosuwarno said experts in the United States had fixed the cockpit voice recorder, known as the black box, after it was badly burned in the fire. Investigators can download the last 30 minutes of the crew's conversations, he said.
Police have questioned the pilots and cabin crew.
Indonesia has suffered a string of transport accidents in recent months, including an Adam Air aircraft that disappeared in January with 102 passengers and crew on board and a ferry sinking in late December in which hundreds died.
Vice President Jusuf Kalla said on Friday airlines would be given warnings, suspended or shut down if an audit found they had violated safety regulations.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070317/wl_nm/indonesia_plane_dc
From Reuters. What do you guys think? A question for the pilots here - what would have caused the pilot to come in at a high speed ?
Bok269
03-18-2007, 02:18 AM
im no pilot, but could it just be from bad training and performance standards? That seems to be a theme with Indonesian carriers. Also, could it be that Garuda would have penalized the pilot for coming in late, so he rushed in. From what I have read, the Indonesian carriers seem to put cost over safety.
DAL767-400ER
03-18-2007, 02:15 PM
That could definitely all be true, as sad as that is.
TriStar-MiStar
03-19-2007, 04:13 PM
im no pilot, but could it just be from bad training and performance standards? That seems to be a theme with Indonesian carriers. Also, could it be that Garuda would have penalized the pilot for coming in late, so he rushed in. From what I have read, the Indonesian carriers seem to put cost over safety.
I have to say again that it really sounds like there was some unexpected wind change (shear? downdarft? direction change?) at the time of landing. Training, maintainence and so on can be secondary when something like this happens.
There was a hard landing in Berne Switzerland that was caught on video. Here is the link: http://www.jetphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=37282&highlight=landing
I'm really surprised that that Avro didn't lose a gear / have a worse result.
Could that one and Garuda be similar (other than the Avro's crew were able TOGO)?
Bok269
03-19-2007, 09:40 PM
I have to say again that it really sounds like there was some unexpected wind change (shear? downdarft? direction change?) at the time of landing. Training, maintainence and so on can be secondary when something like this happens.
There was a hard landing in Berne Switzerland that was caught on video. Here is the link: http://www.jetphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=37282&highlight=landing
I'm really surprised that that Avro didn't lose a gear / have a worse result.
Could that one and Garuda be similar (other than the Avro's crew were able TOGO)?
Like I said Im no pilot. It seems that if the pilot was coming in fast anyway, windshear or none the result would have been bad.
Steve_7
01-22-2008, 07:16 AM
Like I said Im no pilot. It seems that if the pilot was coming in fast anyway, windshear or none the result would have been bad.
Looks as though the pilot was coming in very hot but there also seems
to be "Official" interference in this investigation.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/garuda-crash-air-force-fobs-off-police/2008/01/21/1200764171806.html
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/indonesians-deny-blocking-crash-inquiry/2008/01/22/1200764255744.html
Steve_7
02-04-2008, 09:59 PM
Just an update, we'll watch and see where this goes.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/05/2154357.htm
Uncle Jay
02-05-2008, 03:26 PM
Did anyone catch that little piece of official interference ? TWICE the MAXIMUM safe speed ? Are we supposed to believe it was going over 225 mph ?
Steve_7
02-05-2008, 06:43 PM
Did anyone catch that little piece of official interference ? TWICE the MAXIMUM safe speed ? Are we supposed to believe it was going over 225 mph ?
Nowhere in this update is the mention of any ATC warnings or tower instructions.
Is there ANY chance he'd have stopped before overshooting the runway?
(given the reported speed that he was landing with).
Dmmoore
02-05-2008, 08:56 PM
Nowhere in this update is the mention of any ATC warnings or tower instructions.
Is there ANY chance he'd have stopped before overshooting the runway?
(given the reported speed that he was landing with).
I don't understand what warnings you think ATC should give. The Tower cleared the aircraft to land that is an ATC instruction. The rest of the task is solely the responsibility of the flight crew. If the runway is fouled, ATC should cancel the landing clearance by issuing instructions to go around, other than that ATC is out of the picture.
Steve_7
02-06-2008, 01:05 AM
I don't understand what warnings you think ATC should give. The Tower cleared the aircraft to land that is an ATC instruction. The rest of the task is solely the responsibility of the flight crew. If the runway is fouled, ATC should cancel the landing clearance by issuing instructions to go around, other than that ATC is out of the picture.
Thank you for making that clear Don. I'm just a complete novice on this
forum. I've been following aviation news at AD for a few years and was about
to join when the forum crashed. I'll try not to make stupid statements as I
learn about airline safety and accident investigations. My apologies for my
ignorance.
SYDCBRWOD
12-12-2009, 04:34 AM
As a final ignominious postscript to this terrible incident, the pilot who had been found guilty of neligence in this crash (short recap, tried to land on a short bumpy runway at twice the normal airspeed despite 15 computerised warnings, and four requests from the co-pilot to go around - the crash killed 21 pax) has had all charges he had been found guilty of dismissed and he has been released.
Way to go Indonesia, it did look like you as a country had corruption under control - guess I got that wrong.:shakehea:
EconomyClass
12-12-2009, 02:51 PM
Will this affect their status in Europe which had only begun to recover?
Airfoilsguy
12-12-2009, 05:02 PM
Sure "breaking news" from 3 years ago:shakehea:
SYDCBRWOD
12-13-2009, 02:32 AM
Sure "breaking news" from 3 years ago:shakehea:
And it was three years ago when posted by the OP. I could have updated people by creating a new thread, but its normal practise to keep all posts on the same topic or incident on the same thread.
The only person (apart from mods) that can alter the thread title would be the OP. How would you have posted this news?
As a final ignominious postscript to this terrible incident, the pilot who had been found guilty of neligence in this crash (short recap, tried to land on a short bumpy runway at twice the normal airspeed despite 15 computerised warnings, and four requests from the co-pilot to go around - the crash killed 21 pax) has had all charges he had been found guilty of dismissed and he has been released.
Way to go Indonesia, it did look like you as a country had corruption under control - guess I got that wrong.:shakehea:
I think we figured that out when they served him a whopping two-year sentence for taking 21 lives.
mzk49o1
12-14-2009, 05:11 AM
As a final ignominious postscript to this terrible incident, the pilot who had been found guilty of neligence in this crash (short recap, tried to land on a short bumpy runway at twice the normal airspeed despite 15 computerised warnings, and four requests from the co-pilot to go around - the crash killed 21 pax) has had all charges he had been found guilty of dismissed and he has been released.
There's something so incredibly wrong about that.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.