Sydney Airport Message Board Sydney Airport Message Board  

Go Back   Sydney Airport Message Board > Aviation Industry News and Discussion > International Industry


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 7th April 2009, 10:59 AM
NickN NickN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,394
Default

Quite disgusting seeing a 2 year term dished out, when they locked up poor Schapelle for 20 years for some dope.

My sympathies to the families of those who perished who feel no justice has been done in this matter.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 7th April 2009, 12:26 PM
Adam P. Adam P. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: On two wheels
Posts: 570
Default

I really shouldn't be getting involved in this one again, but here goes nothing...

I think what Owen and Monty are taking exception to is the idea that the crash was all Captain Komar's fault. Giving him personally a jail sentence is clearly pointing the finger squarely at him - the fact that noone else has been prosecuted shows that.

In today's Sydney Morning Herald online is this article:

http://www.smh.com.au/world/despair-...0406-9ux2.html

Right below it online is a link to this one:
http://www.smh.com.au/world/another-...0406-9ux0.html

Read those two articles closely and see if you make the same connection I did. Especially read and think about the last few words in the first paragraph of the second one. The situation as I see it is much more complicated than hysterically pointing accusing fingers while saying that "HE ignored heaps of warnings and HE didn't go around and it was all HIS fault".

I'll even make it easy for you:
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Sydney Morning Herald
AN INDONESIAN military aircraft crashed in the city of Bandung yesterday, adding to the three mid-air emergencies and a crash landing in the past six weeks that are testament to the deep problems with Indonesia's air safety.
Do you see it? I'll emphasise it for you:
Quote:
deep problems with Indonesia's air safety
One more time:
Quote:
deep problems with Indonesia's air safety
The point I am trying to make is so very subtle that even the SMH does not appear to have made the connection. It really comes down to something quite simple:

It is very unfair to place the blame on the shoulders of one man.

An accident is very very rarely the fault of just one person. An accident is usually a symptom of a much deeper problem, a problem seated deep within an organisation, one that's part of its culture. Note that culture in this context is more than simply what country the company is from. Culture is 'the way we do things around here' and flows from the top, down. The example of 'the way they do things over there' that is referenced in the above article is of companies instructing engineers to repair unservicable bits of equipment rather than buying a new one, or pilots being rewarded for saving fuel. Clearly these are not particularly helpful for system safety as we might define it.

It is reasonable to assume that we are all essentially rational - ie in general we want to do the right thing. We want to make the right decisions. Sure, Captain Komar was the 'guy who made the mistake' that brought the whole world crashing down. But it is wise to consider what other, external factors contributed to Captain Komar's judgement on that day - factors which are not necessarily entirely under his control. Jailing just one man while saying "it was all HIS fault" is not an effective way to deal with the deeper issues that are at play in Indonesian aviation.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 7th April 2009, 12:49 PM
Greg McDonald Greg McDonald is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 723
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam P. View Post
It is very unfair to place the blame on the shoulders of one man.

I do understand what you're saying and I think everyone would agree that Indonesian aviation is little more than a very bad joke. Howver, in this case, the blame must be attributed to one man - the pilot.

Relate it back to the roads again...If a truckie has an accident and kills somebody on the road he is held ENTIRELY responsible. It doesn't matter if he is half asleep due to being pushed by his company. The responsibility is entirely his. Sure, his company might get a slap on the wrist for enforcing unsafe work practises but the ultimate decision to drive is still the drivers.
The same applies here. The pilot had numerous chances to abort the landing and was advised to do so by his second. It was ENTIRELY his decision to proceed with the landing and therefore ENTIRELY his responsibility to suffer the consequences for his poor decision.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 7th April 2009, 12:53 PM
Adam P. Adam P. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: On two wheels
Posts: 570
Default

So how does picking on one bloke help aviation safety overall, if the company gets a mere 'slap on the wrist'?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 7th April 2009, 01:54 PM
NickN NickN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,394
Default

I don't think he was picked on, more like he was held to account for his actions, or lack thereof. If you call prosecuting a negligent driver of any vehicle (aircraft or otherwise) being picked on you would then have to say anybody made to account for their actions by law being picked on.

The only way Indonesian aviation can ultimately become safer is for other countries to ban access to Indonesian carriers. Once Garuda and others are banned from their major destinations they will be forced to look internally and take on safer practices, better training and maintenance in order to be allowed to fly to those destinations once again.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 7th April 2009, 02:28 PM
Owen H Owen H is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 365
Default

NickN,

Its a nice idea to just ban them outright, but it can work against the final goal.

If Garuda are banned from flying to overseas countries, Indonesian aviation will suffer majorly, and the money will dry up. Unless there is money coming in, there is no way their industry will change for the better.

What needs to happen is that instead of bans, the other countries work together with the Indonesians (which may also require putting in funds), to work towards a far safer industry.

Greg,

Quote:
Relate it back to the roads again...If a truckie has an accident and kills somebody on the road he is held ENTIRELY responsible. It doesn't matter if he is half asleep due to being pushed by his company. The responsibility is entirely his. Sure, his company might get a slap on the wrist for enforcing unsafe work practises but the ultimate decision to drive is still the drivers.
I find it strange that you relate it back to an industry attitude that is clearly broken! Our whole point is that the situation you describe of penalising the driver, and not the company, is the WRONG one to take! It is purely penal, and does not fix the problem.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 7th April 2009, 03:16 PM
Stephen B Stephen B is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 96
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Owen H View Post
I find it strange that you relate it back to an industry attitude that is clearly broken! Our whole point is that the situation you describe of penalising the driver, and not the company, is the WRONG one to take! It is purely penal, and does not fix the problem.

Owen,

The company did not disregard years of training practice and experience. The company did not ignore 15 separate warning systems. The company did not ignore the second pilot. The company did not try to land a 737 at twice it's landing speed. The company did not drive that same 737 into a paddock causing it to be destroyed. The company did not kill 21 people and injure many others.

Regardless of what he may or may not have been thinking, one man chose to do these things. The independent accident investigation run by aviation experts said so.

That man, and ANYONE else who would do the same should pay the price. Yes, under the penal system, because it's the one we have right now.

I know that just about every company in every field of business places undue pressure on their employees at some time. What and how the employee chooses of their own free will to do in that situation is up to them. Yes, sometimes the choices are very difficult to make, but you always have a choice.

If you, instead of making a choice, can live with driving an airliner into the ground and killing everyone but yourself, please tell me with whom you fly and I'll be sure never to fly with them again.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 7th April 2009, 04:40 PM
Owen H Owen H is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 365
Default

Stephen,

The pilot did not intentionally crash the aircraft. He made a decision based on his training, practice and experience as you say. The company, and industry, is partially responsible for a pilot's training, which is where we need to concentrate.

My concern is not that the pilot gets some form of penalty. My concern is that so many here, and in the media, seem to have some perverted desire to just punish punish punish, while not understanding that what they are doing can damage the safety systems that exist. You and many others have said that he should, and I quote "pay the price". It makes us feel warm and fuzzy to know someone has been punished, while the industry is no safer, and more people can be killed in similar circumstances.

It is so important we can find out the causes behind this mentality of continue in what were marginal circumstances.

To go back to the trucking analogy - For a long time if a truck driver fell asleep at the wheel they were charged and imprisoned, and nothing else happened. That wasn't solving the problem, which is why, now, the regulator is putting pressure on the industry as a whole to remove the unrealistic timeframes the drivers are given.

Imprisoning drivers didn't make the industry safer, nor prevent further crashes. Regulator pressure to outlaw unsafe rostering practices, and harsh penalties for companies that created and encouraged unsafe driving patterns has helped.

We have lead the way in this field in aviation, and we need to ensure that it continues into some of the less wealthy aviation areas.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 7th April 2009, 06:19 PM
Adam P. Adam P. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: On two wheels
Posts: 570
Default

Owen, it is obvious you are writing from an informed perspective. Thank you.

Stephen,
Quote:
I know that just about every company in every field of business places undue pressure on their employees at some time.
Clearly this is a company attitude that is not condicive to safe operations. What measures do you think would be acceptable and effective in mitigating the risk arising from this sort of company culture?

Finally, to all,
At the risk of sounding like the thread police, this has been a fascinating discussion with some obviously polarised opinions. It would be a shame to see it going the way of the last thread on this topic. Please keep it civil - play the ball, not the man!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 7th April 2009, 06:48 PM
Stephen B Stephen B is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 96
Default

The way I see it, there are only two ways to mitigate/eradicate the risk of dangerous pressures being placed on employees to act in dangerous ways. The first is regulation by government. But in this capitalist society where the dollar is all too often the most important thing, effective and appropriate regulation can often be hard to come by.

Where there is no such regulation, the employees have to take a stand. There are various ways to do this, which can include going higher up the chain, going to the media, or simply refusing to undertake an unsafe activity.

If as has been suggested the pilot here was pressured to act in what has turned out to be a deadly way, then he should have taken action against it, up to and including refusing to fly the aircraft. And yes this could have cost him his job, which is a very big price for anyone. But now 21 other people have paid the price for him. And 21 families will continue to do so for the rest of their lives. Not to mention those injured and maimed.

This is the other side of the employees taking a stand. There is unfortunately always someone greedy or stupid enough to think they can get away with it. These are the people, such as potentially in this case that need to be removed from the equation.

If there are other factors that need to be investigated beyond those directly responsible for this crash, then someone needs to do it. They may even be a factor here, but this pilot deliberately chose and is solely responsible for his actions.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time now is 08:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright © Sydney Airport Message Board 1997-2022
Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the Conditions of Use and Privacy Statement