Any person that has worked their way up to a B.737/400 Captaincy position in any airline and any country on this planet , is definetly skilled enough to fullfil that role!
I don't just blame the crew in this accident but I also blame the airline,who hasn't introduced better crew co-ordination between their pilots on their flight decks.
This accident should never have happened and at least one of the pilots should have taken over and did a go-around when they noticed the aircraft was flown too high and fast!
Shame on you Garuda!
Garuda 737 crash, how old was this plane?
Moderator: Latest news team
-
Bracebrace
- Posts: 273
- Joined: 04 Apr 2006, 00:00
I guess that's the big question. Anybody familiar with the swiss cheese model? Nothing is perfect. Training, management, skills, crew cooperation,... all might have a weak point. If one day they join and come together in one situation, you end up with an accident.world wrote:Any person that has worked their way up to a B.737/400 Captaincy position in any airline and any country on this planet , is definetly skilled enough to fullfil that role!
The Garuda Indonesia's B737-400's, that overshot the runway at Yogyakarta on March 7. crash, was caused by a higher-than-normal speed in its attempt to land.
The B737-400's wing flaps failed to extend for landing, and that might have been caused by the high speed.
imho, that does not show high pilot skills?
The B737-400's wing flaps failed to extend for landing, and that might have been caused by the high speed.
imho, that does not show high pilot skills?
The Flemish newspaper Het Laatste Nieuws today states that an argument in the cockpit was the cause for this crash:
"...A member of the investigation team today said that the CVR has registered that the pilots were having an argument about speed and wing flaps for the landing. If was the first time the pilot (15.000 hours) and the co-pilot (2.000 hours) were flying together..."
http://www.hln.be/hlns/cache/det/art_42 ... n=homeHVDN
The article doesn't mention when the incident in the cockpit happened (approach ? final approach ? after touch down ?).
Een lid van het team dat onderzoek deed naar het ongeluk maakte de bevindingen zondag bekend. Hij zei dat menselijk falen mogelijk de oorzaak is van het vliegtuigongeluk. "Ik ben bang dat het ongeluk is veroorzaakt doordat de piloten er met hun hoofd niet bij waren." De audio recorder van de cockpit duidt erop dat de piloten kort voor de noodlottige landing ruzie maakten over de snelheid en de stand van de vleugels. De twee vlogen voor het eerst samen. De hoofdpiloot had meer dan 15 duizend vlieguren, de jeugdige co-piloot tweeduizend.
"...A member of the investigation team today said that the CVR has registered that the pilots were having an argument about speed and wing flaps for the landing. If was the first time the pilot (15.000 hours) and the co-pilot (2.000 hours) were flying together..."
http://www.hln.be/hlns/cache/det/art_42 ... n=homeHVDN
The article doesn't mention when the incident in the cockpit happened (approach ? final approach ? after touch down ?).
Een lid van het team dat onderzoek deed naar het ongeluk maakte de bevindingen zondag bekend. Hij zei dat menselijk falen mogelijk de oorzaak is van het vliegtuigongeluk. "Ik ben bang dat het ongeluk is veroorzaakt doordat de piloten er met hun hoofd niet bij waren." De audio recorder van de cockpit duidt erop dat de piloten kort voor de noodlottige landing ruzie maakten over de snelheid en de stand van de vleugels. De twee vlogen voor het eerst samen. De hoofdpiloot had meer dan 15 duizend vlieguren, de jeugdige co-piloot tweeduizend.
