Latin America Crash

[Bruce Tuncks]

So the air-traffic controllers inadvertently caused the crash. But all these people are justified on "safety" grounds, yet they achieved the opposite in this case. The plane that crashed needed badly to land before running out of fuel, but it was held up for another plane which had declared a problem.

 

Imagine if the pilots actually spoke directly to each other, like happens at Gawler. There would have been no crash. We frequently have people landing within seconds of each other, all in perfect safety. I have actually been part of a landing gaggle of gliders, with about ten landing within seconds of each other, again all in perfect safety. Yes we did look out of our canopies to keep from hitting each other.

 

It is my contention that safety would be improved everywhere by having a less authoritarian system. More power to the pilots and less to the officials say I.

 

 

[frank marriott]

By Australian standards it shouldn't be that critical - consider the fixed reserve plus the 10% & 15% variable reserves as applicable to the particular flight.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Yes, I always took the reserve at 40 mins . In the Jabiru, this means 10 litres, and I for one have never got into this last 10. It's there for an emergency which I've never had.

 

The 40 min reserve is one of the many reasonable regulations that shouldn't need enforcing because sensible people would operate like that anyway.

 

Do the airlines have the same rule? I would think they should, suppose the runway at their destination was obstructed for example. But carrying reserve fuel would cost money.

 

 

[cooperplace]

I don't think it's fair to blame ATC in any way, after all she was dealing with another plane that had declared a problem. The pilot (who also owned the airline) appears to have planned the flight in such a way that he would have landed with virtually no reserve. When he was put in a hold, he failed to immediately declare a fuel emergency. The problem was likely compounded by poorly maintained batteries, so the instant the engines stopped, he lost virtually all electrics. He was flying in mountainous terrain at night with a dark cockpit, a horrible situation. It seems that his own misadventure put him in that position.

 

 

[planedriver]

One can only hope that anyone else who operates in this manner, learns from this sad event.

 

 

[cooperplace]

One can only hope that anyone else who operates in this manner, learns from this sad event.

yes, I think it's called fuel planning, we all do it; that and don't take chances.

 

 

[facthunter]

Your inflight reserve is there to be used or you would carry more to protect the reserves you can't use. Once you have used them though the situation you are in is more critical and you should act accordingly like perhaps divert. Plenty of flights are operated on the basis of as the flight progresses it requires less reserve as the flight continues as 10% of a lesser figure so you are still legal as long as you CAN divert IF you get behind plan, can't get to an economic cruise level due weather /traffic and can't cover the requirements.. Nev

 

 

[Happyflyer]

Your inflight reserve is there to be used or you would carry more to protect the reserves you can't use. Once you have used them though the situation you are in is more critical and you should act accordingly like perhaps divert. Plenty of flights are operated on the basis of as the flight progresses it requires less reserve as the flight continues as 10% of a lesser figure so you are still legal as long as you CAN divert IF you get behind plan, can't get to an economic cruise level due weather /traffic and can't cover the requirements.. Nev

You make it sound quite complex. It's really quite easy as millions of flights prove every day. It takes a special blend of arrogance and stupidity to do what this captain has done.

 

 

[cooperplace]

unfortunately that appears to be the sad truth

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

You are right of course cooper, but now we know the pilot was the owner, there is this possibility:

 

Imagine you were in a tight financial situation, and so you were under pressure to save money, like on fuel. And batteries.

 

Then some real bad luck happened and you couldn't land straight away. But if you declare an emergency, the repercussions might send you broke or worse. So you hope for the best and take a risk.

 

This has some similarities to the Whyalla Airlines ditching disaster. The "safety system" plus the logic of capitalism did the damage there too.

 

 

[alf jessup]

You are right of course cooper, but now we know the pilot was the owner, there is this possibility:Imagine you were in a tight financial situation, and so you were under pressure to save money, like on fuel. And batteries.

Then some real bad luck happened and you couldn't land straight away. But if you declare an emergency, the repercussions might send you broke or worse. So you hope for the best and take a risk.

 

This has some similarities to the Whyalla Airlines ditching disaster. The "safety system" plus the logic of capitalism did the damage there too.

Ahh no you don't take the risk with 70 + passengers that have their lives in your hands, owner or not

 

Not only paid the ultimate price with his life but ruined the lives of hundreds after he took the innocents with him

 

Anyway what's done is done and we can't go back

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

We could do better, alf. We could make it the rule that anything you did for a good safety reason would not be punished and you would be protected from punishment.

 

Alas, this is way too much to ask from a bureaucracy.

 

 

[spacesailor]

BT

 

"We could make it the rule that anything you did for a good safety reason would not be punished and you would be protected from punishment.

 

Alas, this is way too much to ask from a bureaucracy."

 

bureaucracy hasn't a conscience, or heart, as for safety they (the invisible) don't care a fig if it kills 9 people on the road to Darwin, or the rural Firies kill more than a dozen with the smoke hazard,

 

But the Victorian storm had no bureaucrats and all hell is let loose, for how many diseased?.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Bikky]

When he was put in a hold, he failed to immediately declare a fuel emergency.

Having heard the audio recordings, I can confirm this to be fact. He told ATC he had a "pane seco" (electrical failure) and that he as low on fuel. He declared the true state of affairs way too late. I believe ATC did the right thing according to the information received.

 

If the world were a just, place he would have survived to face the consequences of his actions.

 

 

[cooperplace]

If the world were a just, place he would have survived to face the consequences of his actions.

agreed; unfortunately because of his complete failure at fuel planning he's taken 70 people with him.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

We sure agree the fault lay with the pilot, but the following are fair questions:

 

What did the system do to stop this crash from happening?

 

What would have happened to this pilot had he been honest and reported a fuel emergency?

 

What could be changed to prevent this from happening again?

 

In summary, I would like to know if there were anything that could have been done better.On this I have my own ideas of course.

 

 

[Happyflyer]

So reading between the lines Bruce, you are saying the system should have stopped this happening and the pilot should have been able to declare an emergency without penalty for getting himself into this situation?

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Yes Happy, I reckon that a bunch of professionals, whose only job is to enhance air safety, could have done better.

 

As I said at the start, this wouldn't have happened at my club. Gliders in the circuit can't be delayed from landing, and so we are used to the situation where you can't send somebody off for 10 mins or so. We cope with it without a problem because the pilots talk to each other.

 

And yes, if I had to choose between letting a stupid guy off and killing 70 people, that is exactly what I would have done.

 

 

[Happyflyer]

Then with no deterrent he would keep on doing it, undercutting the legitimate operators (because it's all about money) until his luck ran out in my opinion. Airline travel is the safest form of travel and considering the millions of flights every year I think it works pretty well.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

There could be a 3 strikes sort of rule. You and I could come up with some ideas and we are not even professionals paid to do nothing else.

 

The alternative is everybody dies.

 

 

[Geoff13]

I would think that if the thought of killing himself will not work then not much else will either.

 

 

[Bikky]

The pilot was urged, when he lodged his flight plan, to refuel in Bogota but this would have incurred an extra cost of $10,000 for fuel and airport fees. He told authorities, "No problem, stay calm, I will make it."

 

Aircraft range was 3000 km. Distance traveled was 2900+ km. No room for error at all.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

I wonder how you could know in time if you were going to fly on that flight that a terrible risk was going to be taken. Even if he had been ramp-checked, the story would have been that he was going to refuel on the way.

 

Maybe the ATC at the destination airport could have known how far he had come and what the range figures were. That's asking a lot I know.

 

 

[facthunter]

They could ask what endurance they had when there was time to divert. XYZ advise endurance and intentions. The pl;anned trip time and fuel time to exhaustion should be known, for any aircraft type. Nev .

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

The airline was in financial trouble, which partly explains the pilot's behaviour.