balinews

Member
Feb 14, 2010
999
4
18
The preliminary report said that the 24-year-old second-in-command, who had 1,200 hours of flying experience, was in control during the descent into the airport and reported that he could not see the runway 900 feet above ground.

The captain then switched off the auto-pilot and the second-in-command handed over controls to him at 150 feet - or 1 minute, 6 seconds before the crash - after repeating that he could not see the runway.

One second before the crash, the pilot commanded a "go-around" and attempted to abort the landing, but it was too late.

The report recommended Lion Air "review the policy and procedures regarding the risk associated with changeover of control at critical altitudes or critical time".

It added the fast-growing airline should also "ensure the pilots are properly trained during the initial and recurrent training program with regard to changeover of control at critical altitudes and or critical time".


Lion Air pilots criticized over Bali crash: report
 

Markit

Well-Known Member
Sep 3, 2007
9,315
1,109
113
Karangasem, Bali
Sorry to disagree (no I'm not!) but from my understanding they did everything by the book and if you calculate wind-shear into the mix then there was nothing anyone else could have done either.

"The report recommended Lion Air "review the policy and procedures regarding the risk associated with changeover of control at critical altitudes or critical time".

If anyone is due for a drubbing it's "policy" but that's generally done to international norms. So all the rest will have that same policy too.

Playing devils advocate if the second in command had not handed over when he did they might all be dead now?
 

Mark

Well-Known Member
Apr 19, 2004
874
313
63
So far wind shear has been only speculation and an explanation/excuse from the pilot. It's a rare phenomenon and if it did occur, then the plane's black box should have recorded the sudden drop in altitude while at the same time noting that the pilot did nothing incorrect with the controls to force the plan downwards and that all the other systems were functioning properly. I think this sad episode has pilot error written all over it (either the pilot, co-pilot or both) but we won't know for sure until the final report is issued.

ps, I also tend to agree with balibule
 

balibule

Active Member
Feb 6, 2009
1,059
1
38
[FONT=Georgia, Times, Times New Roman, serif]LionAir has a track record of crashes.

[/FONT][h=2]Incidents and accidents [edit][/h]
  • On 14 January 2002, Lion Air Flight 386, a Boeing 737-200 crashed on take-off and was written off; no one died.
  • On 30 November 2004, Lion Air Flight 538, a McDonnell Douglas MD-82, crashed in Surakarta; 25 people died.[SUP][27][/SUP]
  • On 4 March 2006, Lion Air Flight 8987, a McDonnell Douglas MD-82, crashed after landing at Juanda International Airport.[SUP][28][/SUP] Reverse thrust was used during landing, although the left thrust reverser was stated to be out of service.[SUP][28][/SUP] This caused the aircraft to veer to the right and skid off the runway, coming to rest about 7,000 feet (2,100 m) from the approach end of the runway.[SUP][28][/SUP] No-one died; the aircraft was badly damaged.[SUP][28][/SUP]
  • On 24 December 2006, Lion Air Flight 792, a Boeing 737-400, landed with an incorrect flap configuration and was not aligned with the runway.[SUP][29][/SUP] The plane landed hard and skidded along the runway causing the right main landing gear to detach, the left gear to protrude through the wing and some of the aircraft fuselage to be wrinkled.[SUP][29][/SUP] No one died and the aircraft was written off.[SUP][29][/SUP]
  • On 23 February 2009, Lion Air Flight 972, a McDonnell Douglas MD-90 landed without the nose gear at Hang Nadim International Airport, Batam.
  • On 9 March 2009, Lion Air Flight 793, a McDonnell Douglas MD-90-30 (registration PK-LIL) ran off the runway at Soekarno–Hatta International Airport. No-one was injured.[SUP][30][/SUP]
  • On 2 November 2010, Lion Air Flight 712, a Boeing 737-400 (registration PK-LIQ) overran the runway on landing at Supadio Airport, Pontianak, coming to rest on its belly and sustaining damage to its nose gear. All 174 passengers and crew evacuated by the emergency slides, with few injuries reported.[SUP][31][/SUP]
  • On 13 April 2013, Lion Air Flight 904, a Boeing 737-800 (registration PK-LKS) from Bandung to Denpasar with 108 people on board, crashed into the water near Denpasar/Bali while attempting to land. The aircraft’s fuselage broke into two parts.[SUP][32][/SUP]While Indonesian officals reported the aircraft crashed short of the runway,[SUP][32][/SUP] reporters and photographers from Reuters and the Associated Press indicated that the plane overshot the runway.[SUP][33][/SUP][SUP][34][/SUP] All passengers and crew were evacuated from the aircraft and there were no fatalities.[SUP][32][/SUP]
[FONT=Georgia, Times, Times New Roman, serif]
Other than crashing planes they also have crap customer service. They don't take customer feedback or even have a complaint department. I think their system would be down from day one.

Actually, I'm wrong. They do have a customer service page on their website;
[/FONT]www.lionair.co.id/insurance/en/insurance-care.html‎ .

Can you open the link?
 

Markit

Well-Known Member
Sep 3, 2007
9,315
1,109
113
Karangasem, Bali
If the copilot says "I can't see the runway" then gives the com to the chief pilot there's not much anybody can do is there?

He could of said "I can't see the runway but fuckit I'll give it a go anyway".

Which version do you prefer?

Of the 8 written off airplanes listed there was only 1 where 25 people were killed. For my money that aint too bad.

Care to show another case where 8 large passenger planes have been written off with only 25 lives lost?

I don't get anything from Lion Air but they seem OK - haven't flown with em either but would still do if they are cheap.
 
Last edited:

Mark

Well-Known Member
Apr 19, 2004
874
313
63
Of the 8 written off airplanes listed there was only 1 where 25 people were killed. For my money that aint too bad.

Care to show another case where 8 large passenger planes have been written off with only 25 lives lost?

The law of averages is not in favor of Lion Air or its future passengers. But good luck flying with them.
 

ronb

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2007
2,241
56
48
Ubud, Bali
Sorry to disagree (no I'm not!) but from my understanding they did everything by the book and if you calculate wind-shear into the mix then there was nothing anyone else could have done either.

"The report recommended Lion Air "review the policy and procedures regarding the risk associated with changeover of control at critical altitudes or critical time".

If anyone is due for a drubbing it's "policy" but that's generally done to international norms. So all the rest will have that same policy too.

Playing devils advocate if the second in command had not handed over when he did they might all be dead now?

I read this differently. The report is using restrained language to say the pilot was a dickhead to grab control from the co-pilot 1 minute before touchdown. The co-pilot new there was a problem 1 minute before, and he should have aborted the landing and gone around. The pilot who had apparently been sleeping or doing anything other than concentrate on the current conditions, should have just talked supportively as the co-pilot aborted the landing. Instead he seiized control, and took most of a minute to figure out how much trouble they were in. A very significant part of this report is that the pilot said "go around" 1 second before they hit the water - just a tad late. There is no hint in this report to support the wind shear idea - rather it suggests they were flying manually, could not see the runway, and hit the water.
 
Last edited:

davita

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2012
4,441
146
63
The report is preliminary and, like accident review boards that I've attended in my aviation past career, only tries to narrow the search for what happened; it is not yet definitive.
In this case I'm sure that Boeing pushed for an early exit from the review for culbability....and got it! Thus the B737-800 is eliminated from further review.

What we do know is that R/W 09 at DPS is a VOR/DME non-precision approach. This procedure can best be explained by my copy/paste from another forum....

"You basically track the specified VOR radial to the runway. After passing the final approach fix you descend down to a Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA) until reaching the missed approach point. The missed approach point and final approach fix, in most cases, is identified by using DME. If you do not see the runway, or the approach lights at the missed approach point, you go missed. There isn't a glideslope for a VOR approach, therefore it is a non-precision approach."

In my day, if a visual approach was not available, it was Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the Capt to brief the Co-pilot to conduct the approach according to the Airports Terminal Approach Chart (TAC) and focus on an instrument approach. If no other command was given the SOP was to level at Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA) NEVER go below and, at the Missed Approach Point (MAP) according to the TAC, conduct a missed approach calling the Capt for "max thrust/gear up" and, at the appropriate increased speed, retract the flaps and power.

Meanwhile, during the instrument approach, the Capt would focus out the window for a visual on the R/W or the lead-in lights, if seen, he would say "I have control" take over....and land visually. The Co-pilot would revert to pilot not-flying duty.

I'm not familiar with Bali's TAC, the MDA and MAP but hope some current pilot, who is, will comment.

FWIW: My villa has a view from Kerobokan to Uluwatu and the approach lane to R/W 09 although the R/W view itself is blocked. I was watching on that day at around the time of 2-4pm. There was some cloud in the area and occasional local showers and visual impairement but, IMO, nothing that could have created what's known as 'Micro-bursts'.
 

davita

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2012
4,441
146
63
It seems like Lion Air not only don't know where to land...they also don't know where to pick-up passengers!

My wife is flying Lion Air from Jakarta-Bali later today...the ticket/boarding pass expressly says Terminal 1 at Soekarno-Hatta. We are familiar with Lion and Air Asia using Terminal 3 but, as the boarding pass said Terminal 1, my wife complied. Lucky she was early as the check-in at Lion Air said."We changed to Terminal 3 over a year ago."
My wife is born Indonesian but has a N. American attitude so I can only guess the enraged blue tinge that pervaded in the air. She just called me on her drive from Terminal 1 to 3 and now 'it's all my fault....:icon_evil:'

So much for the absurdity of the so-called 'security' that allowed her to enter the terminal....I'm waiting to hear if she'll be prevented from entering Terminal 3 on a boarding pass that says Terminal 1....nope, that's wrong...I'm off to the pub and my phone is switched OFF.

Anyway 'heads-up' to forum members flying from JKT on Lion Air...don't believe everything.....double check.
 

davita

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2012
4,441
146
63
Edit to my above post on Terminals at Soekarno-Hatta.
My wife has returned and I can now modify the above....
Lion Air explained that it is the DIY download Boarding Pass that has not been amended..even after a year! That sounds right as the ticket itself says Terminal 3 but I downloaded the Boarding Pass which says terminal 1. She actually showed the ticket to security so I guess I castigated them incorrecetly....my bad.:black_eyed:

Hope my addressing the issue with Lion Air will prompt them to correct their mistake....and maybe throw me a free ticket. I'm an eternal optimist......but sometimes a damn fool!:cupcake:
 

dwainsworld

New Member
Apr 24, 2012
10
0
1
DUAL PILOT MECHANISM FAILURE :highly_amused::highly_amused::highly_amused:

Both the left hand and the right hand pilot mechanisms that were fitted to temporarily control the utterly brand spanking new Boeing aircraft suffered simultaneous failure due to lack of flying experience.

It is known that both pilot mechanisms were in almost new condition, fresh from pilot school, so much so that neither had hardly ever flown before. Their uniforms and egos were still notably new and shiny even after the incident.

Still it is not understood the reason that the pilot mechanisms failed so early in their careers, however it is likely that each mechanism will be re-cycled and re-fitted to propeller powered aircraft in the near future when other replacement pilot mechanisms are not available for those machines.

It is believed that the pilot mechanisms have submitted an incident report to the airline complaining that because of the ingress of water to the cockpit they were unable to light their traditional cigarette in the cockpit during the last moments of the landing process :ambivalence::ambivalence::ambivalence: