|
Doomed AirAsia Flight QZ8501 Avoidable
by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700
Copyright
December 30, 2014
All Rights Reserved.
When AirAsia Flight QZ8501 disappeared off the
radar at 2220 GMT Saturday, Dec. 27, it was the third tragedy for an Asian
Airline, after Malaysian Airlines lost MH370 somewhere in the Indian Ocean March
8, 2014. Losing a flight due to
inclement weather, pilot error or mechanical failure was a far cry from
Malaysian Flight MH17 that was downed Sept. 9 by a surface-to-air missile over
pro-Russian rebel held territory in Southeastern Ukraine. Before crashing into the Java Sea,
AirAsia boasted an impeccable track record, according to its CEO Tony Fernandez. “On Behalf of AirAsia, my
condolences to all. Words cannot
express how sorry I am,” said Fernandez, not admitting before finding the black
boxes that AirAsia was 100% responsible.
Fernandez’s apology won’t bring back the 162 passengers and crew, whose
lives would have been spared by a different flight plan.
Pulling bodies and airplane wreckage out of the Java Sea,
search-and-rescue workers have the gruesome task to collecting what’s left of
the flight’s debris and human remains.
Inviting families to Surabaya “where a dedicated team of care providers
will be assigned to each family to ensure all of their needs are met,” sounds
macabre, knowing that Fernandez can’t bring back the dead in an entirely
avoidable calamity. Had AirAsia’s
flight planners not OK’d a flight plan into dangerous monsoon thunderstorms, the
whole incident could have been avoided.
Just before the flight dropped from radar, the pilot requested that
Jakarta air-traffic controllers permit QZ8501 to increase altitude 6,000 ft. to
38.000 ft. to avoid what looked like dangerous weather. Shortly after the request was
denied, the plane dropped off the radar.
Whether or not the plane lost speed, lift and went into a tailspin, isn’t
the only consideration.
AirAsia submitted a flight plan approved by air traffic controllers in
Surabaya to the destination of Singapore.
Meteorologists working with AirAsia knew the kind of dangerous monsoons
in the flight path at the 32,000 ft. altitude approved in the AirAsia flight
plan. Whether or not other airlines
at different altitude made it through on similar flight paths can’t undo the
fateful decision to let Air Asia QZ8501 go into harm’s way. Accident crash investigators won’t
speculate on a cause of the disaster until they examine what’s left of the
aircraft debris and carefully evaluate the Flight Data Recorder and Cockpit
Voice Recorder. Reading between the
lines before that laborious process ends, it reasonable to draw some common
sense conclusions. Unconfirmed
secondary radar data indicate that QZ8501 tried to climb in altitude at 353
knots, perhaps hitting extreme headwinds and stalling out.
Anyone flying in turbulence knows that pilots do their best to take
evasive action, changing flight plans and altitude to make flights safer. Airline flight controllers that
determine flight paths are supposed to take inclement weather into consideration
before approving flight plans.
Judging by the pilot’s last-ditch attempt to climb in altitude, he already
concluded it was too late to take some other way out of the turbulent weather. When Air France Flight 447
disappeared off the radar June 1, 2009 off the coast of Brazil en route from Rio
de Janeiro to Paris, it took almost two years before finding the wreckage and
human remains on the floor of the South Atlantic. Thunderstorms were also sighted in
the final report of freezing Pitot tubes, causing the flight to go off
autopilot, lose lift and stall out causing the crash. AirAsia’s Flight QZ8501 sounds
similar, though nothing’s certain until all the data’s in.
If anything at was gleaned from Air France Flight 447, it was that flight
plans should avoid inclement whether whenever possible. Ground conditions approving takeoffs or landings have nothing to do with flight plans
that can put passengers and crews into harm’s way. Since the Flight 447 disaster,
airlines have cancelled or delayed flights if flight plans could not provide
safe passage in or around inclement weather.
Whether or not airlines have to spend more money due to circuitous flight
plans, delay or cancel flights, nothing should get in the way of passenger and
flight safety. If inclement weather
caused Flight QZ8501 to lose lift, stall out and crash, then AsiaAir must accept
full liability for the incident.
Passengers and crew alike expect airline flight planners and air traffic
controllers to give a safe flight plan to pilots before they takeoff and fly
airlines into dangerous weather.
Even if airline flight investigators find the technical reasons for
Flight QZ8501 to lose lift, stall out and crash, the airline must accept full
responsibility for flying the plane into inclement weather. Whether or not the Pitot tubes froze
over or some other part of the planes avionics malfunctioned in inclement
weather, or even whether the pilot lacked the skills to keep the plane from
crashing, AsiaAir still bears the lion’s share of the blame for approving a
doomed flight plan. No pilot,
copilot, navigator or flight crew can be blamed for following a flight plan
approved by the airline. Flying
into inclement weather, as was the case in doomed Flight QZ8501, could have been
avoided by routing the flight path around the weather, delaying or canceling the
flight before it was safe to fly.
Looking for all the technical reasons for the crash doesn’t excuse the airline
from providing passengers and crew a safe flight plan.
About the Author
|
