Dropping the dead donkey! The Merpati MA-60 crash at Kaimana continued

Continuing on from "Let's be fair shall we?" blog article , I had complained about all the talk in the media and politics being irrelevant to the accident (they can rattle their sabers all they like). In that blog article I mentioned that the visibility was 2 kilometers and that the visual approach into Kaimana in that condition would be illegal.


Some have asked me in private where I got the information from (most of the media articles only mentioned "bad weather") and few have even said, "how dare you accuse?"


Today I come across two links related to the accident that occured on 7th May:

1. Aviation Safety News - interim safety recommendations from the National Transportation Safety Comission
2. Preliminary accident investigation report from the NTSC (in Indonesian)

The report mentioned:

• Kaimana has no instrument approach procedures, therefore the approach has to be performed under Visual Flight Rules.
• Weather information (at 0300Z) for Kaimana prior to departure was 8km visibility, 4/8 cloud cover at 1400ft cloud base, wind from the south east at 6 knots and surface temperature was 29C. The flight was legal to start.
• Passing JOLAM At 0425Z, aircraft provided an ETA of 0454Z to Kaimana AFIS. Kaimana AFIS reported the weather conditions as: 3-8km, few cumulonimbus with cloud base f 1500ft, wind from south west at 3knotd and surface temperature of 29C.
• At 0430Z aircraft descended from 15500ft, and was requested to report again 5 minutes out.
• At 0442Z, aircraft reported 7NM out passing 8000ft. Crew asked if it was still raining and was replied that it was, and they decided to proceed to the south of the airfield.
• At 0445UTC, aircraft reported to be 15NM south of the airfield at 5000ft and waiting for a change in weather. Airport was still raining with 2km vsibility.
• The last contact with the aircraft was around 0450Z where the crew asked if the visibility has changed. AFIS replied that the visibility was still 2km and that the threshold of runway 01 can be seen from the tower.
• The aircraft impacted at roughly 800m south east from runway 01, 500m from the coastline. Most of the wreckage sunk in shallow waters of 7 to 15 meters deep.
• AFIS received reports from eyewitness as the impact location was obscured from the tower by trees.
• Aircraft was destroyed, 25 people had died.
• FDR was retreived on 9th May and the CVR retrieved the next day.

Safety Actions:

• DGCA has conducted an audit of Merpati since 10th May.
• Merpati has issued a safety recommendation on 11th May:
• Aircrew are reminded to abandon the approach/landing if the conditions dictate.
• Pay attention to the visual flight rules and instrument approach minimum
• Observe the 9 criterias of a stabilized approach.
• Reinforce the mandatory training and simulator sessions including windshear, CRM, approach landing accident reduction and go-around indoctrination.
• Dispatchers to provide the latest weather information and anticipate flights to Return To Base.
• Ensure technical inspections on pre-flight, transits and daily checks as per the checklists and immediately report each finding to the Maintenance Control Center.

The NTSC has issued the following recommendations:

• To Merpati Nusantara Airlines:
• Ensure that visual flight is being conducted in accordance with VFR conditions, and conduct training on the MA60 Crew Simulator with an emphasis on CRM in the face of the bad weather.
• To the Director General of Civil Aviation:
• Monitor the implementation of the recommendations in point A , to be carried out  by Merpati Nusantara Airlines.
• To Directorate General of Civil Aviation and Directorate of Airports:
• Review the provisions of the use of facilities / equipment, especially the airport runway lights to enhance the safety of flight operations, especially in low visibility conditions.

So, whilst the facts has been established, the question remains, WHY DID THEY ATTEMPT AN APPROACH BELOW MINIMA? (in the meantime, politicians and born-yesterday heroes can continue to rant senselessly!)

Bisa fair gak yah kita?

Kecelakaan MA-60 Merpati di Kaimana memicu diskusi dan perdebatan mencapai titik ngawur beyond belief. Selama in saya males posting mengenai ini di social media demi menjaga akal sehat saya, namun, diem juga panas ngeliat yang lain meng-asbun!

Kebanyakan dari debat nya mutar-muter di "pesawat bikinan Cina", "gak ada sertifikasi FAA", dan "Ngapain kita pake pesawat bikinan Cina? Kan kita ada CN235?"

Hal yang menggelitik dikepala saya adalah tidak ada satupun yang koar-koar masalah fakta seputar kecelakaan itu sendiri. Bandara Kaimana memiliki 1 NDB dan tidak ada instrument approach procedures. Artinya, mau mendarat disana harus melakukan visual approach dimana jarak pandang harus 5 kilometer atau lebih. Dibawah itu, sorry, illegal!

Semua orang mencuap-cuap mengenai buruknya MA-60, dan semua tidak ada yang mau melihat bahwa pada saat kejadian, jarak pandang di Bandara Kaimana dilaporkan hanya 2 kilometer... YA!! DUA KILOMETER ! Mau coba mendarat pakai CN235 atau ATR atau pesawat lainnya dan jatuh... orang-orang masih mau nyalahin pesawatnya kah?

Saya denger-denger dari "koboi-koboi" dan pasukan pendukungnya, kalau mau mencoba masuk dengan kondisi cuaca dibawah VFR Minimum (5 kilometer jarak pandang tadi), mereka menggunakan GPS. GPS tentu saja bisa memberikan panduan setingkat VOR/DME approach, namun membutuhkan GPS yang sudah di-approve untuk digunakan dalam approach dan harus menggunakan approach procedure GPS yang sudah resmi (alias bukan bikinan sendiri, atau menggunakan waypoint untuk guidance only).

Jika sedang "bermain dengan takdir", anda berada di area yang tidak ada perlindungan terlepas dari berapa kali anda pernah melakukannya. Ketika melakukan GPS approach yang ilegal, bagaimana ketika anda go-around? Kalau melakukan approach runway 01 di Kaimana, ingat, ada bukit-bukit di sebelah utara bandara dan escape path anda adalah belok putar arah 180 derajat ke kiri diatas laut. Ini kedengarannya gampang tetapi jika anda melakukan beloknya secara visual, jangan kaget kalo anda kena spatial disorientation!

Jadi, bisa fair gak kita? Saya tidak suka MA-60, menurut saya itu pesawat yang siap jatuh kapan saja, namun dalam kasus kecelakaan ini, lebih baik kita tidak terpaku dalam sudut pandang subjektif kita dan melihat kejadiannya secara objektif! NGAPAIN COBA MENDARAT KALO KONDISI CUACANYA MENGAKIBATKAN ANDA MELAKUKAN APPROACH YANG ILEGAL?

Kapan yah bangsa kita bisa berhenti menyalahkan apa saja selain kita sendiri di saat dimana yang salah itu memang cuman kita sendiri? Bisa fair gak yah kita?

Let's be fair shall we?

The Merpati MA-60 accident in Kaimana have stirred the country to the point of being ridiculous. Whilst I have kept away from its discussions in the social media to keep my sanity, sometimes, one just cannot stay quiet!

Most of the debate have evolved around "aircraft made in China", or "it is not FAA certified", and, "Why are we using planes made in China when we have our locally built CN235?"

It is very disturbing that no one seems to bother to check the basic facts of the accident. Kaimana Airport, has 1 NDB, but no instrument approach procedures. To land at Kaimana airport, one has to approach visually, meaning, the visibility has to be 5km for you to even start the approach, otherwise one would be illegal.

So with all this talk about how bad the MA-60, everyone seems to ignore the fact that weather at the airport was reported at 2 kilometers, yes, TWO kilometers. Do this on a CN235, an ATR, or any other plane, and crash... Would people still blame the aircraft?

I have heard "cowboys" and/or their backers say they can land below the VFR minimum by using the GPS. Sure, GPS can give you down to the equivalent of a VOR/DME approach but only if your GPS is approved for approaches AND if you are following a certified GPS approach procedure.

Now when you start "playing with fate", you're on uncovered territory regardless how many times you've been in that situation before. When you conduct an illegal GPS approach, what happens when you go-around? If you are approaching Kaimana for runway 01, remember the hills beyond the airport and that your escape path is to make a 180 left turn over the water. This sounds simple, but, to do so in instrument meteorological conditions while making the turn visually can and most likely will give you spatial disorientation!

Let's be fair here! As much as I do not like the MA-60, as much as I think it's a plane wreck waiting to happen, in the case of this accident one must not just look at one's view and be objective... WHY LAND WHEN THE CONDITIONS WOULD YIELD YOU AN ILLEGAL APPROACH?

When will people here stop blaming anything but ourselves when we have only ourselves to blame? Let's be fair shall we?

posted from Bloggeroid