Lackof traffic controllers leads to pilots talk to eachOther
-
Even our world-class airport is not spared:
I am very disappointed with the services provided at the Singapore airport staff. I am from India, Delhi, but right now living in Manila, Philippines with my husband. I gave birth on 11 April 2007 to a baby girl and my mothers, Mrs. Rekha Gopalani from India planned to visit me in last Sept. (2007). Since it was her first trip out of India I was making sure that everything goes right and confirming everything with the embassy, but unfortunately she had such unpleasant experience with your staff at Singapore airport that she doesn't want to travel anymore. We booked our tickets through internet at makemytrip.com, this website provides you with the cheapest fair available, she was traveling through Indian airlines from India to Singapore Singapore to manila was through Tiger Airways. She only had to transit from terminal 1 to budget airport. Since there was no information provided by our travel agent n even your embassy, we were not aware that we need visa to transit. So she didn't had Transit visa, but your staff could help her by providing her with the correct information and spoke to her nicely and may be issue her a ticket through Singapore airlines from same terminal, but she was treated so badly and was given orders to be deported to India, we also called like 100 times and tried to explain it to the duty officer n other staff there, but they refused to cooperate, however in the end after keeping her for 20 hrs, when another duty officer came, he understood and decided to give her the visa from the port (however I don't understand how come another officer could give her the visa?), anyways since they took so long to decide, she already missed her connecting flight, as told by one of the staffs at airport we booked another budget ticket, which also went to waste because they refused to take her in their flight since she had deportation order...even though it was by mistake, any ways finally it was suggested by my mother, Mrs Rekha Goplalani, that she was ready to buy the ticket from the same airport at the same time but couldn't before because of the insensible staff ignorance, finally she bought ticket for SQ airlines and arrived manila next day. So basically we spent trice the price and on top of that we had to pay for the inconvenience provided by your insensible staff.
I have never expected this from SQ airport, used to hear that u provide the best services to your passengers...even thought if they are there for transit. However the fact is that my mother dint even had unpleasant experience but we lost so much money also. Would like to know if you can take any action regarding this matter, then only I would like to bring the officer's names to your attention. -
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
Even our world-class airport is not spared:
wrong color. pinkerton syndrome...(still) runs deep.
-
Originally posted by redDUST:
wrong color. pinkerton syndrome...(still) runs deep.
Sad news for SG... -
STy, points to note when in discussions.
I respect what u says.
Pl separate extreme cases and norm happen in
any country.
I am not here to win any discussions,due to limited
English.We come here just to pass time,share info with other,pick
up some info useful to our life....
Changi AP,like other aviation hubs,serve millions of passengers
every years.So,it will be suprising if there is no compliants.
But ,it will be stupid for CAAS just to do any stupid
things to win any ranking.Ranking cant put foods on the table.
Results ,ie business ,will.U check around passengers
of CAP,most of them will give u a thumb up.
Is uncontrolled airspace in Oz is a norm or extreme cases
The reality is it do hapen some times.
But one time misfortunate is more than enough.
Why dunt u vertify my story ,but waste the energy divert attentions
to few passengers complaining CAP?
Few passengers will not die even they get bad services in CAP.
But hundred of passengers fly in oz controlled airspace without
adequate or total lack of traffic controllers guidances may die.
SIA wrote to OZ,complaining Oz accused SIA cannot handle
flying without traffic controllers,but Oz carriers pilots can handle without!!
Oz authority will test SIA pilots ability on flying in uncontrolled airspace!!
I will be more than happy if the news is not true.
But so many news coming up with real names and officail capacity,
it cant be ignored.Do u think so?
Airliners 'seconds' from a collision
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24037747-601,00.html
Cameron Stewart | July 18, 2008
THE Civil Aviation Safety Authority is investigating an air traffic control report that a US Learjet came within 60 seconds of a possible collision with a Jetstar Airbus because of confusion about uncontrolled airspace...
An Electronic Safety Incident Report of the incident, written by the air traffic controller on duty and obtained by The Australian, states the incident occurred last Saturday after a section of airspace on the Melbourne to Sydney route suddenly became unmonitored at 7.30am due to an air traffic control staff shortage.
A shortage of controllers has increasingly forced large chunks of Australian skies to be left unmonitored in recent months, forcing pilots to rely on themselves and other pilots to avoid collisions.
The ESIR indicated the declaring of uncontrolled airspace on Saturday caused confusion among pilots of several aircraft.
The worst of these was when the pilot of an American-registered Learjet flying from Wollongong in NSW to Melbourne baulked at climbing up into uncontrolled airspace despite being cleared to do so. The report says the pilot failed to climb "apparently due to uncertainty with proximity traffic" in uncontrolled airspace....
Mr Mason said yesterday; "Aeroplanes passing 15 miles apart may seem like a lot ... but they are travelling so fast that in some scenarios there can be less than 60 seconds to react and avoid an accident. This incident is a clear example that the current system related to (uncontrolled airspace) has an unacceptable safety level." ..
Do u think it is a problem?Do u think I am anti--Oz by posting this news?
the australian is a main stream newspaper selling in all major cities,
not a unknown newspaper just selling in small town.
Besides,do u know traffic controlling in Oz is outsourced to a private company.
The Australian take the risk of being sued.
But of course,u can treat the news as not reliable.
Neither i can prove the news are true.
i do hope it is not true.
-
Originally posted by noisylion:
lionnoisy, points to note when in discussions.
I dunt respect what u says.
Pl separate extreme cases and norm happen in
any country.
you always talk about business put foods on table
and ranking dunt can important
but is it acceptable to do business in risky way to
Is poor ranking in SIA for safety is a norm or extreme cases
it's norm!
The reality is it is called most profitable airline, but dunt can even make it safe.
Ranking is only 70+ in the world!
SIA got more then one time misfortunate! Two times crash in two years!
This is more then norm, more than enough.
Other safety incidents like tailstrike and cabin depressurizion!
Risks pple life
most profitiable for what?
no safety no point!
Why dunt u vertify my story ,but waste the energy divert attentions
to articles about air control?
Many SIA passengers have not died due to bad safety record of SIA.
But not one major fatal accident in oz controlled airspace yet
no matter what you say
SIA wrote to OZ,complaining Oz accused SIA cannot handle
flying without traffic controllers
but reality is that SIA dun need no traffic controllers, still have poor safety record!
SIA trying to not answer their own poor safety record?
I will be more than happy if the news is not true.
But so many news coming up with real names and officail capacity on SIA lack of safety
it cant be ignored.Do u think so?
SIA rated in 76th out of 90 in Global safety ranking
In an airline accident rating on global airline safety history SIA ranked 76th out of 90 in the world and 15th out of 23 in the region, beaten by Malaysia Airlines and even Air China. It is also way behind Australia's Quantas Airways which ranked 17 out of 90 in the world and 3rd out of 23 in the same region as SIA.
http://www.planecrashinfo.com/rates.htm
Do u think it is a problem?Do u think I am anti--Sg by posting this news?
fact is SIA, most profitible, but trade lives for money
a older airline like Quantas dunt make so much money, but fly jets for longer and make more flights then SIA
still dunt have as many accidents and fatalities as SIA!
is this acceptable for SIA? Most profotiable airline?
-
Originally posted by noisylion:
Also Singapore airport security breach!
Is the acceptable?
What if dangerous people get on planes from changi airport?
lionnoisy, you dunt can answer?
Father flies from Singapore to Vietnam using son's passport
24.06.08 06:27A retiree who took his son's passport by mistake checked in at Tiger Airways, got through security at Changi Airport and flew to Vietnam, only realizing during the flight that he was carrying the wrong document, news reports said Tuesday, the dpa reported.
Ang Heng Soon headed directly to immigration authorities at Ho Chi Minh City airport, where they put him on the same plane Monday back to Singapore.
He told The Straits Times that he was in such a a hurry to catch the plane that he unwittingly took his 39-year-old son's passport, which was also lying on the family's dining table.
His son, Vincent, an electronics company executive, was waiting to check in for a flight to Hong Kong when he realized he had his father's passport.
Vincent cancelled his flight and went to Tiger Airway's office, where he learned that his father was heading back.
Father and son were reunited, the report said. Both made fresh arrangements and flew off to their respective destinations.
"The question is, how did this happen? From a security point of view, this is pretty shocking," Vincent was quoted as saying.
-
Originally posted by noisylion:
World class Airport like Changi complacent about security?:
Airport security lapse leads to calls for more awareness
By Asha Popatlal, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 24 June 2008 2333 hrs
SINGAPORE: An airport security lapse has raised further concerns about complacency and what has been done to strengthen procedures.
The passport mix-up - which allowed a man to fly out of the country using his son's passport – is the third security breach in six months.
Mr Ang Heng Soon managed to check in for a Tiger Airways flight after mistakenly using his son's passport.
The mistake was not spotted in spite of four levels of checks, enabling him to board his flight to Vietnam. He came back later after spotting his own error.
"This is yet another incident of human error, but it's within the same home team, and we've seen a build-up of various incidents within various departments and this is troubling," MP Indranee Rajah said.
"It's really two things, as I see it - one, the complacency that has entered into the day-to-day routine. And two, the sense of a lack of danger that if something can go wrong, it will," she added.
The MP intends to raise this and other wider security concerns in Parliament. -
Originally posted by noisylion:
Security dunt can catch right people and detain wrong ones?
Singapore apologizes for Changi Airport security mistake:
Changi Airport incident involving RI presidential adviser settled: FM
Jakarta (ANTARA News) - Foreign Affairs Minister Hassan Wirajuda said the recent incident in which presidential adviser Adnan Buyung Nasution and former attorney general Abdurrahman Saleh were interrogated by Singapore immigration officials at Changi Airport has been settled.
"We have done some checking and according to a clarification from two Indonesian Embassy officials in Singapore, the interrogation incident at Changi airport has been settled," the minister said at a hearing with the House Commission I which deals with foreign and defense affairs here on Monday.
He said his ministry had sought the clarification after it received information on the interrogation of Buyung and Saleh at Changi aiport.
"The point is that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs continues to pay attention to Indonesian citizens abroad, whoever they are, including Adnan Buyung Nasution and Abdurrahman Saleh who at that time used regular green passports," the minister said.
It was reported earlier Buyung and Abdurrahman Saleh arrived at Changi Airport on Thursday night and were immediately taken by military personnel to an immigration room for two hours of questioning.
Buyung and Abdurrahman reportedly flew to Singapore for medical purposes.
A number of Commission I members asked the government to file a note of protest over the incident.
In the meantime, Singapore apologized on Saturday for the incident, saying the questioning was part of routine random checks on all visitors to the city-state, the Singapore Foreign Affairs Ministry was quoted as saying by the Jakarta Post on Sunday. -
RI seeking Singapore clarification over Changi incident
The Indonesian government is seeking clarification from the Singaporean government following the interrogation of Adnan Buyung Nasution, a member of the President's Advisory Council,
and Abdul Rahman Saleh, former attorney general, by Singapore's Changi Airport authorities.
After arriving at Changi Airport, Buyung and Abdul Rahman were questioned for more than two hours by Singapore immigration officials on Thursday.
Their passports were held by the officials and the two were only freed after Buyung called the former Indonesian foreign minister, Ali Alatas, to report the incident to the Indonesian Embassy in
Singapore.
"Changi authorities have said the incident was a random passenger check. However, we are now seeking formal clarification from the Singaporean government over the incident," Indonesian Foreign Ministry spokesman Kristiarto Legowo said. -
Singapore Plane Hits Equipment at Chinese Taipei Airport
A Singapore Airlines passenger jet took a wrong turn while taxiing towards a runway at Taipei airport Friday and a wing bumped into some equipment, airport officials said. A Singapore Airlines passenger jet took a wrong turn while taxiing towards a runway at Taipei airport Friday and a wing bumped into some equipment, airport officials said.
The Boeing 747-400 took a turn too early, using an apron instead of the designated taxiway, and one of the aircraft's wings hit tail stands used to stabilize planes, an airport official said.
The official, who asked to remain anonymous, said damage was minimal and nobody was hurt, and the aircraft took off immediately for Singapore where it arrived safely several hours later.
The incident follows the crash of a Singapore Airlines Boeing 747-400 at an airport in Taipei on October 31, 2000.
The passenger jet ploughed into construction equipment while trying to take off on a closed runway, killing 83 people. The Taiwan authorities blamed pilot error, while Singapore pointed to poor lighting and a lack of barriers closing the runway.
The airport official said the captain of the aircraft involved in Friday's incident apologized to the control tower after he was told of the mistake.
However he judged it to be relatively minor and continued with the flight, the official said.
The airport official said the aircraft's right wing passed through an equipment area, hitting the tail stands.
The Boeing 747-400 spans some 64 meters (210 feet) while the apron, used for smaller planes, is less than 60 meters wide, the official noted.
Singapore Airlines has been asked to provide flight data to investigate the new incident, Taiwan air safety official said. -
Originally posted by noisylion:
Why so many mistakes in Singapore civil aviations lionnoisy? is this extreme cases or the norm?
it's the norm!
am i anti-SG?
-
Singapore Airlines tail-strike incident blamed on pilots
A SERIES of basic pilot errors led to a Singapore Airlines 747 dragging its tail about 500m along an Auckland Airport runway in March this year, a damning safety investigation has found. The aircraft, flight SQ286 to Singapore, was forced to circle the airport on March 12 for about 20 minutes before making an emergency landing. None of the 369 passengers, 17 cabin crew, or three pilots was injured in the accident, but the tail of the plane was extensively damaged.
A Transport Accident Investigation Commission report, issued yesterday, says the aircraft's three pilots were almost completely to blame for the strike, which occurred when the captain tried to take off at too slow a speed.
It says the incident was the result of the first officer mistakenly entering an aircraft weight figure 100 tonnes lighter than that of the aircraft into his take-off speed calculations.
The captain then failed to pick up the error when he checked the calculation, the second officer did not check it and all three pilots failed to notice the difference between their own calculation and that of the flight management computer.
As a result, the captain "rotated" the plane to a takeoff angle at 123 knots (221km/h) rather than the correct 151 knots (272km/h).
With the plane failing to take off, it tilted 4 degrees more than normal, resulting in its tail striking the runway and dragging for 490m.
Singapore Airlines said yesterday that it accepted the report's findings in full and had demoted the captain.
"The safety recommendations of the TAIC to SIA have been, or are being, implemented in full," said the carrier's public relations manager, Stephen Forshaw.
All three pilots had been reprimanded over the incident.
The captain was demoted and had since left the airline. The first officer was severely reprimanded and the third officer, who played no active part in the take-off, was "reminded of his obligations".
-
Originally posted by noisylion:
"Basic pilot errors" in most profitible airline lionnoisy!
Is this acceptable?
-
Anyway guys , i don't think SIA is that great either. Neither is our government.
We are still growing.
There is lot more countries and airlines which are better.