Pilot error or freak weather? Inside the Flight SQ321 Investigation | 60 Minutes Australia
Posted by superpowerpinger@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 56 comments
BrianWantsTruth@reddit
What is this, literally Airframe by Michael Crichton?
CouchPotatoFamine@reddit
I tried reading that but it never really took off for me.
BrianWantsTruth@reddit
It’s only okay. I enjoyed it fine but I don’t think it’s a great book.
Lynn-Valley@reddit
It does the classic Crichton thing of explaining something relatively technical in a way that makes it accessible. Felt like a paperback Mayday episode.
BrianWantsTruth@reddit
I agree, and I found all that pretty satisfying (big Mayday fan). It was an enjoyable read for the most part.
Frankly, I found the final answer a little too “oh, okay fair enough”. I guess it felt like it was building to something a bit bigger. I did find great amusement at Richman’s ultimate fate in the epilogue.
Stegosaurus69@reddit
I read it but it never really landed with me
Ill_Football9443@reddit
I'm under too much pressure and I have been told to turn off all electronic devices.
aromilk@reddit
Weather radar was malfunctioning
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/flight-sq321-radar-failed-to-detect-weather-that-likely-caused-severe-turbulence-probe-finds
Schizo-Vreni@reddit
This is highly disputed.
not_so_subtle_now@reddit
Just asking as a layperson - Do pilots communicate information about weather/extreme weather to other pilots in the vicinity? In this clip there are multiple other aircraft changing course to avoid what was ahead.
Bionic_Redhead@reddit
Pilot reports (pireps) are very much a thing, but the problem is that weather is movable and variable. What one pilot experiences may not be what another experiences in a few minutes time.
Insaneclown271@reddit
100% pilot error. It’s even within the official report; “both pilots had their ND’s at 320nm scale” - you cannot see small cells on this range.
2nd; when they hit the initial CB the captain said “what’s that? Let me remove this…” referring to the windshield being covered with a shade or object.
chaosattractor@reddit
I hate how much misinformation gets spread in this sub because the people here pretty much never ever read very publicly available reports like the one for this accident for themselves.
Regardless of whether your conclusion is right or not, it is incorrect to claim the report says "both pilots had their ND’s at 320nm scale" when what it actually states is that they both had their navigational displays at that scale more than fifteen minutes before the accident. It's explicitly stated that at the time of the accident the captain/pilot flying had his ND set at 320nm while the relief pilot in the right seat had his own set at 40nm (section 1.1.11 to 1.1.15).
What takes it from just being wrong to being flat-out disingenuous is that you've conveniently neglected to mention (if you actually read it for yourself as opposed to getting your information secondhand) that the report also states that the weather radar system in use on this flight had an intermittent fault that had last manifested as recently as a week before this accident:
And the report further goes on to state that tests of the weather radar system of the accident aircraft during the investigation surfaced "some unusual behaviour":
If you think that this is all a cover-up and Singapore Airlines blatantly fabricated about their aircraft's maintenance records then be bold enough to say that. Spreading half-info is just garbage.
Insaneclown271@reddit
Singaporean accident investigators do have a history of covering up incidents from the national carrier. All weather radars occasionally malfunction but I doubt that was the case here. Even if it did fail to show an accurate picture you still need to be looking out the front window in areas of convection. These pilots were not judging by the comments about removing the window covering.
theyoyomaster@reddit
Please tell me how you can magically “see” turbulence by looking out front.
dragicon@reddit
Disagree with the 3rd one. There is a 121 carrier in the US that even has SOPs to extend speed brake instead of thrust reduction at cruise to prevent an overspeed.
GroundbreakingShip78@reddit
An overspeed isn't a big deal, there's a significant buffer between Vmo and the airspeed limit that causes structural failure.
Insaneclown271@reddit
lol you’re being downvoted by non pilots. Don’t worry.
Whatever_Lurker@reddit
Foreign_Acadia3937@reddit
If that's what a "121 carrier" is advocating then please let me know who so I can avoid flying with them.
You shouldn't be going anywhere near the speed brake at altitude especially in potentially turbulent weather.
A small transgression of a few seconds into an over speed while the thrust is reducing/aircraft is recovering is a lot safer than cracking speed brakes.
Insaneclown271@reddit
I would maybe crack the boards but not fully extend them. I’ve tried it in the sim on multiple Boeing jets and it almost always ends up in stick shaker activation shortly after. Overspeed is acceptable compared to the alternative in my opinion.
siouxu@reddit
Cameras in cockpits yesterday
LawManActual@reddit
Sure, after you convince my union of 80,000 pilots that’s a good idea.
siouxu@reddit
Oh there's no convincing ALPA. They're all about safety if it makes pilots wealthy and that's it. Complete labor cartels.
LawManActual@reddit
Oh, labor cartel is a good one.
I’m noticing a lack of substance in your replies here to support your opinion. Do you have any to share? Or just sarcasm?
siouxu@reddit
I'm not the one that needs to be defending cameras in the cockpits.
LawManActual@reddit
So no, you have no substance. Got it.
siouxu@reddit
Just like ALPA and the 1,500 hour rule. I make things up in the name of safety. Lol, get bent.
LawManActual@reddit
More sarcasm with no substance. Make a valid point. I’m asking you to support your opinion, you’re acting like that is somehow an unreasonable thing to ask.
What problem is a cockpit camera going to solve?
siouxu@reddit
20 Years the NTSB has been calling for cockpit image recorders.
Pilot onions are the only thing blocking it.
LawManActual@reddit
The position of every switch in my flight deck is recorded, the image on every display unit is recorded. The flight control positions are all recorded.
What is to be gained by the addition of a cockpit camera?
The camera will not provide a better view of a switch than the digital position which is already recorded.
Should we install an array of cameras around the flight deck, shall we then be forced to cancel a flight because one malfunctions?
Should the MEL enforce PF duties to one pilot because the other isn’t sufficiently video recorded?
What are these cameras going to record? Instruments? That data is captured. Control position? Captured. Overall cockpit view? What visual sensor is capable of capturing images in the wide variety of lighting environments cockpits experience?
For what reason are we introducing this system?
You know who spends the most time on flight decks? Pilots. We know a thing or two about that environment.
siouxu@reddit
CVR and FDR have well-documented gaps. The NTSB has repeatedly cited the inability to determine crew state as a limiting factor in accident investigations. Switch positions tell you what happened to the aircraft. They don't tell you whether a pilot was incapacitated, hypoxic, spatially disoriented, or engaged in a task unrelated to flying. Or if the switch was inadvertently or intentionally hit. It's not to displace sensors, it's to augment in investigations and learn about CRM in accidents.
Air India 171 would likely be resolved by now with cameras. AF447 would likely have been a prime candidate as well. Pilot suicide seems to be a thing for plausible deniability, cameras would remove that layer.
Pilots knowing the environment isn't the same as pilots being the right arbiters of oversight tools. Surgeons know the OR best too but that hasn't made surgical outcome recording inappropriate.
The NTSB isn't asking for live feeds or punitive monitoring. The proposal mirrors CVR protections. sealed, accessed only post-accident, under legal safeguards. The surveillance framing conflates what's being proposed with something it isn't.
The question isn't whether existing recorders are good. They are. The question is whether there are accident scenarios where crew state and behavior would change the investigation's conclusions and the answer is yes.
You know whos an independent body who's sole task is investigating crashes and providing recommendations? The NTSB - Who's repeatedly said recordings WOULD help.
You know who stood in the way of original use of CVRs? Pilot unions. Who's in the way now? Pilot unions. It's self-service.
LawManActual@reddit
Of course Unionism is self service. It’s expressly the purpose of Unionism. That’s not a bug, it’s a feature.
The NTSB may not be asking for live feeds or punitive monitoring, but that doesn’t prevent the implementation of those systems. Which is a real concern.
It doesn’t stop the public crucifixion of pilots based on an out of context clip that doesn’t actually prove anything. We get this without video, example, the pilot of PAT 25.
You failed to address MEL issues with these systems. That can’t simply be ignored.
Cameras, contrary to popular belief, are not a magical solution to answer unknown questions. They have limitations, blind spots, mechanical issues, physical limitations. Lenses can be scratched. Images distorted. Angles blocked.
There is risk associated with this idea, and the question is if the rewards outweigh those risks. The pilots have spoken rather clearly on this—we don’t think the benefit is worth the risk. You don’t have to agree, that’s your prerogative, but to vilify Unions and Unionism because a Union (really a group of Unions) is uncalled for, and an emotional response to a logical problem.
siouxu@reddit
Look man, there is no risk and you're fooling yourself if you think there is. This is the CVR conversations of decades ago and the same tired pilot BS that's propagated by pilot unions and they need to be called out on it along with a lot of other things.
You're right, they're not a magical solution but it gives a more definitive picture. It's a compliment to current systems and, again, would plug gaps as cited by the NTSB. They've been asking for it for 20 years and there's many cases where it would have been useful.
The punitive use argument isn't there. If the cartels want better safeguards for that then I'm all for it. Punish the airlines and operators if they abuse it, that's fine. It's a non-issue but I truly, truly believe the unions will never think it's enough and just be a snake eating it's tail on this one.
Maybe we run in different circles I would hardly call the PAT25 pilot crucified. Huge fuck up for sure but a part of the overall picture, just like cameras.
The MEL thing is a nominal hangup, if you can even call it that, dispatch reliability for CVRs is already very high.
We're not going to get anywhere on this but I will take a poke at the unions on this, for a group that squeals about safety at every turn - there isn't a valid reason to not have these by now. Same tired arguments.
LawManActual@reddit
Your opinion is uninformed and your logic immature.
Good luck
siouxu@reddit
Fuckin lmfao
Insaneclown271@reddit
Hell no.
siouxu@reddit
What do you have to hide?
How little pylots do?
Insaneclown271@reddit
lol are you ATC or an engineer?
NiceGuyUncle@reddit
No sane controller wants cameras in cockpits as that would almost guarantee cameras in working areas in facilities.
siouxu@reddit
Visual feedback is far less important for ATC when pilots are turning fuel switches of and jamming things in the cockpit window.
22Planeguy@reddit
The little mistakes that every pilot makes, then catches, or that the other pilot catches, or that never make a difference.
Having cameras in the cockpit just allows people to armchair quarterback the tiniest of mistakes in an already extremely safe system.
I've never met a pilot that won't tell you how little they normally do. That isn't why they're paid a lot.
siouxu@reddit
Oh ok, so guess there's no more safety to be had. Brilliant
FatSteveWasted9@reddit
Such a weird take
siouxu@reddit
Because it's true
But mostly we're here infering if it was pilot error and guess what would have solved it?
Cameras
nextgeneric@reddit
Why? I feel like most people work under some sort of camera supervision. Why are pilots always so aggressively against this? Serious question.
SuperOriginalName23@reddit
Speed brake use is absolutely fine on a 777 during cruise, you don't know what you're talking about.
Insaneclown271@reddit
Yeah it’s fine in most circumstances. But old mate pulled full brake, disconnected, and yanked back on the stick…
blueb0g@reddit
The investigation report is also very, very uninterested in what actually caused the worst acceleration events for the cabin, but reading between the lines it was during the time the PF disconnected the autopilot and made big manual corrections. Just keep the thing coupled unless you actually get put outside the safe flight envelope.
Razzile@reddit
I flew the SQ321 route earlier in the year, and I was very suprised, and a bit concerned, when I saw it had its own wikipedia page
pl0nk@reddit
Would it make you less concerned if they changed the number associated with the exact same flight? What should make us all less concerned is that they run an investigation and identify any process or training improvements.
SuperOriginalName23@reddit
Let's not pretend any of this is journalism please...
HeightOld4126@reddit
Horrible thing to experience but this is a perfect example why you should always have your seatbelt on if you aren’t getting up to use the bathroom or have a stretch. It’s crazy to me how many people switch it off as soon as we’re airborne and keep it off until we’re about to land no matter how long or short the flight is. They are only lap belts they aren’t that intrusive, and they can really save your life or quality of life in a rare event like this.
Uncross-Selector@reddit
Haven’t watched it but 60 Minutes Australia has gone from real journalism to tabloid trash since Free to Air TV went broke.
Eat-It-Harvey-@reddit
321 wasn't the flight number. It was the countdown warning.
post-explainer@reddit
Please provide a source by replying to the message that was sent to you. Failure to respond to that message will result in the automatic removal of this post. Please feel free to reach out to the mod team through modmail if you have any questions or concerns.
r/Aviation is trialing new measures to prevent karma farming. Please feel free to provide feedback through modmail. Thank you for participating in the community!