Are Burmese airlines safe?

[Rogie]

A British father was injured when a family of four Britons made a dramatic escape from the burning wreckage of a plane after it crashed in remote Shan State in eastern Burma, killing two people and injuring eleven more.

 

 

 

 

The family were among the 51 foreign tourists on board the Air Bagan Fokker 100 jet when it made a forced landing on a road two miles short of Heho airport. Burmese state TV said the plane slid into a rice paddy, where its tail broke off before the jet erupted in flames.

 

 

Two Burmese citizens died in the crash, a tour guide and a man riding his motorbike on the road the plane came down on, while eleven people were injured, including the British man, two Americans and a Korean.

 

 

So, are Burmese airlines safe? I don't follow aviation closely so a Fokker 100 means nothing to me. What sort of track record do they have outside of Burma? Is this a Burmese problem or could it have been anticipated . . . the expression 'ageing jets' is used.

 

Air Bagan described the crash as an “emergency landing”. The airline operates two Fokker 100 jets, which are no longer manufactured, and is owned by Burma’s richest businessman Tay Za. The flamboyant Mr Za controls a network of companies, but remains blacklisted by Washington because of his close links to the military junta that previously ruled Burma.

 

With Mr Za’s companies still subject to both EU and US sanctions, Air Bagan has struggled to find spare parts for its ageing jets. The US Embassy has previously advised Americans not to use the airline over concerns about its safety record, which includes a number of near-crashes in recent years.

 

But with increasing numbers of tourists visiting Burma, and the country’s roads and railways in a parlous state after decades of non-investment, foreign visitors are often forced to take internal flights on the handful of airlines that operate in the country just to get around.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/burmamyanmar/9766252/British-man-injured-in-Burma-plane-crash.html

[Guest fountainhall]

Seems the Fokker 100 was quite a popular aircraft after being introduced in the 1980s but fell out of favour when the improved models of the Boeing 737 and Airbus A319 appeared. Fokker eventually went bust in 1996 and production halted in 1997. In 2009 there were still 229 aircraft in service with 47 airlines around the world. Presumably that should now be 228! Apart from Austrian, the other operators are what we might term piddling airlines (not sure how you’d describe Iran Air, but it operates them as well).

 

Looking at a website for accidents involving the Fokker100, there appear to have been only two major crashes with 83 killed in Macedonia in 1993 (due to ice on the wings) and 96 killed in Sao Paolo in 1996 (an uncommanded use of the thrust reverser). Since then there have been only four other events involving the loss of two lives – once on board (when another Brazil aircraft depressurized as a result of an engine break-up mid-flight) and once on the ground (on landing in France). So the safety record has been very good since 1997 onwards.

 

But – there is always a ‘but’ when an aircraft is out of production – an aircraft is only as good as its maintenance and access to spare parts (as pointed out in the Telegraph article in Rogie's post). Air Bagan’s two Fokkers (no comments puhlease ) were delivered in 2005 and 2009. The former is 23.1 years old; the latter 24.4. I can’t find any record of previous owners. But it leads to two issues – fleet age and Burma’s aviation infrastructure. As to the former, here is what one captain writes –

 

How old can an airplane be considered as old? (Years ago) manufacturers came up with a figure of twenty years as the intended economic life. Soon, twenty years became the average age of US fleets. Today, manufactures and airlines refuse to agree on when old is too old because the life span of an airplane can be extended.
 All aircraft components have a lifespan that is monitored very closely by maintenance . . . an older aircraft with new components after a major overhaul is almost just as good as ‘new'. Hence there is a reluctance to establish a definite age for a plane when it can

 

http://www.askcaptai...fokker-100.html

 

As to the second point, various pilots’ websites point out the rather obvious fact that with the surge in tourism Myanmar’s aviation infrastructure is now stretched, especially at the more remote airports.

[Rogie]

. . . an older aircraft with new components after a major overhaul is almost just as good as ‘new'.

 

Seems fair.

 

Plenty of old cars on the road, certainly in Britain and many other countries. Lovingly maintained, and in many cases painstakingly restored classic cars are a joy to behold, and provided the brakes, steering etc are up to scratch ought to be just as safe as a modern car. They almost certainly won't have all the bells and whistles of a modern car, but if you take airbags for example, there are problems associated with those. Most do a small annual mileage in any case and are usually owned by enthusiasts driving with circumspection!

 

Same could be said for old WW2 aircraft, Spitfires and the like. Many people would pay a king's ransom just to be able to go up in one of those things; occasionally a flight in a Spitfire is offered as a prize in a competition. There are rumours of a cache of Spitfires buried somewhere in Burma. The parts for them are reputedly in their original crates so the hope is that if they can be found they can be re-assembled and flown!

 

Any 'enthusiasts' in Burmese civil aviation?

[kokopelli]

When I did some checking I saw that the UK recommends that its diplomats and families not use the local airlines in Myanmar due to safety concerns.

[Guest]

Old cars tend to be maintained carefully and driven carefully. They still don't have the brakes or other safety features of a modern car.

 

I'm not sure if Burmese planes will be maintained and flown carefully. I would give them a miss.

I would also avoid anything run from Cambodia, Russia and of course Air France.

 

Update: Yet ANOTHER crash in Russia on the news today.

[pong]

its not just maintenance- but also the abilities of the pilots.

Remember that 1-2-Go (since renamed agian ThaiOreint) crash? It was by Indonesian=cheap pliots, who were not trained properly for the job: not using a flightsimulator by themselves-only watching the instructor. Thats why at some time the EU deemed ANY local Indo airline unsafe-since only partly recalled.

Remember the Russky pilots who were unable to properly speak english when Russia opened up and they flew anywhere?

Remember the Taiwanese (as I recall one of khun FH's beloved destinaions) of China airlines, who were Asian-style too afraid to tell big boss mr Head-pilot he made a clear mistake and the plane crashed?

Next aspect is the local hardware-radar and all that. Burma scores below 3d world in that respect-but thats likely to be remedeed pretty soon, I guess, with investment pouring in in all possible ways.

In general worlds most Unsafe airlines are in tropic Africa-mostly ex-ex-cast off Tupolevs/Antonovs etc with drunk pilots (rejected from any more reasonable job) from Rus/Ukr.

Burma always seemed to have had a love for the Fokker: they were the last to use that old F27 prop-years+more (in the dark years of idiot-minded dictatorship) after any other country had stpped useing them.

[Guest fountainhall]

Remember the Taiwanese (as I recall one of khun FH's beloved destinaions) of China airlines, who were Asian-style too afraid to tell big boss mr Head-pilot he made a clear mistake and the plane crashed?

 

I remember that one well, because I was at HKG airport waiting for a CX flight to BKK when that crash happened. It was a China AIrlines MD11 from BKK en route to Taipei with an Italian captain and a Taiwan co-pilot. There was a typhoon at the time and it was lashing with rain, but the wind was not bad and many aircraft were landing and taking off.

 

There was indeed a hierarchy issue in the cockpit with the pilot wanting to land and the co-pilot wanting to go-around. The pilot landed but the plane lurched and one of the wings clipped the runway. The aircraft flipped onto its back and skidded to a halt as fire broke out. Mercifully, the rain was so heavy it did the job until the fire trucks arrived a couple of minutes later. I think there were only 3 fatalities of the 300 aboard. Looking at the wreckage, I wondered how so many had got out alive. But the accident forced China Airlines to look at its cockpit procedures and focus more on cultural differences in pilot training.

[Rogie]

I think there were only 3 fatalities of the 300 aboard. Looking at the wreckage, I wondered how so many had got out alive.

 

Wow, the plane flips onto its back and only 3 fatalities? That shows how vital it is for everybody to belt up when the plane starts its landing sequence. It must also mean that a properly belted-up passenger will be held in his seat and not fall out and hit the ceiling, which if it were to happen must have a high incidence of serious injury, possibly fatal.

[Guest fountainhall]

In the case of the China Airlines MD11, buckling up could in fact have caused more deaths from fire and smoke inhalation. Many of the passengers were suspended upside down and the weight of their bodies made it very difficult to unbuckle the belts!

 

When you see this brief vdo clip, you will see that the fire started as soon as the right engine hits the ground. So it was indeed a near miracle that so few perished.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCOXOMqLEfU

 

At about 6:43 P.M. on 22 August 1999, B-150, a McDonnell Douglas MD-11, was making its final approach when Typhoon Sam was 50km NE of the airport with maximum reported wind speeds of 140 kmh (85 mph). At an altitude of 700 feet prior to touchdown a further wind check was passed to the crew: 320 deg 28 knots gusting to 36 knots. It should be noted that maximum crosswind component limit for the aircraft was 24 knots. However, the crew neglected this and continued the landing. During the final flare to land, the plane banked on its right, landed hard on its right main gear and the no.3 engine touched the runway. The right main gear and the right wing separated. The plane rolled upside down and skidded off the runway in flames. When it stopped, it was on its back and the rear of the plane was on fire, coming to rest on a grass area next to the runway, 1100 m from the runway threshold. The right wing was found on a taxiway 90 m from the nose of the plane. As shown in photos of the aircraft at rest, the fire caused significant damage to the rear section of the aircraft but was quickly extinguished due to the heavy rain and quick response from rescue teams in the airport.

 

Three of the 300 passengers died; all crew members survived.

 

The final report of the accident blamed it mainly on pilot error.

http://www.lmpd.com/...on=play&aid=811

[Guest thaiworthy]

It seems to me that the right personnel may have some BEARING on this issue.

 

You can count on FAG to keep your aircraft flying!

 

http://www.ahrinternational.com/FAG_Aerospace_Bearings.htm

[fedssocr]

For sure the infrastructure is an issue. Apparently weather and likely pilot error were to blame for the Burma crash, but we'll see what the report and data recorders tell us.

 

I flew one of those F100's on that same route W9 flight 011 from Mandalay to Heho last year...or I guess 2011 isn't last year any more. After having been on their turboprops for all of my other flights it was novel to be on a jet. I never felt unsafe on any of my flights. Although the one from Sittwe to Yangon via Thandwe didn't have functioning air conditioning so it was very hot.

 

Is it as safe as the West or the bigger countries in Asia, clearly not. Is it "unsafe"? I don't know about that. You're probably in more danger trying to cross the street in most big Asian cities than you are on a Burmese airplane.

[Guest fountainhall]

I believe regulation of the industry within a country also plays its part. After Indonesia opened up its market to lots of low cost carriers, regulation of these carriers could not keep pace and there was a spate of crashes. It ended up with the EU banning all Indonesian carriers, including the national carrier Garuda. At the same time, an EU official said "European citizens should avoid flying with these carriers . . . they are really unsafe."

 

One of the more notorious carriers was Adam Air, founded in 2002. One of its aircraft was found to be almost 500 kms off course when its navigation and communication systems failed, another was lost and all 102 aboard killed as a result of pilot error, a Boeing 737 had a hard landing at Jakarta which broke its back, and yet another skidded off the runway at Batam. In the last case, it was found that the crew had not been trained in deploying the emergency exit slides.

 

At Adam Air investigators eventually discovered that serious efforts were made to hide major maintenance issues from regulators as well as fraudulent data manipulation. But the regulators were overwhelmed and their numbers had not kept pace with the industry expansion.

 

Adam Air 'died' in June 2008.

 

Dozens of airlines emerged after Indonesia deregulated its aviation industry in the 1990s, raising concerns that growth outpaced the supply of trained aviation professionals, regulatory oversight and ground infrastructure.

http://www.msnbc.msn...e/#.UOO1iI4ihII

[Guest]

Is it as safe as the West or the bigger countries in Asia, clearly not. Is it "unsafe"? I don't know about that. You're probably in more danger trying to cross the street in most big Asian cities than you are on a Burmese airplane.

 

 

As for crossing the road, well you're in control of some of the decision making there, so risks can be reduced.

 

Some airlines have NEVER had any fatal crashes.  Some have them all the time.  I would rather avoid airlines with an above average incident rate.

[Rogie]

 

As for crossing the road, well you're in control of some of the decision making there, so risks can be reduced.

(not addressing Z in particular) sure, YOU can control your own decision-making most of the time, but what happens if you have a drink too many and coming out of a bar stumble and get hit by a bus or if you're running late for an important meeting and forget to look both ways and are run over by a tram. And what about the speeding madman running a red light in his Ferrari? Sorry, he didn't see you! Multiply that by thousands and thousands of pedestrians in all the cities in Asia and it stands to reason many of them will get injured crossing the road.