ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.ย. 2024
- View the Accident Report here - reports.aviati...
Read IATA’s CFIT Analysis Report here - flightsafety.o...
/ 3greens
CREDITS
Voice Actors
First Officer and ATC - Joseph Louison
Captain and Other Aircraft - Jens (Lezvox) Bak
Music
Doco Background Music - Purple Planet Music www.purple-planet.com/
Action Music - Fesliyan Studios www.feslyianstudios.com
Sim Footage
Microsoft Flight Simulator 10
Airbus A300B4 by Thomas Ruth
Garuda repaint by Michael Pearson
A well spoken narration. Very easy to understand. Too many documentaries are gabbled at mach 1 and have annoying, loud, over use of rock music masking the narration. Keep up the good work.
Great Video; terrible outcome. I’m in the medical field and these videos actually help me to be more attentive to my hands on work. Thanks
This is so unfortunate, the low visibility combined with the too low altitude and confusion regarding which direction to turn was a recipe for disaster.
With an inbound flight in airport proximity and able to land, why is the controller so concerned about a departing flight still on the taxiway ? Seems like a lot of unnecessary fiddling about keeping a plane in the air so close to the airport. How about 'hold short' for the departing flight ?
Agreed. It sure seems like this was primarily the fault of ATC. And the priority should be landing the planes close to the airport, especially in such poor visibility. A plane is safe on the ground, so it can hold, until the incoming planes land.
Amazingly (or actually not), the terrain/pull up warning reduced crashes by about 90% over night once GPWS was mandated. No terrain warning due to being in approach configuration?
It didn't happen overnight, the earliest GPWS were installed as far back as the 70s. The game changer happened to be the TAWS, which explains that no airliner fell victim of a CFIT after 2010.
This thing had GPWS, it was broken.
@@julosx I didn’t mean literally overnight, but once commercial airliners were mandated to have terrain warning, crash numbers plummeted quickly.
How about communication being “turn left, correct” or something similar. The word ‘right’ should never be used unless it’s a command to turn right. It should never be used as a confirmation.
That’s so right.
Way too much inadequate phraseology in this case. that explains a lot of the confusion and misunderstandings between the ATC and the flight crew.
Perhaps they should simply use compass directions rather than the vagaries of ambiguous ‘left’/‘right’ indications.
@@anhedonianepiphany5588 they are using compass directions, that’s what the headings are. Turning left or turning right aren’t vague instructions, they are very specific, they define the flight path of the aircraft and are binary.
@@kickedinthecalfbyacow7549 ...and prone to confusion! There are plenty of binary alternatives which wouldn’t be so problematic. Either that, or just contrive some new aviation specific terms to avoid conflict. The arrogance is amusing, but hardly fitting.
Thank you 3 Greens, subscribed.
a bit surprise for the pilot using words "..turn right now.."
Another awesome video! I was excited to see the notification a new video was up!
I remember this crash when I was living in Singapore. It was just another reason why I avoided Indonesian airlines when I could. But on business inside Indonesia I had to fly Garuda, Merpati, Sempati, Mandela…in tropical weather conditions or at night…it could test your sphincter…
I refused to fly Bouraq
🤣👍
It's Mandala Airline sir, not Mandela
9:33 I thought that was a face in the windshield for a second.
Another great video, thanks!
If altitude detents are at 100ft intervals, jumping by 1000 on release isn't 'sensitive' it's 'broken'
seriously...
I feel sorry for those who have to listen to the voice recordings after a crash. How HAUNTING😱😭
I'll say this, if I was either pilot...I would have added full power and climbed, as soon as I felt there was miscommunication, In mountainiss terrain
Hell! I wouldn't have waited a moment either.
@@tonyduncan9852 copilots need to speak up, captains are in control...but become complacent.0
Yes, me to and would of noticed that I was only 1000 feet due to the mistake in the the setting of the autopilot altitude of 2000. I always give a few peeks at the altimeter when on the the approach. They should of known about the smoke and been more diligent on the approach. My as a private pilot, I would of never took off in the plane. Over my personal min.
This is one aspect of aviation that fascinates me.Yes flying during the night as a passenger I still go to default.If you cant see where you are or where you are going and have to trust systems in the cockpit then you are flying blind.If in a vehicle on the road and you dont see where the road is going you slow down or pull over . Flying into terrain will always be a high risk with less well equiped aircraft in poor visibility and spacial awareness critical.
Was the voice record originally in English, or translated from Bahasa Indonesia? If the former, yes, the word 'right' could interpreted 2 ways. If the latter, the word for right [hand] in BI is 'kanan', which could not be misconstrued.
Hooray for indo!!
I asked Mr Bernard and he said he agrees.
Very well made video's. Enjoy watching thank you..
Some one tried to steal my shoes in Medan in 1997.
Didn’t they wind up being thrown at President Bush?😂
@pro Austrian painter that’s roughly what I said because I was still wearing the shoes at the time
wow, such a great video
Saw the video title and said outloud: CfiG? (Controlled Flight into Ground).
Clicked the video and bam! CFiG/CFiT it's the same thing and is absolutely a killer.
The Swiss Cheese model of randomly what appears minor mistakes add up to a major problem that cannot be overcome with fatal results.
Would you do one on Bar Harbor Flight 1808? I've seen it only done on videos of the death of Samantha Smith, but never really mentioning the details of how and why the plane crashed
Great video! How do you not have more subs? Great content, glad the algorithm worked and led me to you.
Cause the content creator is unresponsive to comments.
What a wonderful idea you suggest : that, at 12:02....the picture your video on you-tube shows is relayed to a screen---like on a cell phone---so the pilots have a verticle view of their intended trajectory.
That's the VSD (vertical situation display)
Turning left right now? So this is a Who's on First accident. Good grief.
Errors are like interest: they compound.
Very true.
This was mostly an ATC error. He should have never directed them that way. But also the fault of the captain.
Very good information in this video.
1:45 Wait, you said Medan is a small city?
It is the 3rd largest city in Indonesia with 4.7 million population.
Situational awareness!
1986 I tested SONY video camera. The camera could see through fog in 0 visibility
There’s plenty of technology that could enhance the safety of aircraft but has yet to be implemented in the most obvious ways. Every time I watch an investigation of an incident which would have had a different outcome had the pilots known the _actual_ state of their engines, I’m always shocked that there aren’t any cameras to _visually_ monitor them (and other external structures/surfaces). Such a system would be inexpensive and easily integrated.
The same goes for cameras which are sensitive to infrared and able to see through fog. We should have them in our road vehicles for low-visibility driving, and they should _definitely_ be employed in large passenger aircraft.
Seems like some kind of altitude awareness program needed to be in effect to handle sensitive knobs to correct the input and something that would remind you what altitude you have descended to when nearing the ground.
What one must have is SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. It can be learned.
Back in the 50s, traveling by air was Russian Roulette. Now there are more chambers in the revolver, but the bullet remains. I just grit my teeth and wait. . . .
You can easily say this about driving... Flying would have more "chambers" than driving
When you drive it is you who is in control. I would rather fly and be in control myself. But than I am rather old. Cannot find wrinkly emoji. @@gxbrielwatches4088
I couldn't believe this, as they got further and further from the airport, I was just thinking, WTF is he doing??! Tragic.
I know. Why weren’t the crew and controllers concerned with such a strange approach pattern?
@@MovieMakingMan Agreed. At this point, the captain should've had his spidey sense tingling. Here you are a trained pilot, and you are relying on some ATC, who really seems careless in how they are communicating to the airplanes.
Commenting for the algorithm
what the cockpit????
The A300 cockpit is glass
September 25,1997 25th Anniversary of Crash I was 18 Year old at Time ago that
Something was off with the Captain. He seemed distracted and not focused
Aviation charts are marked with terrain altitude readings. The pilots did a poor job of proximity awareness; I for one would have demanded immediate gain in altitude from the ATC, until everyone involved was playing from the same page of the game plan.
Every accident has more than one cause, and the most important thing to do is break the chain of event and start fresh.
Aviate - Navigate - Communicate
aduh = oops !
That's not Medan, that's my native City of San Francisco! 🧡🖤
As a trash x-plane 11 player, this happens to me on a daily basis
If they flew following the approach plate, overhead medan vor, this disaster could have been avoided. too bad.
Why don't planes have a warning every 100 feet from like 3000 ft down
They do from 500ft. Pretty sure it's disabled during landing though (gear down)
Some people shouldn't fly.
140 is a flight level? 14 thousand normally check.. Maybe different?
Shame they did not have a GPS map display
It was 1997, not many planes had GPS let alone a GPS map display
Hey great video but I have to correct you. The Air New Zealand Erebus crash was not pilot error.
Sadly ultimately it was pilot failure. The fatal factor being...They were flying below the designated minimum altitude. As set by the NZ Civil Aviation Authority, and by the Airline for these Antarctic sight seeing flights. And that official rule was never changed! They were also flying in white out conditions. Therefore couldn't visually confirm their position. However the pilot in control knew Mt Erebus was in the area. So given they couldnt visually confirm their position. And knew they were below the minimum designated altitude. - IE below the height of Mt Erebus! The golden rule here is - climb out!! Get up stairs fast!! As a general rule, altitude is your friend! That responsibility comes back to the pilot in control! Yes the later navigation change had them flying towards Mt Erebus instead of to 1 side if it. As stipulated by the original flight plan. However had they been flying at the authorised minimum altitude. And as stated, that requirement hadn't been changed! The aircraft would have flown safely over the mountain regardless. And the navigation correction would have occured on the flight back to NZ. And that accident investigation finding was never overturned by any subsequent Court cases. Right up to the Privy Council! So the synopsis is. = There were 2 contributing factors to this tragedy and 1 fatal factor. - 1. Was the navigation error... and 2. They were flying in white out conditions. However - ultimately - the core fatal factor was... They were flying below the minimun authorised altitude! And in so doing, abandoned a critical safety measure!
It was Air NZ changing the flight plan coordinates the night before and NOT telling the pilots
Gravity
The ATC were just as culpable. Total amateur hour.
Avoidable...sad.
For future reference, San Francisco, California is not in Indonesia. 😉
Aduh....harusnya kalau atc dan pilot sama² orang indo ya mending pake bahasa Indonesia sajalah. Supaya tidak bingung dan terjadi miskomunikasi
The echo from the reenactment radio narration is too fake and distracting
Not "most deadly". It's "deadliest".
Speak good English, confound you.
Comparatives and superlatives. They're there for a reason - use them. 🙄
This guy's voice and accent are nauseating
They are not. You are too self-centred
HE IS SPEAKING VERY CLEAR AND PRESISE, THE BEST I;VE HERD ON TH-cam!
Go make a video about plane accidents and we'll judge you if you're better then