Singapore Airlines Flight #SQ006

[Andrew Ong 1]

October 31, 2006 will be the 6th anniversary of SQ006, a Singapore Airlines 747-412, that crash on runway 05R during takoff . The runway that Papa Kilo (9V-SPK) crashed was under repairs. The flight was supposed to be a routine flight from Los Angeles International Airport to Singapore Changi International Airport via Taipei Chiang Kai Shek International Airport. The accident specs:

 

----Aircraft: Boeing 747-412

----Crash Site: Taipei Chiang Kai Shek Int’l Airport, Taipei, Taiwan

----Registration number: 9V-SPK

----Accident Date: October 31, 2000

----Passengers: 159

----Crew: 20

----Fatalities: 83

----Survivors: 96

----Cause: Cause: The aircraft began its takeoff roll in heavy rain and high winds. and the aircraft struck construction equipment, flipped over to its side, broke in three and burst into flames. The pilot missed some key warnings, including a routine preflight briefing report that warned of the hazard on the runway under construction and two signs indicating the number of the runway he mistakenly went down.

----Closed Runway for repairs (crash site): 05R

----Supposed takeoff runway: 05L

 

Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) transcript

 

The following are selected excerpts from SQ006's CVR prior to the accident. All times are in UTC and the language spoken by the Singapore Air Crew is Singlish.

 

15:14:58: Pilot-flying (PF)- Tell them we ready lah

15:15:02: Radio 2 (RDO2)- Singapore Six ready

15:15:04: Tower (TWR)- Singapore Six roger, runway zero five left, taxi into position and hold

15:15:08: RDO2- Taxi into position and hold, Singapore Six

15:15:12: Pilot-not-flying (PNF)- I get them seated ah

15:15:12: PF- Ok below the line please... yah

15:15:15: PNF- Cabin crew to your takeoff station thanks

15:15:22: TWR- Singapore Six, runway zero five left, wind zero two zero at two eight, gust to five zero, cleared for take off

15:15:30: RDO2- Cleared for takeoff, runway zero five left, Singapore Six

15:16:43: Observer pilot (OBS)- Ok, thrust ref toga toga

15:16:43: PNF- Thrust ref toga toga

15:16:44: PF- Ok, thrust ref toga toga

15:16:54: OBS- Hold

15:16:54: PNF- Hold

15:16:54: PF- Roger

15:16:55: OBS- Eighty knots

15:16:55: PNF- Eighty knots

15:16:56: PF- Ok, my control

15:17:13: PNF- Vee One

15:17:13: OBS- Vee One

15:17:16: PF- s#1t, something there

15:17:17: Sound of first impact

15:17:18: ****waaah****

15:17:18: Sounds of series of impacts

15:17:22: End of recording

From:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore_Airlines_Flight_006

 

The captain of the doomed aircraft is a Malaysian. The aircraft is a "Tropical" 747-412, painted in 1997 to promote SQ's new First, Raffles, and Economy class cabins. After the accident, SQ promised to pay US$400,000 to every victim of the crash and 9V-SPK's the sister aircraft, 9V-SPL was changed back to original livery because SQ now believed that any of their aircraft that is painted in special livery is "cursed"

 

Pre-crash photo:

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=412917

 

 

Aftermath :

 

 

**** The flight number is changed from SQ006 to SQ030

Edited October 21, 2006 by Andrew Ong

[Min Chun 0]

9V-SPK's the sister aircraft, 9V-SPL was changed back to original livery because SQ now believed that any of their aircraft that is painted in special livery is "cursed"

 

The flight number is changed from SQ006 to SQ030

 

*speechless*

Anyways, still..R.I.P to those unfortunate

That's a photo which is sad to look at

Edited October 21, 2006 by Min Chun

[KC Sim 2]

SQ now believed that any of their aircraft that is painted in special livery is "cursed"

 

I think it should be noted that this was not exactly SIA's perspective, but the typical A.net and the aviation enthusiast's reading of what SIA's management thought.

 

In any aviation disaster, you will find that airlines send out a team of people to quickly remove identifiable markings on the aircraft before TV cameras give it even greater coverage . . . often spray paint would be used to remove titles and logos.

 

In the case of SQ6, the entire plane was covered in the special markings applied in 1998 (not 1997), it was not possible to spray paint the entire structure. As such, it was only logical that the second aircraft painted in exactly the same livery be repainted in the airline's definitive livery. It had nothing to do with any association of "special livery" with "being cursed". There just wasn't any particular event since then to celebrate with a special livery . . . and I am hoping that something will be painted in special livery next year for SIA's Diamond Jubilee.

 

KC Sim

[Lawrence L 0]

Does the "Star Alliance" livery considered as special....???

[Simon 3]

Does the "Star Alliance" livery considered as special....???

 

Good question.

 

Painted in 1998, accident in 2000, 'a curse'???

 

[Andrew Ong 1]

Does the "Star Alliance" livery considered as special....???

 

Yes because it shows SQ entering the Star Alliance family

[Denny Yen 0]

The discussions on Anet or other websites are merely "arm-chair so called experts." And it has nothing to do with being cursed. Whatever they say is "hear say" or secondary (or definately subject to exageration).

 

There is a particular Taiwanese TV channel on its "Files of Formosa" that makes it a point to highlight major disasters that had impacts on Taiwanese people. For this year's SQ006 anniversary program, the producers will focus on the human tragedy side of the crash.

 

Producers have brought in the camera to shoot the daily living of one of SQ006's victim who is still waiting for her day of justice in court. She and her ex-husband suffered 80% burn. She previously owned a skincare saloon and was a newly-wed travelling for honeymoon in USA.

 

The crash took away her beautiful life ahead, they divorced because they can't even take care of each other. She now requires a helper even for routine things such as going to the loo, getting out of the bed, etc. Her cosmetic business went bankrupt because customers became afraid after looking at her disfigurement.

 

Last year's program focussed on those involved in the investigation....they talked to investigators, pilots, rescuers, ambulance crew, etc. The interviewed the chief investigator, who highlighted that there were 10 clues for the pilots. He said had they paid more attention to any one / some of these 10 clues, the error could have been rectified. The 10 clues were:

- Airport navigation diagram

- A/c heading reference

- Taxiway centerline lights

- Rwy centerline lights

- Signage

- Color of centerline lights leading into taxiway and rwy

- Rwy edge lights

- Para-Visual Display - to show if aligned to correct rwy localizer

- Primary Flight Display

- Width difference between rwy and taxiway

 

After the crash, the American victims initiated lawsuits in US courts. During the trial, SQ's lawyers highlighted the "disputed facts" about rwy lighting, markings not in conformity with int'l standards, threshold lighting too closely spaced, etc. However, the court weighted these against the 10 clues as per the preliminary report. And the most glaring of all: 1 continuous 180deg turn vs two 90deg turns.

 

Based on these factors, one of the Californian court awarded USD15mil to 2 children whose parents died (the highest award in aviation compensation history for a single plaintiff). Following this decision, 12 other similar lawsuits were later settled out of court...presumably because the earlier decision gave some indication of their probable outcome.

[S V Choong 4]

Wonder what happened to the Captain and the Co-pilot. Weren't they guilty of negligence and manslaughter?

[Andrew Ong 1]

Wonder what happened to the Captain and the Co-pilot. Weren't they guilty of negligence and manslaughter?

 

They are dead already

[Keith T 2]

They are dead already

 

Uhh that's not true...

After the accident the 3 pilots were detained in Taiwan. Don't know the specifics - best to consult wikipedia. But they were acquitted eventually, but stood down from SQ.

[Guest Fendy]

They are dead already

no they arent. they were not prosecuted.

[Edwin P K 0]

Gosh, first time seeing the wreckage...it's cut into 2???

[Seng Lim 0]

From what I remembered the Captain and FO both sacked by SQ while the SO able to keep his job.

[Lawrence L 0]

From what I remembered the Captain and FO both sacked by SQ while the SO able to keep his job.

 

I bet that SO learnt a hell lot of things....First hand....

[Rozhan 0]

I recall the press highlighted / stressed the captain being a Malaysian. What has one's nationality got to do with the incident. Since he was flying for SQ and trained by SQ, why should another country be put to blame?!

Edited October 22, 2006 by Rozhan

[Lawrence L 0]

*Off topic

 

Can we trust the wikipedia content...??? Anybody can write anything they want...

[Guest Fendy]

I recall the press highlighted / stressed the captain being a Malaysian. What has one's nationality got to do with the incident. Since he was flying for SQ and trained by SQ, why should another country be put to blame?!

right, i remember too that at one point the media tried to blame a china airlines captain for not reporting seeing the sq6 on the wrong runway???

[Seth K 3]

right, i remember too that at one point the media tried to blame a china airlines captain for not reporting seeing the sq6 on the wrong runway???

Media iz powerful, they can influence anyone, anytime! Agree, that Nationality has got nothing to do. Other than that, what happen to the 2 pilots? What they do now? RIP

[S V Choong 4]

I recall the press highlighted / stressed the captain being a Malaysian. What has one's nationality got to do with the incident. Since he was flying for SQ and trained by SQ, why should another country be put to blame?!

 

Lets not get a bit over-sensitive, shall we?

Malaysian or not, it was fully trained by SQ themselves.

[Isaac 0]

I recall the press highlighted / stressed the captain being a Malaysian. What has one's nationality got to do with the incident. Since he was flying for SQ and trained by SQ, why should another country be put to blame?!

Because the captain is indeed a Malaysian. Nothing more I don't think there is anything wrong by stating the captain's nationality.

 

[Simon 3]

Media iz powerful, they can influence anyone, anytime! Agree, that Nationality has got nothing to do. Other than that, what happen to the 2 pilots? What they do now? RIP

 

They were fired....

[Andrew Ong 1]

The background was that the Malaysian Captain was trained at the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) and trained for Singapore Airlines . The point is that the captain forgot to tell the ATC that if there was a closed runway .

 

 

Uhh that's not true...

After the accident the 3 pilots were detained in Taiwan. Don't know the specifics - best to consult wikipedia. But they were acquitted eventually, but stood down from SQ.

no they arent. they were not prosecuted.

 

When the accident was first reported, the news media said that the 3 pilots are dead

 

 

Gosh, first time seeing the wreckage...it's cut into 2???

 

The aircraft was cut into three pieces: Nose, Middle, and Rear; I believed the death toll goes like this :

 

First Class: All

Raffles Class: All

Economy Class: 2/3 dead

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 23, 2006 by Andrew Ong

[Denny Yen 0]

Regarding issue about nationality/identity of pilots or which organization they belong to...it has to do with reporting style. Anyone who has written a news report would've recognize the pattern of the 5Ws: what happened? when it happened? where? who? why?

 

All 3 pilots were detained and barred from leaving Taiwan by an overzealous local prosecutor to "assist in a criminal manslaughter charge." Although local laws allow him to issue those orders considering that 83 people died, however, the Taiwanese ASC heavily criticised him for acting contrary to international norms in aviation accident investigation.

 

The moment the pilots knew they have a potential criminal charge hanging over their heads, they will be fearful about saying things that can implicate themselves. The focus of ASC is on cause of the accident, which requires full disclosure and cooperation from the pilots. This is different from a criminal investigation, which from the outset sets a different tone altogether.

 

In the end, the ASC prevailed and he was told to back-off. Nevertheless, as a face-saving gesture, the pilots were put on good behaviour bond for 2 years and not allowed to operate any flights into Taiwan for a stipulated period.

[Denny Yen 0]

Gosh, first time seeing the wreckage...it's cut into 2???

If you read the official report, there is a big section on the analytical description of the break-up sequence and debris dispersion. The report is comprehensive and covers all aspects...it describes about how the fuselage got punctured, attempted lift-off and rolled-over, ignited fuel became "flying" liquid that splashed onto the passengers, pattern of injury, etc. It also described about chimney effect, the chaos during the emergency escape, why slides failed to deploy, etc.

 

BTW, the wreckage is still lying in a fenced site located in Taoyuan county, Taiwan. It has rusted but you can still see the traces of tropical livery.

[Isaac 0]

First Class: All

Raffles Class: All

Economy Class: 2/3 dead

This is not true. There are survivors from the First & Raffles Class. Passengers from the upper-deck Raffles Class only had minor injuries.