Singapore Airlines Flight #SQ006

[Andrew Ong 1]

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

 

I get it now ; I really got to stop paying so much attention to the news media

Edited October 23, 2006 by Andrew Ong

[Denny Yen 0]

The report has a seat-map of SQ6, which classified passengers according to dead or alive. As to cause of death (smoke, burn, instant death from the impacts, internal bleeding, etc), subsequent sections provide the analysis.

[S V Choong 4]

All in all this is the characteristic of human error and professional negligence by all three professionals at the cockpit of that flight.

Edited October 23, 2006 by S V Choong

[Teoh Z Yao 0]

Mind my ignorance, but isn't SQ006 bound for LA that fateful evening?

 

The stats has that all 1st and Raffles Classes pax died, while 2/3 of the economic died. That's a pretty high casualty rate for a relatively mild crash (I mean at lower speed and lower altitude). How was occupancy that evening in SQ006?

 

Forget about those NTSB and media reports, what was identified as the real cause of the accident? Maybe some MW members here can provide a more accurate reason of what caused the accident? Would really like to know. Thanks!

 

Still a sad incident, anyway! Still remember learning of the news on TV that night... Fire was everywhere...

[Gavin Andrew David 6]

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 .

 

 

Captain needs to check NOTAM during briefing Andrew .

Its his very own responsibility to check for closed taxiways , runways and any obstructions .

[Guest Fendy]

Forget about those NTSB and media reports, what was identified as the real cause of the accident? Maybe some MW members here can provide a more accurate reason of what caused the accident? Would really like to know. Thanks!

they took off from the wrong runway. plain and simple.

[Gavin Andrew David 6]

*sidenote

 

Runway numbers changed already due to the accident ?

 

Anyone care to clarify .

[Teoh Z Yao 0]

they took off from the wrong runway. plain and simple.

 

No doubt, we all knew that since 2000, but why?

 

Captain needs to check NOTAM during briefing Andrew .

Its his very own responsibility to check for closed taxiways , runways and any obstructions .

 

Yes, Andrew, it is the flight crew's responsibility to know what's going at the airport in general. And there is no reason why it is the Captain that informs the ATC that there is a closed runway. I'm sure the least thing that could had happened was that even ATC reminded the crews of a closed runway.

Edited October 23, 2006 by Teoh Z Yao

[Guest Fendy]

No doubt, we all knew that since 2000, but why?

p-i-l-o-t-e-r-r-o-r

 

Yes, Andrew, it is the flight crew's responsibility to know what's going at the airport in general. And there is no reason why it is the Captain that informs the ATC that there is a closed runway. I'm sure the least thing that could had happened was that even ATC reminded the crews of a closed runway.

the crew wasnt supposed to be on that runway in the first place.

[Lawrence L 0]

When the plane crashed into the construction site, what was the speed ?

[Gavin Andrew David 6]

When the plane crashed into the construction site, what was the speed ?

 

Anyone got the captain's phone number ?

[Denny Yen 0]

The a/c crashed on the closed Rwy 05R. Rwy 05L was later re-designated as Rwy 05. Rwy 05R was merged with taxiway NP to become apron and one taxiway.

 

CKS airport now has 2 rwys: Rwy 6 and 5 (which is slightly longer), one for take-offs and the other for landings. However, I've seen landings and take-offs from the same rwy.

 

I've flown with CX, BR and ANA...they tend to use Rwy 05. If I take CI or UAL, its usually Rwy 06.

 

Download the entire final report here:

http://www.asc.gov.tw/asc_en/accident_list...?accident_no=80

[Seng Lim 0]

The complete SQ6 report is available for download at:

http://www.airdisaster.com/reports/ntsb/ASCAAR-02-01.pdf

All the information is available there.

 

Refer to the lucky vs. unlucky seats in this disaster, here's the information I got from that report.

 

 

[Keith T 2]

I shall keep my fingers crossed when flying Raffles Class on the 744 then - as my favourite seats are in row 17 due to the huge legroom. As i'm non-PPS I only get 17 H or K, both of which saw perished pax in this accident.

[Teoh Z Yao 0]

So, it;s that plain and simple, pilot error. It can be carelessness or the storm really blurred vision severely. Very simple, period.

 

 

[Lawrence L 0]

I shall keep my fingers crossed when flying Raffles Class on the 744 then - as my favourite seats are in row 17 due to the huge legroom. As i'm non-PPS I only get 17 H or K, both of which saw perished pax in this accident.

 

Shouldnt say so... People learnt from mistakes(Hope so )... Hopefully no more accident like this...

[Andrew Ong 1]

Shouldnt say so... People learnt from mistakes(Hope so )... Hopefully no more accident like this...

 

I hate to say it but there is a similar accident: Delta Connection (Comair) Flight #DL5191 (reg. #N431CA); it took the wrong runway (runway is too short) and crashed into some trees on August 12, 2006. But the cause was somewhat alike.

 

Here is the map of crash site:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:KLEX_US...omair_Paths.jpg

Edited October 23, 2006 by Andrew Ong

[Andrew Lim 1]

Thanks for the report, Seng Lim, but glancing through the document, it would seem both the pilots and the airport are at fault.

 

Its just a bit of a wonder that the pilots managed to stay alive when more than half the passengers behind them, on the same deck, perished.

 

[Sandeep G 1]

An unfortunate accident.

A number of contributing factors.

 

What's done is done and can unfortunately, never be changed.

 

May all those who lost their lives R.I.P.

 

Continuing condolences to their families who I hope have been able to pick up the pieces, and move on with only the bestest and fondest memories of their lost loved ones.

[Simon 3]

Guys, thanks for all the useful infos.

[Denny Yen 0]

Taiwanese rescue crews that brave typhoon Xangsang’s winds in the recovery effort.

 

Crash-site pics

 

 

 

 

 

SQ006 collided with several machinery…this one was dragged/thrown off a significant distance from point of impact site.

 

Minnie Mouse doll burnt beyond recognition

 

Chinese/Taiwanese customs say that a recently departed person’s soul stays at the location of their death. A ceremony must be conducted to recall these “spirits” to follow their next-of-kin so that funeral rites can be completed by family members.

 

At the other end of the line, a prayer session for non-Chinese traditions.

 

About 3/4 of total skin area of this SQ F/A was burnt.

 

The last body (SQ F/A) was recovered several days later…hidden under tailplane section debris.

[Adrian88 0]

Yea i do remember tis hot topic when i was kinda young tatime......but is tis the oni aircrash involving SQ so for so long???

[Isaac 0]

but is tis the oni aircrash involving SQ so for so long???

A major one with casulaties ? Yes

 

[S V Choong 4]

It tells us that the end section of the plane is a the safest place......

 

I can't see the cockpit at all and amazingly the pilots did not die........ I assume the cockpit is damaged beyond recognition?

Edited October 25, 2006 by S V Choong

[Seng Lim 0]

It tells us that the end section of the plane is a the safest place......

From http://www.askcaptainlim.com/asseatingissues.htm

"Practically, there is no solid evidence to point to any specific area of the airplane that is safer than the other. Some believe that it is safer to sit near the wings. Conventional wisdom has sometimes influenced safety experts to conclude that sitting at the rear of the airplane provides a higher survival rate in the event of a crash. This is one of the reasons why the black boxes are always installed at the tail portion of the airplane. However, I would caution to say that the safest seat during an emergency evacuation is probably one near the aisle and emergency exits. Speed of evacuation is one of the reasons why FAA requires all airplanes to be capable of getting every passenger out within 90 seconds of a crash landing. . In real life, an emergency evacuation can be a very chaotic event with people trying to collect their precious baggage, further hampering the flow. Being nearest to the exits ensure the best guarantee of a safe evacuation. So I would like to be the first few to be out before the rush starts from the back!"