A training incident involving an inexperienced pilot and 177 Jetstar passengers at the Gold Coast Airport on May 30 is expected to come under scrutiny at the imminent Senate Inquiry into pilot training and standards.
According to an ATSB report, the trainee pilot of the A320 involved “flared” the jet’s nose upwards too early on his approach to a landing, which was under the supervision of the Jetstar captain conducting the exercise with paying passengers on board.
The plane then “floated” low over the comparatively short runway until the captain took control from the learner pilot after it became apparent it there might not be enough runway left in which to make the landing.
However, the radio altimeter height of the flight was just 30 feet above the runway (or 22 feet below main wheels) and the A320 sank and hit its surface before the jet powered away from the airport to return for a more conventional landing.
The ATSB report notes that the trainee pilot had only 50 hours’ experience on the Airbus type when he was designated as pilot in control for the landing exercise.
Pilot inexperience and declining standards of training in Australian carriers is one of the issues that led independent SA senator Nick Xenophon to introduce and win support for the forthcoming inquiry to be conducted by the Senate’s Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Committee.
The Gold Coast Jetstar incident is one of 20 “level 5” or least serious incidents reports released by the ATSB, even though the public may reasonably expect that an incident involving an 177-seat Jetstar flight, while under the control of an inexperienced pilot, deserved to be examined more fully and prominently.
The ATSB identifies no safety issues and makes no safety recommendations in the report. Instead it offers a “comment:
“The incident highlights the importance of recognising when a go-around should be initiated and supports the safety benefits of being ‘go-around-prepared’ and ‘go-around-minded’.”
Pilots who have read the report this morning are angered by the inability or unwillingness of the ATSB to address what appears to be a severe deficiency in flight safety standards at Jetstar.
One pilot said if Jetstar wasn’t able to maintain go-around-awareness in its pilot training exercises, it needed to served notice under the regulations that its air operator certificate would be reviewed.
I have said before on these pages that after just ONE Jetstar flight – Townsville to Melbourne I would never willing fly with this airline again. And that was because of the sullen, off hand treatment of cabin crew. Now it seems that proper standards are not being applied where it really matters. Even more reason to avoid Jetstar.
Without being flippant, the guy had 50 hours on the aircraft type, so fair go – when should he have a go? And anyway, any landing you walk away from is a good one, isn’t it?
Dr Harvey M Tarvydas
Ben Sandilands I don’t know enough to make a fair comment on this issue but I do know, as someone who flies a hell of a lot, that when a professional like you has the guts to stand up and say it straight I know I can only be safer unless a psychopath is the respondent to your alert.
I am finding that I am the only medical professional in the whole of Australia with the guts to alert the community to the killing that my profession does while avoiding smarts and truth and being scientifically ignorant would you ever believe.
Enough to make Queensland’s Dr Death look like an angel and the Queensland medical board look like boy scouts with clean underpants while egging him on. But I’ve been on about that for years and the powers that be are perfecting my destruction.
Dr Harvey M Tarvydas
The pricks are in for a surprise (don’t worry about me).
From the report I conclude that ATSB did not find any safety issue to report on. Training issues there may be, and certainly many are worried about deteriorating training standards generally, and employment of first officers with low hours and on low pay. But in this case the Pilot in Command did his job and took control and the aircraft was not in any danger. A go around is standard operating procedure. The crew certainly were “go around aware” and “go around ready”. BTW a first officer is not a “learner pilot” however one might interpret that non technical phrase. In this case he had 50 hours on type, but would also have time in the simulator. The report does not disclose total hours which may well be substantial on other types. I don’t believe it reasonable to draw conclusions about flight training standards from this incident. Your pilot informant was in fact misinformed. There was indeed go around awareness in this case. ATSB found so.