AirAsia Didn’t Have Permission to Fly Route on Day of Crash

[Turborama]

Last edited Sun Jan 4, 2015, 11:48 AM - Edit history (1)

Source: WSJ

Updated 04 January 2015 10:27

JAKARTA, Indonesia— AirAsia didn't have permission to fly from Surabaya to Singapore on the Sunday morning that Flight 8501 crashed into the Java Sea, Indonesian officials said Saturday.

The development came as Indonesia’s search-and-rescue agency said it had discovered four large pieces of the plane on the floor of the Java Sea. Because of that discovery, the search area was narrowed on Sunday and divers were able to enter the water to look at what was found, an Indonesian search-and-rescue official said. He added that weather in the search area has improved and that vessels equipped with sound-detection equipment are combing the area in the hope of detecting pings from the plane’s “black box” data recorders.

Transport Ministry spokesman J.A. Barata said the airline was only permitted to fly the route on Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays.

“So AirAsia has committed a violation of the route that has been given to them,” Mr. Barata told The Wall Street Journal. He said the company’s flights from Surabaya, Indonesia’s second-largest city, to Singapore had consequently been suspended on Friday.

Read more: http://www.wsj.com/articles/airasia-didnt-have-permission-to-fly-route-on-day-of-crash-indonesia-says-1420261574?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories

---

On edit:

This is why it is not so "trivial"...

AirAsia Flight's Altitude Request Was Refused

Pilots of the AirAsia plane thought to have crashed in the Java Sea were refused permission to climb higher to avoid a storm, according to Indonesia's air travel chief.

Joko Muryo Atmodjo said Flight QZ8501 had asked to ascend from 32,000ft (9,753m) to 38,000ft (11,582m) but controllers denied the request because of heavy air traffic.

Full article: http://news.sky.com/story/1399245/airasia-flights-altitude-request-was-refused

[cosmicone]

1. This accident could have happened on any day

While flying without permission for a specific day is commercially disturbing, obviously, the authorities knew the plane was going to fly and thus this news has no bearing on the tragedy nor on the plight of the victims.

[groundloop]

2. Sounds kind of petty.... but hey, it'll get headlines for WSJ

I'm sure that the families of those killed will be glad to know that the Wall Street Journal is hot on the case of why the airline was flying that route on Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays instead of on Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays.




"Transport Ministry spokesman J.A. Barata said the airline was only permitted to fly the route on Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays.....

Mr. Murjatmodjo added that AirAsia had been flying the route on Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays rather than the four days designated by the Transportation Ministry. He said the ministry is investigating why AirAsia was flying the route outside its permitted schedule. The probe will include an investigation of the ministry."

[Turborama]

6. Please see my edit.

[George II]

3. People on the news are acting like this was something that contributed to the accident...

....it didn't.

Too bad some have to dwell on triviality as though it was a contributing factor.

[pangaia]

5. Few 'reporters' have any idea what they are talking or writing about.

Airline reporters are among the worst.

[bluevoter4life]

13. As an aviation professional myself

I absolutely cringe every time I see an aviation "reporter" on the news. Sure as water is wet, they will get something important wrong.

Then you get images like this one.





Unfortunately, this is not exclusive to Fox News. For those of you who don't follow aviation, AirAsia flies Airbus A320 aircraft. Not a single one of the airplanes shown in this graphic is an A320.

[pangaia]

14. Priceless graphic. !!

I am not a pro, just have my ppl and fly a Pacer when I can.

This kind of ignorance makes one wonder just how bad ALL reporting is.

[jmowreader]

15. But hey, they got one out of the three dimensions close

And at Fox News, one of three is just as good as being completely right...

A ten-second search of the internets gives these numbers, from the manufacturer's own website:

Overall length: 123'3"
Wingspan: 117'5" with "Sharklets" (Airbus' blended-winglet device)
Height: 38'7"

[Turborama]

7. Not so trivial when you start looking into what went wrong. Please see my edit. n/t

[FLPanhandle]

4. While this has nothing to do with why the accident happened...

it could be an indication of AirAsia's corporate culture of obeying aviation rules. If they ignored route rules/regulations did they also ignore maintenance or safety or training rules too?

So while not significant on it's own, it may be one of many rules they didn't follow.

[Turborama]

8. It may well have something to do with what happened, please see my edit. n/t

[pangaia]

12. I read your edit.

I don't know what happened, but. I am assuming that an IFR flight plan was filed as per usual. Requesting a different altitude is not unusual. Having the request denied, at least temporarily, is also not in and of itself unusual - usually, as indicated, because of other traffic.
But as suggested, flying on a day when AirAsia was not approved for that route may (or may not) indicate lax rule following, maintenance, etc etc..

[NBachers]

9. The implication is that Sunday was not approved because of crowded skies or routes too close.

A comparison of flight routes and times on the approved days vs the non-approved days should give some information on whether that's the case or not.

[whereisjustice]

10. interesting discovery, the implication is that the route had become crowded with limited

maneuverability to avoid things like bad weather that frequently develop over ocean routes. Therefore, there were restrictions put in place in the interest of air traffic safety.

If it is determined that the corporation defied the route in order to increase profits, there should be criminal charges.

Generally speaking, Asia is not known for a transparent justice system so this will be very interesting to follow.

- on edit: see post above mine, coincidentally almost the exact argument.

[goldent]

16. Like many news stories it is best to wait for more information before

jumping to conclusions. From reading the article, it said the restrictions were due to "quotas" of passengers coming from a particular country. This restriction could be due to commercial agreements, similar to the ones governing transatlantic flights.

[Blue_Tires]

18. +1

[quadrature]

17. the limitation... was a business arragement to lower competition...

or there was too much air traffic
to be safe?

edit.
looks to me like an airline cartel
was trying to reduce competition