Why I never have, and never will fly a budget airline.

[duanebigsby]

I think you'll find many "reputable" airlines have had accidents caused by poor maintenance.

Taking one example and labeling all budget airlines as a high risk isn't logical.

Perhaps your longevity has a lot to do with airlines being safe in general and you lucked out not getting cancer, which people are at higher risk for than plane crashes.

[Srikcir]

I'm not condoning anything but as a former electronic repair technician I will try to explain that many circuit boards these days are MULTILAYER boards with tracks running underneath other tracks, mainly to conserve space on otherwise crowded circuit boards.

The old days of single level circuit boards when a technician could fix a track on a circuit board with a hot soldering iron and some solder are long gone.

Now circuit boards with multilevel interlacing tracks MUST be replaced and be sent to a factory for repair as only a factory can deal with repairing multilevel tracks on circuit boards as those you find now because only in such a factory do you find the kind of equipment to repair those multilayer tracks

This would be particularly true on a circuit board in something as complex as a control computer where space and heat would be a problem.

As I say I not condoning, just trying to explain the repairman's problem.

Replacing new circuit boards requires expensive and long downtime repairs which cost money for the operators of the equipment.

And the owner always wants everything fixed as fast as possible at the cheapest cost.

Surely the compensation to be paid out for the 162 deaths and ancillary survivor expenses will far exceed the circuit board repair costs.

Perhaps every aircraft should post for passengers at the gateway and internet any and all unrepaired deficiencies, ie., 24 hours prior to flight with the potential impact from failure. Let passengers decide for themselves the cost of risk.

[jacko45k]

You have a far greater chance of dying in a traffic accident in Thailand than losing your life flying on Air Asia.

Some where between evens and 1 in 10 then?

[thaiowl]

Here's the official report, all 206 pages: http://kemhubri.dephub.go.id/knkt/ntsc_aviation/baru/Final%20Report%20PK-AXC.pdf

Yes, there was a problem with the tail rudder limiter on the aircraft, but the plane was perfectly airworthy. But because the tail rudder limiter was faulty, they pulled a black circuit breaker which turned off the autopilot and put it into "alternate law". The airplane banked to 54 degrees...they corrected the bank...but then the rudder (which was off by 2 degrees) caused the aircraft to descend, at which point, the crew put the aircraft into a steep climb, which eventually caused a stall. The stall could have been quickly recovered by pointing the nose down and regaining lift. However, the Indonesian Captain was telling the French First Officer to "pull down", which added to the confusion. The nose remained up and the aircraft plummeted to the sea.

The stall was very recoverable and it's amazing that a Captain who had 20,000 hours flying and who had just had his 6-monthly check (which includes stall recovery) was unable to identify and recover the stall. All they had to do was fly the plane instead of being distracted by the faulty tail rudder limiter.

I think there was a dual input problem during this incident (like Air France)...don't know why Airbus doesn't do anything about this. Apparently, you can have two opposite control inputs at the same time and one will override without the other pilot feeling it in the controls.

[UTH001]

I feel terrible because I have a (non refundable) flight booked with one of these Budget Airlines in April (to escape the Song Kran madness)

Will wait and see what happens, but if the situation doesn't improve I'm going to cut my losses and book with a regular (foreign) airline, or choose another destination, or stay indoors

Edit: I also never fly budget airlines, but I booked a hotel via a Booking Site and this Airline had a good time schedule to fly us to the destination and back, so you see you should stick to your principals

I am very happy to fly 'budget' airlines (also love Bangkok Airways, of course, no problems. Especially Thai LionAir (has an Indonesian parent company) as this company has the IATA Operational Safety Audit (IOSA) Certification!

[F4UCorsair]

yermanee

one day we will die whether on theo ground,in the sea or up in the air and for whatever reason old age,illness etc. that day is marked somewhere in the future so don,t worry about a triviality as this-next time you travel in any vehicle I suggest you ask to see the maintainance records and give it a thorough inspection yourself........................

Aha here we go. Do not attack the facts but attack the OP.

I'm 79 and fly reputable airlines only, maybe some of my longevity is thanks to that.

Keep flying budget airlines as far as I'm concerned.

Yermanee

So you're a qualified maintenance engineer, yermanee? Or a pilot?

I can assure that unless you are, checking the Maintenance Release or doing a 'walk around', will be a complete waste of time, because you would have NO idea what you're looking at, or for.

Edited December 3, 2015 by F4UCorsair

[whaleboneman]

I'm not condoning anything but as a former electronic repair technician I will try to explain that many circuit boards these days are MULTILAYER boards with tracks running underneath other tracks, mainly to conserve space on otherwise crowded circuit boards.

The old days of single level circuit boards when a technician could fix a track on a circuit board with a hot soldering iron and some solder are long gone.

Now circuit boards with multilevel interlacing tracks MUST be replaced and be sent to a factory for repair as only a factory can deal with repairing multilevel tracks on circuit boards as those you find now because only in such a factory do you find the kind of equipment to repair those multilayer tracks

This would be particularly true on a circuit board in something as complex as a control computer where space and heat would be a problem.

As I say I not condoning, just trying to explain the repairman's problem.

Replacing new circuit boards requires expensive and long downtime repairs which cost money for the operators of the equipment.

And the owner always wants everything fixed as fast as possible at the cheapest cost.

Replacing expensive circuit boards or replacing expensive planes?

[rakman]

A disaster is a series of events that lead to a catastrophic ending.

It was unfortunate the base cause of the Air Asia crash was the bad joint on a circuit board, followed by poor crew anaysis and troubleshooting. Followed with the most frightening aspect that the pilots rely on automation too much and don't know how to escape a stall.

AF447 basically encountered the same scenario, the flight computer went to "Alternate Law" where the normal control protections are removed and the pilot is truely flying the aircraft. The result of constantly pulling back on the stick, caused the plane to stall and just fall from the sky.

There are many first world aircraft crashes with "experienced" pilots who did the wrong thing at the worst time.

Doesn't matter the if you fly the high cost or low cost airlines, if your number comes up, it may be on any venue, even your bed.

[The Deerhunter]

Why would the authorities let only budget airlines get away with poor maintenance & repairs?

Why would they be more strict towards other airlines?

Either you trust the authorities, or you don't.

If Air Asia was at fault, then so were the countries in which they operated, and most probably the other airlines as well.

You touch on the most important point as regards Thailand. It is the aviation authorities that are in trouble here mostly. The Americans say they do not trust them. Trusting the airlines is a separate matter and the Civil Aviation authorities in each country have the job of keeping the airlines safe and honest. If the Civil department is not to be trusted then each airline makes up its own mind about how safe they want their planes to be and how much in bribes they want to pay to get fraudulent reports to save money on required maintenance.

[The Deerhunter]

yermanee

one day we will die whether on the ground,in the sea or up in the air and for whatever reason old age,illness etc. that day is marked somewhere in the future so don,t worry about a triviality as this-next time you travel in any vehicle I suggest you ask to see the maintainance records and give it a thorough inspection yourself........................

Aha here we go. Do not attack the facts but attack the OP.

I'm 79 and fly reputable airlines only, maybe some of my longevity is thanks to that.

Keep flying budget airlines as far as I'm concerned.

Yermanee

You obviously drive a Toyota...?....

Toyota Vios, 9 years and counting, not one glitch except the regular new tires (Bridgestone) and battery.

Got it from my wife for my 70th birthday, but she drives it more than me now.

Yermanee

Off topic but our Toyota Vigo, 6 years 93,000 km one battery and one headlight bulb filament. I changed the tires at 92,400 ONLY because a couple of long trips were planned and they were not even down to the safety bars yet. Toyota. Best 5 cars i have ever owned.

Edited December 3, 2015 by The Deerhunter

[mercman24]

re : pilots, years ago i was in CUBA, drinking in the departure "shack" with these other guys dressed in uniform, and on our walk out to catch our small turbo prop plane to take us back the - main airport, lo and behold walking in front of us was our pilot and crew i had been boozing with 20 minutes earlier. lol !!

[Pinot]

Do the same people who swear they'll never fly a budget airlines, drive in Thailand? Driving is far more likely to kill you. It ain't even close. More people are killed by coconuts falling on their heads in Asia than plane crashes.

Courage.

[Batboy]

I'm not condoning anything but as a former electronic repair technician I will try to explain that many circuit boards these days are MULTILAYER boards with tracks running underneath other tracks, mainly to conserve space on otherwise crowded circuit boards.

The old days of single level circuit boards when a technician could fix a track on a circuit board with a hot soldering iron and some solder are long gone.

Now circuit boards with multilevel interlacing tracks MUST be replaced and be sent to a factory for repair as only a factory can deal with repairing multilevel tracks on circuit boards as those you find now because only in such a factory do you find the kind of equipment to repair those multilayer tracks

This would be particularly true on a circuit board in something as complex as a control computer where space and heat would be a problem.

As I say I not condoning, just trying to explain the repairman's problem.

Replacing new circuit boards requires expensive and long downtime repairs which cost money for the operators of the equipment.

And the owner always wants everything fixed as fast as possible at the cheapest cost.

Anyone heard of having a back up replacement board and then the failed one being sent for repairs for becoming back up again. I know that airlines run many of the same aircraft but they also make millions of dollars profit. What about the safety of the the people they carry in their aircraft.

[gerry123]

I feel terrible because I have a (non refundable) flight booked with one of these Budget Airlines in April (to escape the Song Kran madness)

Will wait and see what happens, but if the situation doesn't improve I'm going to cut my losses and book with a regular (foreign) airline, or choose another destination, or stay indoors

Edit: I also never fly budget airlines, but I booked a hotel via a Booking Site and this Airline had a good time schedule to fly us to the destination and back, so you see you should stick to your principals

so its wet or dead then ??

[yermanee]

Just to make my point about never flying budget airlines more clear here is my take on this unfortunate incident :

Fact : The problem with the faulty circuit board was known for 12 months and nothing was done about it.

Fact : The faulty circuit board caused 23 malfunctions in that period of time.

Fact : The crew did indeed exacerbate the malfunction but if it had not been faulty there would have been NO malfunction of the said part.

Fact : Who let inexperienced pilots fly the plane ?

I hope I've made my point.

Yermanee

Edited December 3, 2015 by yermanee

[nidieunimaitre]

Just to make my point about never flying budget airlines more clear here is my take on this unfortunate incident :

Fact : The problem with the faulty circuit board was known for 12 months and nothing was done about it.

Fact : The faulty circuit board caused 23 malfunctions in that period of time.

Fact : The crew did indeed exacerbate the malfunction but if it had not been faulty there would have been NO malfunction of the said part.

Fact : Who let inexperienced pilots fly the plane ?

I hope I've made my point.

Yermanee

I agree with everything you say.

However I disagree with what you imply.

Given the chance, (and in Asia the chance IS given) I am sure big airlines WILL do the same.

50% of the blame should go to the authorities.

[F4UCorsair]

Hope i dont jinx it but ive found jetstar asia very reliable....theyre part of qantas.

Every time i board i glance at the cockpit and theres usually a farang fellow behind the wheel.

And your point is?

It seems to suggest that he implicitly trusts his own race to 'drive' the 'plane, as against assorted, unreliable 'persons of other shade'.

Make up your own mind as to whether you find that offensive, bigoted, wrong-headed or merely risible.

I've flown with multiple nationalities, and I can say that some fly better than others, some much better, and (call me racist if you wish) most Asians aren't amongst them, with the worst being Japanese, by a wide margin, and the best (some won't believe me), are Indians.

If I had to put it in a nutshell, I think it's that, mostly, Asians can't thimk laterally, or multi task under pressure.

Japanese, particularly, are unable (just one aspect) to refuse an Air Traffic Controller's instructions if they believe safety could be compromised. It's deference to authority, regardless of the consequemces.

[F4UCorsair]

Just to make my point about never flying budget airlines more clear here is my take on this unfortunate incident :

Fact : The problem with the faulty circuit board was known for 12 months and nothing was done about it.

Fact : The faulty circuit board caused 23 malfunctions in that period of time.

Fact : The crew did indeed exacerbate the malfunction but if it had not been faulty there would have been NO malfunction of the said part.

Fact : Who let inexperienced pilots fly the plane ?

I hope I've made my point.

Yermanee

I agree with everything you say.

However I disagree with what you imply.

Given the chance, (and in Asia the chance IS given) I am sure big airlines WILL do the same.

50% of the blame should go to the authorities.

Exactly right. Major airlines Do exactly the same.

A lot of 'maintenance' is done on a computer screen, often the same screens (certainly on Boeing aircraft), that the pilots use to input flight plan information. Maintenance engineers laugh it off as 'the keyboard is mightier than the spanner'!

If a fault is reported by pilots, or is revealed on the BITE (Built In Test Equipment), a check is done on the system by maintenance engineers. It frequently tests OK and is signed off as good to fly, but I don't think 23 such 'sign offs' on the same system would be permitted or legal.

Solder 'dry joints' can be an electronics tech's worst nightmare, difficult to find because of their intermittent nature, and subject to different performance under different thermal conditions.

Having said all that, not recovering the aircraft from the stall seems odd to me. It should have been possible right down to 10,000 feet, without difficulty, and I've seen it done from 6,000', in the simulator, but the crew were wound up like a clockspring, ready to act at the first stick shaker indication, but suffering severe sphincter chattering over the last 600 feet!!

Edited December 3, 2015 by F4UCorsair

[Altalake]

If you go on a Budget airline try to fly in the daytime. If it's dark and/or bad weather, they are not really trained to operate 100% safely. Garuda is the Pits.

E.g. Singapore and Cathay are very good, but they do not alway fly the Budget routes.

[recycler]

It really doesn't matter at all if you fly a budget airline or not. Thai Air also fails big time on aircraft maintenance and many other premium carriers with them.

[robertson468]

yermanee

one day we will die whether on the ground,in the sea or up in the air and for whatever reason old age,illness etc. that day is marked somewhere in the future so don,t worry about a triviality as this-next time you travel in any vehicle I suggest you ask to see the maintainance records and give it a thorough inspection yourself........................

Aha here we go. Do not attack the facts but attack the OP.

I'm 79 and fly reputable airlines only, maybe some of my longevity is thanks to that.

Keep flying budget airlines as far as I'm concerned.

Yermanee

In comparison, I am a youngster at 71 and have flown Budget Airlines several times and am still here. However, do keep flying what you term "reputable airlines", but remember it only takes one to crash and that knackers your batting record my old son!! Would be more rational to see how many "reputable airlines" have crashed in comparison to budget air lines. I think you will find the latter wins by a very large margin.

Edited December 3, 2015 by robertson468

[F4UCorsair]

If you go on a Budget airline try to fly in the daytime. If it's dark and/or bad weather, they are not really trained to operate 100% safely. Garuda is the Pits.

E.g. Singapore and Cathay are very good, but they do not alway fly the Budget routes.

And one of those quality airlines had an appalling level of maintenance some years back. It possibly still does.

The punters have no idea of how good, or bad, an airline's maintenance is until there is a crash or serious incident, and often a smow job Iis done on the findings.

Most base their assessment on the quality of the last 100 feet of the approach and landing, possibly as little as .001% of the flight time.

Edited December 3, 2015 by F4UCorsair

[F4UCorsair]

Yermanee, what constitutes a 'reputable' airline.

Quote us some stats, including previous record, crashes/major incidents, has the airline ever failed an audit, maintenance or flight standards, how many pilots have failed a check, or multiple checks......the info that really matters.

Only when you've researched airlines, and can provide answers can you reliably make an assessment as to whether an airline is reputable... or otherwise.

Incidentally, travel industry ratings, based on service, comfort, on time performance, etc., don't count.

Edited December 3, 2015 by F4UCorsair

[smotherb]

yermanee

one day we will die whether on the ground,in the sea or up in the air and for whatever reason old age,illness etc. that day is marked somewhere in the future so don,t worry about a triviality as this-next time you travel in any vehicle I suggest you ask to see the maintainance records and give it a thorough inspection yourself........................

I am sure you are right, one day we will all die, but to say, " . . . that day is marked somewhere in the future . . ." is ludicrous. So you believe in predestination, eh?

Well, following your logic, I should not look both ways before crossing the street, speed through all intersections, stick my nose in everyone's business, sleep with my gfs worst enemy, tug on superman's cape, and spit into the wind.

[watgate]

Without reading all the replys and forgive me if this has already been mentioned but I just recently read in a magazine that almost all of the major US airlines now farm their major overhaul and critical work to countries overseas such as China and latin American countries. The article went on to say that all the detailed maintenance manuals are in the international language being English and the vast majority of maintenance crew can't even read English. Unlike where before a lot of the American workers were FAA certified, most of the maintenance workers overseas are not FAA certified. Also, due to big cuts in funding of the FAA, there are little or no inspectors to check on the maintenance performed on the aircraft by the overseas maintenance workers. If by chance an FAA inspector, which is very rare, wants to inspect a maintenance facility overseas, they can't show up unannounced. The have to make an appointment and apply for a visa to go an inspect a maintenance facility which eliminates the element of surprise to make sure the facility is being run according to FAA safety standards. There are many accounts of aircraft,after undergoing major overhauls at these oversea facilities, being grounded at various terminals because of defects and shoddy workmanship being discovered by maintenance crews at various airports. Also, there are documented reports of ptentially devastating incidences of aircraft sustaining structural damage and various systems failing in flight due to shoddy workmanship. It is a nightmarish scenario and I was left with the distinct impression it is not only budget airlines you have to be concerned with what with the outsourcing of critically major overhaul work overseas with virtually no oversight, as well as major defunding of the FAA.

[carter1882]

Love it! The OP will not fly a budget airline but in an area that is truly dangerous, namely motoring, he has a budget motor vehicle. I have a Vios, or its predecessor the Soluna that us still fine after nearly 20 years and a million km. But it would be absurd to say it was as safe as more expensive better designed cars, but i fly on budget airlines. Surely the OP should be driving a Volvo or something if he believes so much in self preservation! If he traveled budget he may be able to afford one...

[F4UCorsair]

My understanding watgate, is that those facilities are approved by, and some owned by, the manufacturers.

All major maintenance undertaken is supervised and signed off by the airlines own engineers.

Every airline is seeking to keep costs down, and maintenance labor costs are one area that can be achieved.

I can't comment with any knowledge on maintenance manuals only being in English, but I think it would be unlikely. I think the manufacturers, Boeing and Airbus, would make them available in any language, and the cost of even thousands of $$ is insignificant againt the total service costs, per aircrafft, that could be well over a million $$ for some routine servicing.

[LukKrueng]

That fits well to the news from the US FAA:

FAA Downgrades Safety Rating of Thailand Aviation Industry

All that optimistic paroles from the junta didn't help.

Expect another demonstration requesting the US ambassador to pack his suitcase

it was an Indonesia AirAsia flight from Surabaya to Singapore. I can't find ANY connection to Thailand whatsoever, but then, what do I know...... I am not an American......

[hawker9000]

The worst year in aviation accidents globally was....1954.

You have a 20 million chance to 1 of dying in an plane crash...... the chance of dying in a car crash in the U.S. is as low as 1 in 74 !!!

look at this from 2002.... beds and baths are really deadly.

So budget airlines cut costs elsewhere and perform the necessary maintenance and repairs on their planes? Air Asia didn't. Have you ever watched Air Crash Investigation on TV? The proper locking of cargo doors and engine reverse thrusters took crusaders years to get fixed. In the case of reverse thrusters, it was Niki Lauda's valiant efforts to discover the cause of the crash of one of his own jets that led to the installation of mechanical locks on the reverse thrusters on all airplanes then flying so that they could not be activated by rogue electric sig9nals.

It's always tempting for airlines to skimp on repairs because of the costs involved.

You can be fatalistic but how many bullets do you want in your Russian Roulette pistol?

Uh, 20 million?

[yermanee]

OK guys that's it, I've taken as much abuse as I am willing to accept on this topic.

And to carter1882 you've absolutely no idea how much I can spend, but I'm sure you would not believe me if I told you.

I'm not on Thaivisa to be offended, ridiculed etc. I was merely stating why I will not fly budget airlines, and I stand by my statement.

So go ahead as much as you like I'm out of here.

Yermanee