Qatar Airways Fires Pilots Responsible For Miami Accident

Last September I wrote about the Qatar Airways accident (at least that’s how the FAA categorized it) at Miami Airport. During this incident, a Qatar Airways 777-300ER bound for Doha didn’t take off in time and struck some of the landing lights on the far end of the runway.

Qatar-777

This caused substantial damage (including a 46cm tear in the fuselage and 90 dents and scratches), though as it turns out the pilots didn’t realize they had struck anything, so they continued flying to Doha. It’s extremely fortunate that the plane landed without incident, as things could have ended much worse.

It was quickly revealed that the Qatar Airways pilots made a midfield takeoff, where they took off from intersection “T1,” instead of doing a full length takeoff, like they were supposed to. If you look at the bottom of the diagram below, you’ll see the airport’s south runway, which they took off on. They were taking off into the east, and the first grey box is where they started their takeoff roll (instead of the end of the runway), and then the second grey box is where they ended up hitting the runway lights.

MIA-Airport

As I wrote about in December, this incident was caused by confusion and miscommunication on the part of the pilots. Before the flight, they were given a temporary performance advisory for the runway on which they were taking off, which was named “Runway 09#T1.”

When they went to takeoff they used intersection “T1” for takeoff, which was a huge mistake. They made this mistake because they recalled hearing “T1” before, though the context was completely different. There was some confusion in the cockpit, though they continued with the takeoff anyway.

They’re very fortunate nothing worse happened, though it’s rather pathetic that Qatar Airways’ CEO brushed off the incident at the time, claiming that “such kinds of incidents happen quite often.” No, Akbar, I don’t think a plane colliding with the runway lights and flying with 90 dents and scratches for 14 hours without the pilots knowing is something which “happens quite often.”

And that’s a bit concerning, because it makes you wonder what kind of safety policies the airline has when they don’t view an incident like this as being serious.

The Sydney Morning Herald recently sat down with Al Baker, given the airline just launched flights between Doha and Sydney. They brought up the Miami incident to him, since airline safety is of course something which is very important to passengers. Here’s what he had to say:

Mr Al Baker on Thursday reiterated “runway overruns happen very often in airports”. But he said passengers could rest assured the Miami incident was the “first and last” time it would happen at his airline. “At no time was there any harm or any major safety issue for the aircraft and its passengers,” he said, emphasising the plane landed safely.

The safety message became a little muddled when he was asked to explain why all of the pilots on the flight deck that day had been sacked.

“At Qatar Airways we will not accept any kind of lapses by pilots because they have hundreds of passengers whom they risked,” he said. “[The pilot flying] was not asked to leave because he did anything by putting passengers at risk. What he did was he violated the company regulations on takeoff distance required by an aircraft, especially with the weight he was carrying on that aircraft.”

So Al Baker still isn’t acknowledging the severity of the issue, or the fact that things could have ended a lot worse.

But instead he’s playing a word game here. The pilots weren’t fired because they flew the plane unsafely, but rather because they violated the company’s regulations on takeoff distance required by an aircraft.

That’s the same thing!

What does Qatar Airways base their regulations around regarding takeoff distances required by an aircraft? Isn’t it based on the safe distance required?

Bottom line

It’s pathetic that Qatar Airways isn’t acknowledging the severity of the incident. Though perhaps they’re just trying to save face, and are in fact taking it seriously, based on the fact that they sacked the pilots (or maybe they’re just doing that so they can shift blame). Regardless, claiming no one was at risk is a gross exaggeration, as multiple airline pilots have chimed in on this and indicated that the situation could have ended a lot worse.

I’d much rather an airline leader acknowledge something went wrong (no matter how severe it is) and explain what’s being done to fix it, rather than brush something under the rug and pretend it wasn’t a big deal.

Do you think Qatar Airways is taking this issue seriously internally and just trying to save face, or do you think Al Baker really views the incident the way he’s claiming?

Conversations (18)
The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.
Comment as a member

Membership is free and takes no more information than commenting as a guest. Earn status points for good contributions, and see fewer ads as your status grows.

Type your response here.

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Anyone can comment, and your email address will not be published. Register to save your unique username and earn special OMAAT reputation perks!

  1. Loading comments…
Recent Comments
The latest from the OMAAT community.

The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.

DC Dude Guest

All fair criticisms. But to be fair, none of the airline executives including the US or European would do exactly the same in case of pilot error. Rest is all posturing. Al Baker is generally notorious thus the extra scrutiny.

0
‼ 0
P Jackson Guest

These are not airline Pilots they are contract Pilots. The ME3 carriers have inherent safety problems with contract pilots in command of their aircraft who are dependant on their performance rather tenure. You have a much greater risk of never screening out a German Wings type pilot (or a Captain who would depart midfield in a heavy) in the cockpit without a seniority based system. Overall ME3 carriers and anyone who staffs via contract is not as safe as a tenure based seniority system where safety comes above the blame game and Pilots operating aircraft with fear of losing their next contract offer.

0
‼ 0
Jeff T Guest

Al-Bakar was probably busy molesting his favorite flight attendant at the time. Runway end lights had to be explained to him later.

0
‼ 0
ann Guest

akbar likes firing people just to have someone to blame, but at the same time he says there is no fault to his airline. if there is no fault, then why did he sack the pilots? he is trying to save face but at the same time not doing anything even internally to solve the issue in a proper manner. sacking people doesn't solve problems.

0
‼ 0
Bhindar Guest

@Dima OMG! I have heard that flying in China was challenging. Flying Upside Down makes my former job of Captain (read Instructor pilot) for SpiceJet (SG) and living in Delhi seem like child's play. Truth to the "no matter how bad you think you have it, somebody has it worse."

0
‼ 0

Save posts to read later

Saving posts is a member feature. Become an OMAAT member to build a reading list you can come back to from any device.

Become a member
Meet Ben Schlappig, OMAAT Founder
5,883,136 Miles Traveled

43,914,800 Words Written

47,187 Posts Published

Keep Exploring OMAAT