analysis on the aircraft accident (combined)

7/31/2019 Analysis on the Aircraft Accident (COMBINED)

1/3

BUS303B Section 2 Group1

Hong Kong Shue Yan University

Group Member List

Full Name Student

No.

E-mail

1 Catherine 0930 [email protected]

2 So Hei Man, Sherman 093046 [email protected]

3 Poon Nga In, Katherine 093052 [email protected]

4 Cheung Ka Ming, Ming 093059 [email protected]

5 Alan 093 [email protected]

6. Samuel 093 [email protected]

Name of Lecturer: Jim Crowe

Course code and title: BUS 303B Business Communication, Section 2

Topic: Analysis on the Aircraft Accident.


2/3


Analysis on the Aircraft Accident

Effective communication is very important in every part of our lives.

Communication contains a linear process with sender and receiver. However, noise

interrupts effective communication. In the case of air crash ofAvianca, the absence ofeffective communication leaded a serious aircraft accident. Here are the analyses on

this accident.

Before the air crash, the pilot only had a two-way verbal communication

conversation with the copilot. When the plane was preparing to land, the pilot was

quite concerned about the fuel amount. However, the navigator only responded to

the copilot then only mentioned the flat of the plane and the landing place was

ready or not, but didnt report the fuel state. It was due to the belief of the navigator,

because he thought the landing was absolutely done so he missed such important

information. Therefore, both the pilot and copilot thought that they were going to land

on JFK Airport in a short period of time. Nonetheless, their conversation was just

checking the airplanes operation. However, due to the bad weather such as violent

wind shear, they were forced down to the ground.

In order to prevent air crash, the pilot told the copilot to give up landing and just

hold the airplane up. This hold consumed more fuel. Therefore, the pilot told thecopilot that they were running out of fuel and needed a priority landing at the JFK

Airport as it was an emergency. However, due to the noise, fear and anxiety, the

copilot only told the air traffic controller 1 that they were running out of fuel and

needed priority landing. The copilot did not tell the air traffic controller 1 it was an

emergency. In the meantime, air traffic controller 1 wants to take off the

responsibilities because he wants to sharp leave. Therefore, Avianca delayed the

emergency.

Also, due to the language differences between English and Spanish, a request for

priority landing can be interpreted as an emergency to Spanish-speaking pilots but not

to English-speaking air traffic controllers. This had caused some confusion amongst

the pilots when air traffic controller 2 confirmed their priority status. For example,

when the air traffic controller 2 said they were out of the landing route, the

navigator and copilotdidnt tell the pilot they were out of route because of fear, so

they just said the air traffic controller 2 was angry and missed the most important

information out.


3/3


Base on the above analysis, the followings are the possible solutions for this aircraft

accident. The air crash would not have taken place if the pilot had chosen to talk to

the air traffic controller 1 or 2 directly, because he was the one who knew the situation

of the plane very clearly. If he had told any one of them that they only had fuel for

about ten minutes, one of them would have treated it more seriously and gave them

more advice and information about how they could land safely. However, as the pilot

was affected by the noiseanxiety, when he found out the emergency, he could not

send his message clearly to his copilot or even if he had chosen to talk to the air traffic

controllers directly. The air traffic controllers and the pilotsshould put passengers

safety as the first priority. Therefore, all of the delays or missed approaches should

not be an excuse to let this tragedy happens.

analysis on the aircraft accident (combined)

Documents