On May 7, 2011 Indonesia is again mourning dove incident plane crash in the waters of Kaimana, West Papua which type MA60, fell shortly after deciding to land. This incident killed 18 people (one baby, two children - children and 15 adults: the source) of the 25 passengers who fell and still no circumstances deiktahui 6 flight crew ..
Why do I say again grieving?
Because earlier on August 2, 2009 and 13 April 2010 two types of aircraft owned PT Merpati Nusantara Airlines (Twin Otter, with flight number MZ 9760 and Boeing 737 aircraft Merpati MZ 836) also had an accident in Papua also has claimed many victims injured and killed ( source: http://satria11.blogspot.com/2009/08/ (tv one) and http://www.krjogja.com/news/detail/28226/20).
Here I do not review how this happened, but I want to review how the ethics of PT is to consumers.
Because apparently based on the source detik.com, MA60 planes have not secured a license to a license from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) United States (even though original Indonesia-made aircraft type CN-235 has picked up licenses from the FAA) and the historical record tracks how Chinese-made aircraft was purchased by PT MNA also turned out less well.
When PT MNA receives MA60 aircraft occurred Crack in the fuselage, but indeed this is already fixed when sent back by China.
However, my view rather than negative thingking yah ... but whether a reissue of the aircraft of this type even though it is "safe", will not repeat the Crack? I am not an expert on aircraft mechanisms, did not even understand at all but from the eyes of consumers arises the question '"If from the outset it PT MNA is less safe with this aircraft, why still negotiating again and receive?" Since this involves public life ... Although This word was associated with program funding of government-owned 10 000 watts. If PT MNA remain in his opinion to refuse this type of aircraft, perhaps this will not happen. It makes it ambiguous who played an important role entry of the aircraft, causing the accident (when only the rest of this plane incoming corn). What PT MNA or the Government? ..
Regardless of who's responsible, I even want to ask where are their ethics on consumer safety?
Once again PT MNA already 3 years old respectively - also suffered a tragic accident. Yet in business, the consumer is the main factor that determines a feasible business continues to operate or not, they who give the desired profit businessmen contribution. It is regrettable business ethics in Indonesia is still not reflected in the maximum, for example the case of PT MNA, which eliminates the lives of consumers. Remember that business will not run properly without ethics, and ethics here either to maintain the safety of consumers should be highly considered. Businesses not only how to make a profit today, but business was how Long Live.
So it seems in my opinion, CSR (Coorporate Social Responbility) programs had to be heavily promoted, not only about the environment, but also for consumers. Moreover, there are the sources said PT MNA buy aircraft products that have been "used", if I do not know why wearing secondhand planes (possibly policy - specific policy), but I strongly emphasize the bell; i the "new" Facebook no more loss of life and our flight was not in Blacklist by the UNI-Europe.
Source:
- http://www.detiknews.com/read/2011/05/08/105517/1634816/10/pesawat-ma-60-tak-kantongi-lisensi-faa-tapi-dinilai-tetap-laik?nd992203605
- http://www.detiknews.com/read/2011/05/08/121344/1634839/10/kisah-pesawat-ma-60-merpati-buatan-china-dan-proyek-listrik-10-ribu-mw? 9911012
- http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merpati_Nusantara_Airlines
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar