If any of you guys have any questions about what they are saying in regards to this crash--------------I'll do my best to answer them
Jerry
Printable View
If any of you guys have any questions about what they are saying in regards to this crash--------------I'll do my best to answer them
Jerry
Maintenance(lack of)?? Pilot error?? Have seen the pix,Jerry,and parts of the report,,but I don't really know what happened..:confused::confused:
All I know is it's lucky in one way,that only two died,,but unlucky that it happened at all..:( Pretty sad for the families of the two dead students..:(
Someone made a booboo.
It's being reported here that the pilot was a trainee and that one of those killed may have been hit on the ground by another vehicle, not sure if those are true or not, it's just what I've read.
First, I guess that for any of you that don't already know, I was one of the earlest number of pilots rated on the B777 and retired off that aircraft in late 1997---------
The paralell approachs to SFO ruways 28l and 28r can only be done under visual conditions as they are too close together---instrument paralell approaches the runways will be one mile apart---SFO is only a couple hundrd feet---In SFO on a visual approach you have to keep the other aircraft in sight for separation and it is quite typical that when the lead aircraft starts slowing down that the following aircraft has to make some space by slowing earlier---this creats difficulty for getting lower while slowing airspeed----
On the B777 (and other GLASS cockpit aircraft) with the systems they have, many pilots have turned into passengers and are so far behind the aircraft that they -----------------
In this particular incident, I believe that the auto throttles were turned off or they would have advanced to keep the minimun speed(137kts) in this case----
There is an opticle ollusion at SFO arriving over the water (can't explain it) and if you remember, a Japan Air(I think) landed in the water several years ago--
The news people are doing a lot of talking about terms that they don't understand(I heard one gal say that these pilots had 10,000 miles experience(this trip was probably that long)) when she should of said hours------Lots of the pilots for the Asian airlines are expatriots from other countries and sometimes don't speak the same langauge!!!!!!!!!!!altho the langauge world wide for aviation is english.
I also heard that one of the dead might have been run over by an emergency vehicle and I think thats a better explanation than they fell out of the aircraft when the tail broke off---
I don't have any idea how that fire could have started in that area altho The overhead(above the cabin ceiling is open) and the fire could of spread easily, but I would have expected a fire would be around the engines and wings fuel tanks---------
More will come to light but as you can tell, the CEO is already blaming pilot error even before he left Korea---they always try to blame something other than the airline or equipment/facilties(inop equipment)
While all loss of life is sad, after looking at the wreckage I was really surprised to hear that this accident had two casualties (one perhaps caused by accdient on the ground). The burned fuselage looked like many more could have died.
Another accident just happened in Alaska and it was a de Havilland DHC3 air taxi and all 10 people onboard died :( ANCHORAGE, Alaska: All 10 killed in Soldotna, Alaska, air taxi crash | State News | ADN.com
A pilot friend of mine, flew C130s in the Air Force, related a landing training exercise he was going through, he was near touchdown when the plane started to stall. Although he had had ample instructions on what to do in a stall he pulled up on the wheel,(stick?), to bring the nose up. The trainer immediately pushed the wheel down and brought the speed up for a close call but safe landing. My friend had to change his shorts but learned a good lesson. Because this planes' tail hit first I suspect the pilot was trying to bring it out of a stall by raising the nose. It was below the safe landing speed to retain appropriate lift and was maybe in a stall? Just asking.:rolleyes:;)
Jack.
The details provided on the news coverage have been very good, IMO. They clearly stated that there was a stall warning "shake" of the yokes a few seconds before impact. In the minute before impact the pilot got several warnings, including one to abort and go around for another approach.
I think that he was pulling up to go around--he didn't have enouh altitude to push the nose down to pick up speed------------I have watched the video on CNN dozens of times----------
This was a case of a first time instructor/check pilot working with a more jumior captain doing a visual approach that might be probably the 2 or 3 most difficult in the world to do----------(and a lot of that is because at SFO the 28 L & R runways are so close together plus the traffic into/out of Oakland is in the same general area over the bay---
In this case, I would bet that no matter what mode the flight guidance system was configurated, the auto throttles were turned off because the auto throttles would of brought the engines up to maintain the targeted airspeed for the approach-------
Both these guys had lots of time on the air bus which is so fully automated that a pilot almost can't do anything but lock the cockpit door------
It's really tragic that even with three supposedly qualified pilots in the cockpit, not a one of them realized what was happening and made the proper responses to the audible alarms ........... it makes you wonder about the training some of these foreign airlines provide :HMMM:
Jerry gotta ask. If he woulda grabbed a handful of throttle has that thing got enough throttle response and thrust too have saved it ? Seems that's a lot of airplane to get back up to flying speed.
And I read in the news today that the airline is going to sue a American TV channel because they named the four so called pilots with some very funny clever names. Heck I would be more concerned with how the world will be looking at the Asian airline company's and their training now before worrying about suing a TV Channel for making fun of them. I believe their training is a hogwash of just been able to remember the instruction book before actual time in hands on flying. Another point I read also and which is alarming is the new aircraft the pilot basically sits doing nothing apart from take off and landing as the planes do most of the hard work now in automatic pilot. So someone saying they have 1000 hours air time doesn't mean 1000 hours hands on flying time. I would be interested in Jerry's take on this thanks also.
I'll be back on here tonight with some more info and some answers to your questions
Jerry
I don't know exactly how slow they got, however I think it could of been flown-----would of been touchy with all the drag of full flaps and gear down, but if they had retracked the gear as they started there go around and adding thrust, aT LEAST the gear wouldn't of hit the sea wall and tore off the tail-------
If the auto throttles had been on they would have maintained the 137 kts tat was the approach speed(bug would of been set on the air speed indicator for the approach and landing--evidently the auto throttles weren't on--------
The visual approaches to SFO are doubly complicated because the runways are so close together and aircraft for 28 l # 28r approach at an angle to each other and it is quite common that a smaller slower aircraft approaching 28r will over shoot there intercept angle and fly into the approach path of the heavier(and faster approach speed) aircraft using 28l---
If you would like a better understanding of the shared airspace in the bay area, google map the bay area, including where the Golden Gate bridge is (they fly over that on visual entries to the area) SFO airport, OAKLAND airport and San Jose airport----all the traffic from these three airports and arriving, desending, approaching the landing runways while all the departing flights are taking off, climbing to departure altitudes
and it really takes more precision to desend slow down and land 1000 ft from the end of a runway 200 feet wide than it is to take off, and climb out toward a 30,000 + altitude and airways that take you world wide on this planet thats 25000 mile round-----------
Pilot's View of Airbus A380 approach and landing at San Francisco - YouTube
if this works its a visual approach to 28l at SFO but not a B777--at least you get idea-------
Crikey!
That was awesome!
Had me sitting on the edge of my seat and I didn't realise it.
And you flew those things all around the world, sometimes landing in the dark on unknown fields!
Mr Clayton sir; I salute you!
That's sure as hell different from driving a truck!
And not a darn steering wheel or joy stick anyway to be seen in the drivers seat, heck, has the old airplane advanced so much over a short few years. It was only 50 or so years since the DC3 was the " modern way to fly " . Thank you Jerry for the link and as John enjoyed it so did I, amazing.
That was a Airbus 380, maybe on its initial flt into SFO-----------just postedit so you could maybe see what the airport area was like and those two runways---28 l # r---how close they are together and maybe get the picture of the area with Oakland and San Jose airports thrown in for mixing up the traffic---keep in mind that the radio talk did not include the traffic for the other airports-------
No steering wheel or joystick--------actually the airbus has joysticks---they are to the outside arm of the pilot--left captain, right arm co pilot--- I did see a hand on one I think on the landing---its a short handle with a arm rest---
Joystick visable at 8:29 seconds when the 200 feet minimuns call is made(might of been 8:39)Captains left hand---
Awesome stuff,Jerry..Thanks for the link.. Makes me want to jump in another plane ..Might have to try a landing at SFO myself next time...From the passengers cabin,of course..;);)
Sum Ting Wong
Wi Tu Lo
Ho Lee Fuk
Bang Ding Ow
Good animation showing what "was" compared using an exemplar as to what "should have been"...
(Animation to be refined as more data are released)
Asiana 214 Crash Update 2 on Vimeo
Awesome footage Jerry! The Lufthansa guys obviously know their stuff and are some "Sierra Hotel" pilots:LOL::LOL:
Looks easier than it is and this on a clear day with relatively little wind. Try it in the rain with 25 knots at 90 degrees to the aircraft and it get's real fun.
I too salute you Jerry! You are truly a man of "many talents!"
Glenn
That footage makes everything look pretty simple---I posted it for the visual of the bay area and to give an idea that the approaches take a little piloting especially in vfr weather/approach---with Oakland and San Jose its like trying to do something inside a pop corn popper!!!!!!!
I had a personal experience with this flight crash, as my wife was flying in that evening from St. Paul, and I was working at Marin General. On my ride into work heard about the accident on the radio, called my wife, to find out that all flights were being rerouted. She ended up flying into SFO that night arriving about 12:30, and I ended up taking a 4 hour call off, so she could get a ride home, as the shuttle service was iffy that late at night. For all the news media, I thought the airport would be crowded, but it was strangely quiet.
Jerry thanks for the insight it makes sense, and also details just how tricky it is to land there. At most hospitals, it's the same as the airlines, when a tragedy happens they are quick to blame staff, not hospital coverage or administration policy, or equipment error. Typical to throw someone under the bus and hide any other cause. This seems to be miraculous that so few were killed given the extent of damage to the plane.
Thanks for that link Jerry! It really brings in to perspective as to what they were dealing with. That is a crazy place for an airport. :LOL:
Another think that bothers me is why did the aircraft catch fire where it did as watching that second video clip, apart from losing the tail section and one engine, there was no fire from the normal areas around the fuel tanks. What would of caused the body to catch fire up in the first class area ??
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiplash23T
Maybe an electrical fire that caught hydraulic fluid on fire?
I was thinking what could burn up there that hot to melt the top of cabin---then I remembered about the pax oxygen system for those high altitude pressurization failures!!!!!!!!! each group of seats has an oxy generation system that is some chemical mixture that when set off generates oxygen----Its about the only thing I know of that could do that damage----there is pretty large area in the cabin that is above the ceiling for a lot of stuff and a fire could spread the length of the cabin in a flash???? any way, I came to the conclusion that it had to be an oxygen fed fire to get that hot that quick--it wasn't a jet fuel fire or the wings would have been engulfed----
Then---------on one of the news channels they showed an interior scene and the O2 masks were all hanging down so I am correct that the passenger oxygen system had something to do with it---the seat materials and cabin wall/ceiling trim are all combustble---------