ClearedHot Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 "The Boeing 777 was traveling at approximately 106 knots (122 mph) upon impact and at about 118 knots (136 mph) 16 seconds before impact at an altitude of about 200 feet; the recommended speed upon approach to the runway threshold is 137 knots (157 mph), Deborah Hersman told reporters."
Fuzz Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 I curious as to what the relative level of experience was among the 4 pilots on board. Take media reports with a grain of salt, but the oft quoted "43 hours in type" pilot was also very experienced 747 captain. He may have been the senior ranking pilot of the 4 on board. However, there was an instructor on board because of his lack of time in type. From the armchair quarterback perspective, it seems this was more of a failure of the instructor/check pilot to intervene in an unsafe situation. Getting IPs to intervene in a timely manner is one of the hardest skill to teach, and typically unpleasant for non assertive types when they come through CFIC. Was this lack intervention a product of that airline culture, or a dynamic particular to that crew? The media's light is shining bright on this one, so the answers will be fairly quick in coming https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/news/2013/07/08/asiana-airlines-san-francisco-crash/2497769/ Pilot had 10,000+ hrs total and his copilot had 12K+ (3,200 777 time), also read so,e where else there were two other pilots with 10K & 5K ours of experience
HerkFE Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 It is starting to sound like a case of pilot error if these reports of the low airspeed are, in fact, true. However, you can bet that you and I (the taxpayers), via a court settlement fining the FAA for not having that GS on the air are going to pay heavily.
stract Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 What's the approach speed for a similarly config'd 747? Wonder if there was any negative transfer there...
HU&W Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 Leave the throttles at idle too long and bad things happen. Does the 777 or 747 use autothrottle on coupled approaches?
Coasta Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 Leave the throttles at idle too long and bad things happen. Does the 777 or 747 use autothrottle on coupled approaches? Yes
Napoleon_Tanerite Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 It is starting to sound like a case of pilot error if these reports of the low airspeed are, in fact, true. However, you can bet that you and I (the taxpayers), via a court settlement fining the FAA for not having that GS on the air are going to pay heavily. Doubt the FAA would be fined for it. It was clearly NOTAMed out, the company decided to dispatch their aircraft there knowing it was out, and the crew accepted clearance for the approach knowing the GS was out.
HerkFE Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 (edited) Doubt the FAA would be fined for it. It was clearly NOTAMed out, the company decided to dispatch their aircraft there knowing it was out, and the crew accepted clearance for the approach knowing the GS was out. A jury made of you, me, and 10 others from this board would say exactly that. However.....Hi, I am Mark Geragos <speaking to a jury made up of people who know less about aviating than a CNN reporter>. I am representing Yu Suk Me and Suk Su Kim.....Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, these two ladies lost their precious daughters all because the big, powerful FAA turned off the GS. This big, super advanced airplane can land all by itself if it has a glideslope to tell it where to go. If that GS had of been on, we wouldn't be here today. But that big, mean, ugly FAA man RIGHT THERE..the one with the big checkbook.............turned it OFF! How would YOU like it if you had sent your sweet 16 yr old daughter to China for a summer vacation and they died in a plane crash because the Chinese government turned off their glideslope. Edited July 9, 2013 by HerkFE
Orbit Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 Some of the more notable airline incidents from Asian airlines have been due to "saving face" and not speaking up. Wonder if this had anything to do with them not communicating at all?
hindsight2020 Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 a fuckin' nav could have done a better job of rounding out that fat goose than these fucktards did...... 1
moosepileit Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 (edited) https://m.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/07/professional-pilots-on-the-san-francisco-crash/277563/ If you really are interested in details, you could check out PPRuNe. This is a site for professional pilots, whose postings anyone can read. For an example of the nitty-gritty of the discussion, consider this post: The 777 can catch you out with with what is known as the "FLCH trap." When you are above the glide slope and need to get down in a hurry Flight Level Change (FLCH) is a useful mode to use. Normally you transfer to another mode like glideslope or vertical speed, or you switch off the flight directors. However in this situation the glideslope was off the air so the ILS would not have ben selected or armed. If the flight directors were left on and the plane was descending at a high rate in FLCH the autothrottle would have been inhibited and would not have put on power so the thrust levers would have stayed at idle. If the Asiana was a bit high (quite normal for SFO) then regained the visual glideslope, the rate of descent would have decreased and the speed would have started slowly reducing but with the thrust levers staying at idle the 777 would now be in the same situation as the Turkish 737 at AMS, ie speed decreasing below Vref and not being noticed. The 777 has autothrottle wake up, ie when the aircraft approaches a stall the power comes on automatically to almost full power. This gives pilots great confidence however autothrottle wake up is inhibited in FLCH. So 777 pilots will be looking at this scenario and wondering if Asiana were in FLCH with flight directors on, too high, stabilised late and did not notice they were still in FLCH and that the autothrottle was not keeping the speed to Vref plus 5 untl too late. Edited July 9, 2013 by moosepileit
Toro Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 This: https://aviation-safe...p?id=20130706-0 Aviation Safety Network "The Boeing 777 was traveling at approximately 106 knots (122 mph) upon impact and at about 118 knots (136 mph) 16 seconds before impact at an altitude of about 200 feet; the recommended speed upon approach to the runway threshold is 137 knots (157 mph), Deborah Hersman told reporters." Apparently I haven't paid too close attention to civilian crashes in the past - is it typical for the NTSB to release this amount of detailed information so early in the investigation process? 1
HercDude Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 https://m.theatlantic...o-crash/277563/ If you really are interested in details, you could check out PPRuNe. This is a site for professional pilots, whose postings anyone can read. For an example of the nitty-gritty of the discussion, consider this post: They don't make fun of navs or post pictures of tits enough. 2
Masshole Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 Holy shit, they just showed a picture a passenger took. There were fuckers carrying their bags. If I am getting out of an aircraft that just crashed and you grab your bag, you are getting throat punched. I would never give the bag a thought, but depending on where you are it is not that big of a deal. If you are out of your seat, standing there, waiting for the people in front of you to proceed to the emergency exit, and your bag is under your seat, then you are not holding anybody back by picking it up. Also, it obviously depends on what is in the bag. My little brother has some health issues and if I were on the plane with him I would be taking my bag because that is where his medicine is. The problem would arise when people see you getting your bag, and then they start taking the time to open the overhead.
Royal Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 Here's an interesting history lesson on what happens when you're low and slow going into SFO: Japan Airlines flight 2. The news put together some footage of the incident after Sully ditched in the Hudson; if you watch the video, I recommend putting it on mute while the "journalists" are talking because it will make you want to claw your eyes out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VnAvH6z3-c
moosepileit Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 They don't make fun of navs or post pictures of tits enough. That was an embedded quote from the linked article! Well played, and I agree. Laughing, not quibbling- they make far fewer C-17 jokes over there, too.
TreeA10 Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 NTSB has been sending out tweets with nuggets of info.
pbar Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 The Korean press is going to great lengths to pin the blame on Boeing or the airport. Thus far it seems to be a clear cut case of pilot error but that would make Korea look bad, so they can't admit that (especially when the female flight attendants showed them up by doing their jobs better). Guess media anywhere is extremely biased... I would suspect that Korean culture has something to do with this ala' the KAL Guam crash of the mid-90s.
moosepileit Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Cargo_Flight_8509 Even more so than the Guam, the above had the CP/PM and FE let the Captain fly a failed ADI into the ground on departure in a 747.
BFM this Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 The Korean press is going to great lengths to pin the blame on Boeing or the airport. Thus far it seems to be a clear cut case of pilot error but that would make Korea look bad, so they can't admit that (especially when the female flight attendants showed them up by doing their jobs better). Guess media anywhere is extremely biased... I would suspect that Korean culture has something to do with this ala' the KAL Guam crash of the mid-90s. Par for the course. "Korean pilots are not susceptible to spatial disorientation". Different mishap, but yeah, they actually said that. 1
Ram Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 Par for the course. "Korean pilots are not susceptible to spatial disorientation". Different mishap, but yeah, they actually said that. Yet every mountain in Korea seems to be an F-5 magnet. 3
Jaded Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 The Korean press is going to great lengths to pin the blame on Boeing or the airport. I am in Korea, and have been watching Korean news for days. This is not true.
fox two Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 (edited) https://m.theatlantic...o-crash/277563/ If you really are interested in details, you could check out PPRuNe. This is a site for professional pilots, whose postings anyone can read. For an example of the nitty-gritty of the discussion, consider this post: The 777 can catch you out with with what is known as the "FLCH trap." When you are above the glide slope and need to get down in a hurry Flight Level Change (FLCH) is a useful mode to use. Normally you transfer to another mode like glideslope or vertical speed, or you switch off the flight directors. However in this situation the glideslope was off the air so the ILS would not have ben selected or armed. If the flight directors were left on and the plane was descending at a high rate in FLCH the autothrottle would have been inhibited and would not have put on power so the thrust levers would have stayed at idle. If the Asiana was a bit high (quite normal for SFO) then regained the visual glideslope, the rate of descent would have decreased and the speed would have started slowly reducing but with the thrust levers staying at idle the 777 would now be in the same situation as the Turkish 737 at AMS, ie speed decreasing below Vref and not being noticed. The 777 has autothrottle wake up, ie when the aircraft approaches a stall the power comes on automatically to almost full power. This gives pilots great confidence however autothrottle wake up is inhibited in FLCH. So 777 pilots will be looking at this scenario and wondering if Asiana were in FLCH with flight directors on, too high, stabilised late and did not notice they were still in FLCH and that the autothrottle was not keeping the speed to Vref plus 5 untl too late. The live NTSB conference going on right now (https://video.foxnews.../1155606216001/) sounds like this exact thing happened. Edited July 9, 2013 by fox two
ThreeHoler Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 https://news.yahoo.com/pilots-union-says-probe-asiana-crash-revealed-too-181628708.html
Ram Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 The best article I've seen from the media about the crash: https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1787132/Comment-Asiana-Airlines-Flight-214-a-pilots-perspe 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now