Announcement

Collapse

The GaijinPot Forum Is Closed

Please join us on our new Facebook Group.
See more
See less

Top

Collapse

Booing Boeing

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Brown Cow View Post
    Source?

    Not according to this report and the guy sounds very measured. According to him, the thing was not under control on approach and there was a boom before it touched the runway.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23214500
    I would say layperson eyewitnesses are not terribly reliable. But more importantly, if the plane really was "out of control" (more likely an unstabilized approach), then that would be the responsibility of the pilot at the controls.

    Idle speculation, but based on passenger stories and other eyewitnesses, it looks like they came in too low and too fast, and waited too long to go around, resulting in the tail striking the seawall, a few bounces on the runway, and then the slide into the open space between 28L and 28R.

    Uncertainly,
    A.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Brown Cow View Post
      Source?

      Not according to this report and the guy sounds very measured. According to him, the thing was not under control on approach and there was a boom before it touched the runway.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23214500

      Pilot comes in too low, overcorrects, pulls up too sharply, tail hits the runway--"boom"--tail breaks off, plane careens out of control, fire, screaming, panic, people jumping to safety, cats and dog sleeping together, etc.

      Comment


      • #63
        Just watched an interview with an eye witness who saw the whole thing from beginning to end from his hotel balcony. Plane came in too steep.

        One very interesting twist is that the airport representative made it sound like the ILS system was turned off, forcing the pilot to land using visual flight rules.

        Even if the weather was perfect, with no wind, why do they turn off the instrument landing system? What is the harm in leaving it on?

        I guess we'll find out soon enough.

        By the way, the number of injured is now reported as 181, about a dozen critically, and about 33 seriously.

        Comment


        • #64
          We will have to wait - It really is just speculation at this point. I also heard a credible report that the glide path instruments were turned off because of "some construction". The same person also said that there were lots of other ways to be sure your glide path was correct so it wasn't considered a safety critical service.

          I'm still very surprised that in this day and age the pilot has much to do with flying or landing the plane. I really thought it was pretty much all computer controlled and even if the pilot does do it, the computers will prevent silly mistakes. You learn something new every day.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Hijinx View Post
            Pilot comes in too low, overcorrects, pulls up too sharply, tail hits the runway--"boom"--tail breaks off, plane careens out of control, fire, screaming, panic, people jumping to safety, cats and dog sleeping together, etc.
            Do you have a source? It just seems so early to be so sure.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Brown Cow View Post
              Do you have a source? It just seems so early to be so sure.
              Secret source. And this secret source says that the pilot was pounding down soju the whole flight.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Hijinx View Post
                Secret source. And this secret source says that the pilot was pounding down soju the whole flight.
                I see. Certainly the 777 has been around for ages and has an excellent safety record so from that point of view I suppose the balance of probabilities does point to pilot error.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by ruserious View Post
                  Just watched an interview with an eye witness who saw the whole thing from beginning to end from his hotel balcony. Plane came in too steep.

                  One very interesting twist is that the airport representative made it sound like the ILS system was turned off, forcing the pilot to land using visual flight rules.

                  Even if the weather was perfect, with no wind, why do they turn off the instrument landing system? What is the harm in leaving it on?
                  They had to deactivate it while doing construction work to expand the displaced threshold on the 28 runway pair per an FAA order.

                  An order which, ironically, was intended to avoid exactly this kind of accident.

                  Cosmically,
                  A.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Hijinx View Post
                    It seems like pilot error. The pilot came in too low and clipped the tail.
                    Seems like.... if you look at an overhead view of the runway there are warning strips (lines in white) which you must be at least 3 meters past before your wheels hit the tarmac. An ideal landing of a heavy requires that the aircraft must be at 15º nose up attitude and at a speed of 265km/hr. Seeing that the APU (where one of the black box recorders is located) and tail section were sheared off on final approach I'd have to say the aircraft was more than 25º nose up attitude and in excess of 285 km/hr.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Agitator View Post
                      They had to deactivate it while doing construction work to expand the displaced threshold on the 28 runway pair per an FAA order.

                      An order which, ironically, was intended to avoid exactly this kind of accident.

                      Cosmically,
                      A.
                      Taking off or landing a heavy using VFR rules is not an impossible task. If the ILS is off there is still a lot of information available, the beacon markers are still functioning and the the tower controllers are still giving prompts concerning course, altitude, speed and systems based on their profile data received from the aircraft's transponder and GPS systems.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by edin日本 View Post
                        Taking off or landing a heavy using VFR rules is not an impossible task. If the ILS is off there is still a lot of information available, the beacon markers are still functioning and the the tower controllers are still giving prompts concerning course, altitude, speed and systems based on their profile data received from the aircraft's transponder and GPS systems.

                        I think there's a joke in there somewhere:

                        Why did the pilot crash the plane?

                        He had a bad attitude.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Anyone in the US (or someone who's better hooked up than I) that can tell us how CNN is spinning this?
                          Are they going with a "Flaming in Frisco" headline or something more dramatic?

                          Another update:

                          SEOUL (Reuters) - Asiana Airlines, the South Korean carrier whose Boeing 777 crashed while landing at San Francisco airport on Saturday, had been trying to clean up a tarnished safety record that included two other fatal crashes in its 25-year history.

                          One of the pilots of flight 214, Lee Jeong-min, is a veteran who has spent his career at Asiana. He was among four pilots on the plane who rotated in two-person shifts during the 10 hour-plus flight, a senior Asiana official told Reuters.

                          "The pilot's name is Lee Jeong-min, and (he is) a veteran pilot with long experience," said the official, who requested anonymity. "Our investigation committee is looking into the accident in San Francisco," he said.

                          Lee, in his late 40s, had 12,387 hours of flying experience, including 3,220 hours on the Boeing 777, according to the Transport Ministry in Seoul.

                          A second pilot on board the aircraft, Lee Kang-kook, had 9,793 hours flying experience and 43 hours on the 777.

                          The ministry said earlier that the aircraft's fuselage appeared to have hit the ground, sending the plane off the runway and causing massive damage to the body of the jet.
                          http://ca.news.yahoo.com/asiana-jet-...030057994.html

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Korean BBQ comes to San Francisco

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Pilot error? A nasty gust of wind? What's the latest news?

                              "Based on witness accounts in the news and video of the wreckage, Mike Barr, a former military pilot and accident investigator who teaches aviation safety at the University of Southern California, said it appeared the plane approached the runway too low and something may have caught the runway lip — the seawall at the end of the runway.

                              San Francisco is one of several airports around the country that border bodies of water that have walls at the end of their runways to prevent planes that overrun a runway from ending up in the water.

                              Since the plane was about to land, its landing gear would have already been down, Barr said. It's possible the landing gear or the tail of the plane hit the seawall, he said. If that happened, it would effectively slam the plane into the runway, he said.

                              Noting that some witnesses reported hearing the plane's engines rev up just before the crash, Barr said that would be consistent with a pilot who realized at the last minute that the plane was too low and was increasing power to the engines to try to increase altitude. Barr said he could think of no reason why a plane would come in to land that low."
                              http://news.yahoo.com/tail-end-trans...091011758.html

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Agitator View Post
                                JAL made a perfect, if inadvertent, water landing at SFO in 1968.

                                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Airlines_Flight_2

                                Aeronautically,
                                A.
                                Haw that's excellent. Very Japanese to land in the water but without inconveniencing anyone much.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X