Asiana flight crash at San Francisco
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Cape Town
Age: 60
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Racism, Culturalism, or Realism
FERetd post 799:
You obviously are shooting from the hip and branding all those who disagree with you a liberal lot.
There may or may not be cultural aspects in play. However we do not know yet whether it was in play in this PARTICULAR case, just as we don't know if there were mechanical, weather or other issues in play.
So to start harping on about cultural deficiencies is called generalisation which can be construed as racist commentary. Purely by definition and nothing to do with one's political persuasion. Of course you continue to classify yourself with a generalisation as well (being white, male etc.). If I carried on in your vein I'd probably mention something about the age in which you grew up as being a factor in your oratory behaviour but how would I know
You obviously are shooting from the hip and branding all those who disagree with you a liberal lot.
There may or may not be cultural aspects in play. However we do not know yet whether it was in play in this PARTICULAR case, just as we don't know if there were mechanical, weather or other issues in play.
So to start harping on about cultural deficiencies is called generalisation which can be construed as racist commentary. Purely by definition and nothing to do with one's political persuasion. Of course you continue to classify yourself with a generalisation as well (being white, male etc.). If I carried on in your vein I'd probably mention something about the age in which you grew up as being a factor in your oratory behaviour but how would I know
anxi
why cant they fly visual approaches . because they they haven't been taught by the great aviators that you are . don't tell me you're sim profile doesn't have raw data and visual flying and approaches
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An added possible complication in the cockpit gradient could be the seniority of the 'trainee' Captain v the 'training'. All MAY become clear through the investigation.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AIAA 2000-4221
COMPUTATION OF VISCOUS FLOW FOR A BOEING 777 AIRCRAFT IN LANDING CONFIGURATION
http://people.nas.nasa.gov/~rogers/p...a2000-4221.pdf
COMPUTATION OF VISCOUS FLOW FOR A BOEING 777 AIRCRAFT IN LANDING CONFIGURATION
http://people.nas.nasa.gov/~rogers/p...a2000-4221.pdf
Last edited by ventus45; 8th Jul 2013 at 10:47.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: The AUK
Age: 80
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet transport aviation is a complex & serious business. Too many do not
treat it with the seriousness that it demands.
. The accidents which occur speak volumes in terms of lack of ability, airmanship, and competence.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Bus Class
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stable Approach Policy
I totally agree with John_Smith on this. If they implemented their stable approach policy(and they must have one as they are an IOSA Registered Operator) this would not have happened. They breached their own company Ops Manual procedures it seems.
Such policies are put in place to prevent this kind of accident.
This puts Asiana in a poor light in front of its stakeholders. I wonder what the insurance ramifications will be if they are found to be in breach of company procedures?
Such policies are put in place to prevent this kind of accident.
This puts Asiana in a poor light in front of its stakeholders. I wonder what the insurance ramifications will be if they are found to be in breach of company procedures?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Cyprus
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Handbaggage
Kerosine Kraut please join the real world!
The operating crew can tell passengers anything they like during the Safety Briefing but since the pax don't actually work for the airline concerned they will do EXACTLY what they want in any given situation - whether sensible (legal?) to your understanding or not - herd instinct simply takes over - particularly if there are a large number of non-English speaking passengers on board who may simply have not comprehended the safety briefing!
The safety briefing given before every flight is, in reality, only a set of guideline requests that, as I suspect you are well aware, a great number of passengers simply ignore while reading their paper/book/magazine.
Realistically they simply cannot be enforced - especially in a stressful or emergency situation affecting a large number of people - after all who is going to stop, discipline or sue Mr/Mrs Nameless x 250 if they decide to to take all or part of their hand luggage with them during an emergency evacuation?
When a Captain on a B767 in the early '90s I had to order an emergency evacuation at an airport in the Middle East after experiencing a severe undercarriage problem during take-off after we had burnt off a considerable anount of fuel and re-landed with one inflated operational tyre which then hugely overheated. About 45% of the passengers overall took their hand luggage with them (observably about 95% plus of the women pax took their personal handbags) and about 70% of women pax wearing high heels refused pointblank to remove them in the end the cabin crew simply gave up and concentrated on getting everyone out ASAP.
The evacuations procedures are all OK in theory in the simulator, aircraft mockup or classroom but, in my admittedly limited experience, simply didn't work in a real emergency when the cabin crew were faced with 200+ pax all of whom are in a panic all trying to fight their way out of the aircraft as quickly as possible.
The operating crew can tell passengers anything they like during the Safety Briefing but since the pax don't actually work for the airline concerned they will do EXACTLY what they want in any given situation - whether sensible (legal?) to your understanding or not - herd instinct simply takes over - particularly if there are a large number of non-English speaking passengers on board who may simply have not comprehended the safety briefing!
The safety briefing given before every flight is, in reality, only a set of guideline requests that, as I suspect you are well aware, a great number of passengers simply ignore while reading their paper/book/magazine.
Realistically they simply cannot be enforced - especially in a stressful or emergency situation affecting a large number of people - after all who is going to stop, discipline or sue Mr/Mrs Nameless x 250 if they decide to to take all or part of their hand luggage with them during an emergency evacuation?
When a Captain on a B767 in the early '90s I had to order an emergency evacuation at an airport in the Middle East after experiencing a severe undercarriage problem during take-off after we had burnt off a considerable anount of fuel and re-landed with one inflated operational tyre which then hugely overheated. About 45% of the passengers overall took their hand luggage with them (observably about 95% plus of the women pax took their personal handbags) and about 70% of women pax wearing high heels refused pointblank to remove them in the end the cabin crew simply gave up and concentrated on getting everyone out ASAP.
The evacuations procedures are all OK in theory in the simulator, aircraft mockup or classroom but, in my admittedly limited experience, simply didn't work in a real emergency when the cabin crew were faced with 200+ pax all of whom are in a panic all trying to fight their way out of the aircraft as quickly as possible.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bali, Indonesia
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@KeroseneKraut
You are just not being realistic. Policy is one thing, The reaction of human beings is entirely another, especially when there is no penalty involved and in particular in a life threatening situation. In such a situation, people do what they will do. The smarter ones, as always, tend to push the envelope. I would.
Machines are not infallible. They sometimes behave in unexpected ways or fail,
About 45% of the passengers overall took their hand luggage with them (observably about 95% plus of the women pax took their personal handbags) and about 70% of women pax wearing high heels refused pointblank to remove them in the end the cabin crew simply gave up and concentrated on getting everyone out ASAP.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bali, Indonesia
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Centaurus
Aussie, Aussie, Aussie!!!!
Sad. And Pathetic. You seem to suggest that Aussie Pilots are so superior to all others, especially Asians? Sheesh........
I think that the more relevant point is that ALL training procedures these days teach the use of automation and NOT how to, first, FTFP???
Sad. And Pathetic. You seem to suggest that Aussie Pilots are so superior to all others, especially Asians? Sheesh........
I think that the more relevant point is that ALL training procedures these days teach the use of automation and NOT how to, first, FTFP???
Last edited by philipat; 8th Jul 2013 at 11:31.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Cyprus
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
90 secs / half doors in use?
Kerosine Kraut
Aircraft Evacuation Certification tests are all carried out by the manufacturer using 'semi-trained' staff who usually have had several trial runs, know which door they are assigned to exit from and, quite frankly in the event of a genuine catastrophic situation bear very little resemblence to the real world confusion of a genuine emergency evacuation!
Aircraft Evacuation Certification tests are all carried out by the manufacturer using 'semi-trained' staff who usually have had several trial runs, know which door they are assigned to exit from and, quite frankly in the event of a genuine catastrophic situation bear very little resemblence to the real world confusion of a genuine emergency evacuation!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They even put test luggage in the aisles to block easy egress.
So let's give them carry on too to jump out.
My point is: If this is the real world we'd better get prepared for it whatever it is.
So let's give them carry on too to jump out.
My point is: If this is the real world we'd better get prepared for it whatever it is.
Last edited by Kerosene Kraut; 8th Jul 2013 at 11:29.
Paxing All Over The World
Kerosene Kraut
Indeed.
I have thought for 20 years that the evac times are the result of guesswork, ridiculously unreal tests and managment 'push' to get the machine approved for as many seats as possible.
I am fortunate not to have been involved in even a precautionary evac but I expect that most pax will respond as per instinct - not procedure. They will:
So maybe we need to rethink the evacuation time limits then? 90 Seconds through half the doors with cabin luggage?
I have thought for 20 years that the evac times are the result of guesswork, ridiculously unreal tests and managment 'push' to get the machine approved for as many seats as possible.
I am fortunate not to have been involved in even a precautionary evac but I expect that most pax will respond as per instinct - not procedure. They will:
- Head for the door they entered by
- Take baggage - large and small
- Not remove high heeled shoes
- Obese people will obstruct others
- Some will tramp over others
- and the rest.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bali, Indonesia
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@KeroseneKraut
Actually, and fortunately from your point of view, most of "The Sheeple" will do exactly what they are told. There are, however, a few who will think for themselves and make their own decisions accordingly.
SFO proved the point that present procedures seem to work fine. And I' sure that ALL the folks in F/C Class got off WITH their hand luggage. Sorry, it is what it is. And, actually, it doesn't make any difference, despite all the "Policy". The reasons for which propaganda I can fully understand.
SFO proved the point that present procedures seem to work fine. And I' sure that ALL the folks in F/C Class got off WITH their hand luggage. Sorry, it is what it is. And, actually, it doesn't make any difference, despite all the "Policy". The reasons for which propaganda I can fully understand.
Last edited by philipat; 8th Jul 2013 at 11:38.
Luggage
KK
Most of the bins would already be open, bags everywhere.
All those bleating about criminals etc, if you found your bag in the aisle with all your valuables in it you would be a darn fool to leave it behind, plus it is just blocking the escape routes.
Most of the bins would already be open, bags everywhere.
All those bleating about criminals etc, if you found your bag in the aisle with all your valuables in it you would be a darn fool to leave it behind, plus it is just blocking the escape routes.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Centaurus
Reminds me of a conversation I had with a Boeing instructor pilot with regards to the design philosophy of the Boeing 787. He said the 787 was designed on the basis it will be flown by incompetent pilots. Thus the sophisticated computer systems will do their best not to allow the pilot to crash. With huge orders for the 787 coming out of the Asian region you can see his point.
A pilot who is taught that he is flying an aircraft that cannot stall or who thinks he can always just pull fully back on the stick, add full power and hold those inputs to get himself out of a collision with terrain or a wind shear is bound to get himself in trouble when the protections that allow such manoeuvres no longer work. The companies that have highly automate aircraft such as the A320 that require that their pilots engage the autopilot right after take-off and keep it on to the flare or even do auto-lands in VFC do not do themselves a favour.
Last edited by Montrealguy; 8th Jul 2013 at 19:37.
I don't care who is upfront of my airliner, as a bare minimum I would expect them to be competent enough to not 'stall' the bloody thing on final approach just because a navigation aid that is not even required in the weather is not functioning.
Yes there will be mitigating factors such as the 'training' taking place, but the fact that there were FOUR pilots on the flightdeck and NOT ONE of then seemed to notice the speed deteriorate to 30 - 50 kts below approach speed (according to ADSB data) is quite frankly gross negligence.
Yes we are all prone to making mistakes, this though should not preclude us as a supposedly professional group from trying to keep our standards high.
Recent events have had:
An jet airliner lost due to the loss of some speed data and a crew applying the incorrect stall recovery technique (Air France)
A turbo-prop regional airliner lost due to the crew mishandling the icing system which gave a false stall warning and resulted in the crew apllying the incorrect stall recovery technique (Coglan)
A jet airliner lost after a 'minor' radalt fault on approach to land and all THREE pilots failing to recognize the deteriorating speed profile until the onset of the stick shaker at which point the thrust levers were advanced and then allowed to automatically close back to idle, all the crew had to do was hold them up!! (Turkish)
A jet airliner lost on approach to land as the crew set up for a NPA and when at minima with NO visual reference elected to disconnect the automatics and continue in the 'hope' that the would arrive at the runway, what it resulted in was a perfect touchdown on the water.
And now finally we 'seem' to have a jet airliner lost on landing due to all four crew failing to notice or act on a deteriorating speed state until it was way way too late.
What scares me about all this is that these are apparently 'professional' crews from ALL different cultures and backgrounds who seem incapable of keeping a perfectly airworthy aircraft in the air when faced with what amount to very very minor defects or unservicabilities. It is a disgrace and a blight on the whole profession that our 'stick and rudder' skills have been so adversely affected by the accountants and safety departments in the name of safety (which is ironic)
What is more stunning is that in the Turkish / Lionair / Asiana incidents is has been just blind luck that people survived these crashes, it could have so easily been a total loss of life in all of these accidents, thank god it was not.
Rant Over.
Yes there will be mitigating factors such as the 'training' taking place, but the fact that there were FOUR pilots on the flightdeck and NOT ONE of then seemed to notice the speed deteriorate to 30 - 50 kts below approach speed (according to ADSB data) is quite frankly gross negligence.
Yes we are all prone to making mistakes, this though should not preclude us as a supposedly professional group from trying to keep our standards high.
Recent events have had:
An jet airliner lost due to the loss of some speed data and a crew applying the incorrect stall recovery technique (Air France)
A turbo-prop regional airliner lost due to the crew mishandling the icing system which gave a false stall warning and resulted in the crew apllying the incorrect stall recovery technique (Coglan)
A jet airliner lost after a 'minor' radalt fault on approach to land and all THREE pilots failing to recognize the deteriorating speed profile until the onset of the stick shaker at which point the thrust levers were advanced and then allowed to automatically close back to idle, all the crew had to do was hold them up!! (Turkish)
A jet airliner lost on approach to land as the crew set up for a NPA and when at minima with NO visual reference elected to disconnect the automatics and continue in the 'hope' that the would arrive at the runway, what it resulted in was a perfect touchdown on the water.
And now finally we 'seem' to have a jet airliner lost on landing due to all four crew failing to notice or act on a deteriorating speed state until it was way way too late.
What scares me about all this is that these are apparently 'professional' crews from ALL different cultures and backgrounds who seem incapable of keeping a perfectly airworthy aircraft in the air when faced with what amount to very very minor defects or unservicabilities. It is a disgrace and a blight on the whole profession that our 'stick and rudder' skills have been so adversely affected by the accountants and safety departments in the name of safety (which is ironic)
What is more stunning is that in the Turkish / Lionair / Asiana incidents is has been just blind luck that people survived these crashes, it could have so easily been a total loss of life in all of these accidents, thank god it was not.
Rant Over.
Last edited by Ollie Onion; 8th Jul 2013 at 11:36.