Asiana flight crash at San Francisco

[6000PIC]

I`m wondering , what part of an EGPWS Warning WHOOP WHOOP PULL UP ! wouldn`t they have heard or understood with such reported sink rates below 1000`? Must have been lots of bells and whistles going off for the CVR Analysts to sink their teeth into. SOP`s ? This one is going to cost a Billion before it`s all over. Never lose the skill of hand flying your aircraft.

[CISTRS]

A few unrelated points:

Pax evacuating with bags:
In this type of incident, are there arrangements for re-uniting surviving pax with their surviving hand baggage and checked baggage? Understand it will be low priority, and after forensic NTSB investigation.

The overall robustness of the airframe is impressive. Would a composite airframe perform as well?

A bit of confusion in the posts about VFR, CAVOK and VMC.

[Dushan]

Umm, is it just me, or do the passengers seem to be strolling out of the burning airplane with their carry on luggage?

http://crush.flightaware.com/~dbaker/AAR.jpg

Yep, same as Air France at YYZ, in 2005.

[physicus]

skol, I hope you're not the one Oz that's about to fly me to HNL in a few hours time... if you can't land your airplane with eyeballs, one hand on the stick (or wheel) and the other on the throttles, you should not be flying anything. I was always able to land what I flew by manual method, and I'm flying (or have flown in some instances) the whole gamut: from gliders via turboprops to the ol' 744 freighter. Many thousands of hours.

Now whether your outfits SOPs allow you to do so is an entirely different story and knowing that neither ILS nor any visual guidance was available at SFO for your ETA means your airmanship is stuffed at the preflight level (check a NOTAM recently?), not just the airmanship level!

If any of this played any factor we're all in trouble!

[Buttscratcher]

Skol's right tho
What nut-jobs thought it was a good idea to remove all visual and electronic runway guidance from an international airport
C'mon fellas, that's just annoyingly dumb-ass

[ironbutt57]

Removing electronic guidance would increase these types of incidents..for whatever reason, unstable approach appears to have occurred...

[PlatinumFlyer]

"Word I had from someone on-scene (at the terminal) was that they were deplaned via portable stairs driven to the taxiway, and bused back to the terminal. They also said the aircraft (now empty) was pushed (backwards) to clear the taxiway, and then back on a gate to unload the baggage/freight. I don't have any info on how long any of all that took, but given the much higher priority tasks being undertaken, I don't think it happened very fast."

It took the passengers 3 1/2 hours to get back to the terminal.

[galaxy flyer]

What a strange idea, pilots being required to fly their airplane to a visual landing on a clear blue day....who'd expect that?

CISTRS

Well, the pax on US 1549 got thei bags back after a thorough soaking in the freezing Hudson, so, yes, they'lll get 'em back, whether they want them is another question.

[mickjoebill]

Press conference with fire airport and local government reps;

Praising 1st responders who went into the plane.
130 specialist medical staff at local hospital within 30 minutes.
9 hospitals accepting passengers
Many interpreters came forward to help.

All 307 passengers and crew accounted for
123 not injured
2 fatalities.
49 judged serious/critical at time of accident, 10 still critical.
2 Fatalities were found "outside the plane" ...."on the runway".

Two runways closed two have been reopened.
NTSB Washington team arriving at midnight.
Some runway construction but not at time of incident.
Runway or perhaps threshold had been extended, but runway had not been "reconfigured".

Fire Crews arrived in 3 minutes and applied water and foam, chutes already had been deployed.
Rescue team searched aircraft once passengers had ceased coming down shoots.

In response to questions, airport rep says weather clear of they were operating VFR rules so ILS was "not turned on"


Next briefing tomorrow morning.

KCBS local radio report;
Mills hospital took 12 all are ok.

Stanford Hospital took 45, report 10 serious, 3 critical, doctor says they will all probably survive.
They activated seven trauma teams, some victims were transported by helicopter.
Internal bleeding fractures and spinal injuries.

Burn unit director at Saint Francis Hospital, says they took 6 patients, 5 were released.
Saint Francis only takes burns not trauma, so we assume these patients did not have trauma. 1 day in hospital for each % of body burned..

[Sheep Guts]

Just on CNN with John King interview of crash survivor.
Says the aircraft seemed very high on approach from his view in the window then a sharp downwards correction was made then he heard the engines rapidly spool up as it impacted.

Lots of witnesses are saying the aircraft had high pitch attitude at impact. So sounds like they tried to go around but very very late.

Of course their stable approach criteria must have been out the window way before that.

So that probably eliminates a fuel problem ie. like the BA 777 in London.

Anyway I shouldn't have added to this. I just said don't speculate in my previous post.
The NTSB report will give us better story.

[Lost in Saigon]

So, if they did not run out of fuel, how come it was not the wings (where the fuel is) that got burned, but the top of the fuselage? What is so flammable up there that could melt the aluminum skin? I am not a pilot, so forgive me if this is a stupid question.


These photos shows no initial fire damage to the top of the fuselage. Fire probably spread to the cabin walls and ceiling after fire from the right engine penetrated the fuselage on the right side.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17/msowsun/photo%20stuff/Photo13/02_zps14af4633.jpg

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17/msowsun/photo%20stuff/Photo13/04_zpsac4f8d0c.jpg

These photos shows how the fire likely originated in the area where the right engine lay beside the fuselage after it broke off the wing.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17/msowsun/photo%20stuff/Photo13/03a_zps7f023227.jpg

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17/msowsun/photo%20stuff/Photo13/01_zps8b40eb5f.jpg

[The Big E]

Today's airline training teaches pilots everything except HOW TO FLY THE
AIRPLANE.

Ain't that the truth, as there seems to be a complete lack of understanding when it comes to the stick and rudder principles. Not just reserved for airline training either, as the blind (who were not taught properly) are partially creating the next generation of the blind.
Time for some Organisations to stop enforcing the 60 or 65 age limit (on those who are still on top of their game, and whose expertise they sorely need) in an effort to maintain the competency, experience, and safe helmsmanship which their fare paying passengers are entitled to??
Regards to all the full bottles out there who have a proven record of doing it as it should be done.

[B-HKD]

We have first hand accounts of professional pilots stating what they observed when they worked at Asiana and in Korea. It is evident there is a widespread deficiency among Korean crews (definitely not the only ones who suffer from this) to conduct proper visual approaches and landings.

Now take that pre-existing factor and add it to what would be a perfectly standard approach on a CAVOK day for a competent crew, take away the ILS GS, the VGSI, and suddenly these guys are left clueless.

No doubt the final report will indicate a clear point at which any other competent crew would have initiated a go-around due to the stabilized approach criteria not being met.

Hopefully they will learn sooner than later.

[bugg smasher]

Irrespective as to whether it contributed to this accident in any way, it's outrageous that an airport the size of KSFO has no electronic or visual G/S.

Temporary VASIS or PAPIS can't have been that expensive until R/W works were complete.

It is part and parcel of all professional airline pilot training that one must be able to safely conduct a variety of approaches, down to the applicable minimums. This includes not only the standard ILS approach, but LOC, RNAV, and visual approaches, amongst others, and depending on the Ops Specs of the particular airline, circling approaches as well. RNP is the latest iteration, our tool boxes are increasing exponentially every year.

These operations are rigorously tested in the simulator every six months, any pilot falling short of acceptable standards is sent for retraining, in the event said aviator still comes up short, s/he is immediately, and without remorse of any kind, shown to the nearest hole in the wall.

Most call it the door. It is pretty bleak on the other side.

No more of this nonsense please.

[paxrune]

Another shot of pax and their luggage post-crash

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BOiARaXCcAAYI_A.jpg

[Earl]

Heard that also from one of the pax on the news.
Just before impact engines spooling up.
CVR and FDR will tell all soon.

[Mic Dundee]

Irrespective as to whether it contributed to this accident in any way, it's outrageous that an airport the size of KSFO has no electronic or visual G/S.

Temporary VASIS or PAPIS can't have been that expensive until R/W works were complete.

It is part and parcel of all professional airline pilot training that one must be able to safely conduct a variety of approaches, down to the applicable minimums. This includes not only the standard ILS approach, but LOC, RNAV, and visual approaches, amongst others, and depending on the Ops Specs of the particular airline, circling approaches as well. RNP is the latest iteration, our tool boxes are increasing exponentially every year.

These operations are rigorously tested in the simulator every six months, any pilot falling short of acceptable standards is sent for retraining, in the event said aviator still comes up short, s/he is immediately, and without remorse of any kind, shown to the nearest hole in the wall.

Most call it the door. It is pretty bleak on the other side.

No more of this nonsense please.

My Son-in-law is a CFI-MEI. He says his Asian students come over here for their specialized JAA/EASA and FAA ab initio training. He says while they're on their landing rollout, the tower might say "exit on taxiway Juliet," and the student will do everything to make that turn, even if it means collapsing the gear to make that exit, when "common sense" dictates a safer course of action would be to respond "unable" and take, say the next safest exit. These are the students who head back and are placed (from a Seminole) into a B-777 F/O position. Clueless! No common sense! Cannot make a decision outside the box! :mad: incredible. I've been flying in and out of SFO on a regular basis, and their 28's G/S's and PAPI's have been OTS for a while (don't know why?), but who cares when it's CAVOK? Just Programme your own glide path (VNAV, HGS, etc.) and keep a visual scan, inside, then outside, etc.

[deeside]

I don't care how many hours you have chalked up 'YOU WERE NOT THERE" !!!!to make such disparaging comments re the flight crew without any knowledge of what has just occurred is beyond me.Why not wait like everybody else to get the facts instead of being a bunch of smart arses prior to knowing the facts,just like you would wish if you had been involved in such an event.

[Mark in CA]

Turns out that a friend of mine was on this flight. He is basically ok. Here's a Facebook post from his wife, who apparently changed her own flight to an earlier one:

Ben is alive @ sf general hospital. Thank u god from the bottom of my heart. My kids need their loving dad who i am so proud!!! Ben was sitting next to the exit door. Seat # 30K. opened the exit door and help 50+ ppl out wz broken ribs from the crash. He calmed ppl down n helped to get them out before too late. Ppl were injured, bleeding n screaming. Flight attendances were overwhelmed n Ben did best to help other passengers. He thought the plane was so low when he saw the water n runway was too closed and the pilot put the gas it was too late. Plz forward this posting to let the news channels. So they know what exactly happened. (I supposed to flight back with him in the same flight then changed to the earlier flight. From now on I will travel in different flights.)

[Jack1985]

To those of you saying the pilots would not be used to visual approaches how are you backing this up? I ask this with total amazement because isn't it a basic rule of flight to be able to fly visually? I know it is to me.

[Toruk Macto]

I would get on a flight to a destination if I knew G/S was out but I would not get on an A/C if I knew crew could not fly visual approach .

[aircarver]

2 Fatalities were found "outside the plane" ...."on the runway".

How'd that happen ? Crew from aft galley ? (Aft pressure bulkhead busted out in pictures)

.

[Pucka]

Big aeroplanes, legacy carriers and Asian airlines..the triage does nothing to encourage visually flown approaches. Infact, a visual approach is anathema to the firm I work for and on the 777 fleet, rarely flown either for real or in the sim..due "threat"..wtf!!! For the kids doing right seat conversions to type, an end of sim VMC, no vasi, no ILS approach, under..lets just have a go and no test threat...is a real eye opener!! Flying schools, or at least flying school precursors for the airlines do not engender a culture of visual and manual flying. Low energy conditions, stall incipients etc are all covered by modules and the insurance of protections by the myriad of auto systems. Mix that with the barrier culture of Asian "face" and the risk of incident is increased immeasurably. The CVR will be an interesting if not indicting piece of evidence in MHO....

[V1... Ooops]

It is part and parcel of all professional airline pilot training that one must be able to safely conduct a variety of approaches, down to the applicable minimums. This includes not only the standard ILS approach, but LOC, RNAV, and visual approaches...

Agreed.

It's worth noting that there are RNAV (GPS) approaches published for both 28L and 28R that have 200' AGL minima for aircraft with LPV capability.

I'm not familiar with the 777, but it perplexes me why the crew would not have elected to fly a coupled RNAV (GPS) approach if the ILS was NOTAMed off the air.

[donpizmeov]

Mic Dundee,
It would seem your son in law is not doing a very good job of instructing if he sends these chaps home unable to "think out of the box" or show some airmanship . Perhaps they need to use another flight training school.

[PJ2]

Re, Quote:
Originally Posted by PJ2
I would be very cautious about anything Flightaware and AVHerald have to offer at this point.

One might say the same about PPRuNe, no?

Those two sources seem to be doing a better job than many of the "official" sites and ALL of the media.
If I may, there is a definite veridicality between various data sources. PPRuNe makes no pretentions to be other than advertised. There is no "data" here. Flightaware provides "data" but does not indicate for the user anywhere what the data is based upon, and neither does AvHerald. I've seen time errors in Flightaware and wrong reporting in AvHerald. Doesn't mean they're to be dismissed, but it does mean that they must be taken with a grain of salt.

I do flight data analysis and know that images and videos created from "data" have both the power to easily convince a credulous and information-seeking audience but can also be significantly in error and can draw parties to incorrect conclusions. Now in the end it doesn't really matter because the NTSB Report will eventually be written. But in the early hours of such events I think it is wise to greet all information as suspect because it is.

Those who fly the aircraft and who otherwise know this business first-hand generally speculate wisely but, as we see here, the thread is already more than a dozen pages of kapok, as is usual for industry events such as this. But that's okay too - it's "as advertised", but can't be taken as anything more than it is. Once in a while a gem shows up from someone who quietly knows his or her stuff but it takes an eye to avoid the general throng to capture the truth.

I happen to believe that this is nothing more than a visual approach gone wrong. I've done hundreds of them into SFO on various types, Quiet Bridge from the east, usually and it's a great amount of fun, generally but one must know more than just relying upon ILS. We'll see what the NTSB has to say.

[AnQrKa]

"To those of you saying the pilots would not be used to visual approaches how are you backing this up?"

From flying with them. Sad but true.

[Mimpe]

Aircarver - looking at the 777 floor plan, there are two crew seats with telephones aft of row 67 but in front of the galley. I presume the violently detatched tail section included these two seats and hence the crewmembers. The Cog aft limit will be calculated during the investigation- this is another variable along with sink rate/ AoA, SA of loss of stable approach , training/recency/CRM "culture", lack of standard vertical guidance cues, fatigue, and all the other possible factors raised above.

[V1... Ooops]

It's worth noting that there are RNAV (GPS) approaches published for both 28L and 28R that have 200' AGL minima for aircraft with LPV capability.

Here is the current RNAV (GPS) for 28L.

http://i979.photobucket.com/albums/ae275/Paneuropean/KSFO28L_zps21d565ea.jpg (http://s979.photobucket.com/user/Paneuropean/media/KSFO28L_zps21d565ea.jpg.html)

[Username here]

I`m wondering , what part of an EGPWS Warning WHOOP WHOOP PULL UP ! wouldn`t they have heard or understood with such reported sink rates below 1000`? Must have been lots of bells and whistles going off for the CVR Analysts to sink their teeth into.

At worst I would expect a "SINK RATE"...I wouldn't expect it to be going too bananas....

[ttowne1267]

The NTSB will address flame propagation, but I would think the fuselage fire was initiated by belly skin friction. Certainly plausible, but not as likely, that the fire at the starboard wing root migrated to mid-cabin... especially when the picture shows the CFR fire truck already in the act of fire suppression. IMHO

[djaferisp]

is he asking for go-around here? and then its suddenly an emergency?

Asiana 214 KSFO Crash Landing ATC - YouTube

[hoggsnortrupert]

On page 11 I asked about 300 ft per mile approach profile for visual and non precision approaches, I would have thought that someone would have commented on this very "basic" procedure, but not a comment, either its not worth the input, or people dont understand the importance of it:
The silence is Interesting::rolleyes:

[Toruk Macto]

Saving face in Asian cultures has a bearing on making a go around .

[CUTiger78]

Re. Buttscratcher's post # 269 http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/518568-asiana-flight-crash-san-francisco-14.html#post7926482 -
Yeah, heads ought to roll. Wonder if anybody'll get fired. Administrator Huerta should be the first to go, but that'll never happen.

[musicman476]

I know in the crash I was involved in, the airline contracted a company to retrieve all cabin & cargo baggage. They cataloged it all with photos and put it online for the survivors to view on a private site. We were able to visually ID which items were ours and they were returned to us. I was even able to get the book I was reading back- albeit with a few charred pages.

[C441]

A quick glance at Flightaware altitude and speed recordings shows 'normal' speed with altitude until 200ft where the speed has reduced to 85kts. Whilst these scales are probably prone to inaccuracies close to the ground, a look at other flight's altitude vs speed recordings shows that even down to 200ft, the speed recorded is still usually 'normal'.

85kts at 200ft, would perhaps suggest a realisation that the approach profile was not right, followed by a rapid raising of the nose without sufficient thrust (for whatever reason).

I guess we'll know soon enough.

[scandistralian]

@hoggsnotrupert from memory (although its been over 7 months since I landed a 777 @ KSFO) you are cleared a visual, but you back it up with ILS guidance from ISFO 109.55, but apparently the G/S was out, nonetheless, you would still have vertical guidance available in the form of VNAV/PAPI/Aim Point etc.

[ZKSUJ]

I asked about 300 ft per mile approach profile for visual and non precision approaches

Here's you're 1st re[ply. You're not alone. I use it as a rule of thumb too, very handy when planning profiles on a visual. And I know many others in my company do the same

[ironbutt57]

Even on a visual, an electronic glideslope must be respected if it's available

[Mic Dundee]

Mic Dundee,
It would seem your son in law is not doing a very good job of instructing if he sends these chaps home unable to "think out of the box" or show some airmanship . Perhaps they need to use another flight training school.

You're correct, in that these blokes aren't trainable (he didn't recommend the guy).

[Suvarnabhumi]

Of course the passengers are going to take their luggage, the Chinese passengers especially, they don't do rules, they do what they want.

I'd like to see ANYONE try and take a wheeler/box of fruit/box of tea off an China mainland pax during an evacuation !!!

And besides if your passport gets burnt in the overhead bin, do you have ANY idea how much hassle US Immigration will give you? Better to have your passport , breeze through the airport and you'll be in Chinatown slurping noodles before you know it.......

Thats why I always carry my passport in my pocket.

[awblain]

The only person farther from the aisle than a car seat would be an accompanying adult.

Unfastening the child from a car seat and evacuating is a lot quicker and less disruptive than having to find the child and evacuating.

(Relates to http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/518568-asiana-flight-crash-san-francisco-10.html#post7926326)

[DoMePlease]

"Big aeroplanes, legacy carriers and Asian airlines..the triage does nothing to encourage visually flown approaches. Infact, a visual approach is anathema to the firm I work for and on the 777 fleet, rarely flown either for real or in the sim..due "threat"..wtf!!! For the kids doing right seat conversions to type, an end of sim VMC, no vasi, no ILS approach, under..lets just have a go and no test threat...is a real eye opener!! Flying schools, or at least flying school precursors for the airlines do not engender a culture of visual and manual flying. Low energy conditions, stall incipients etc are all covered by modules and the insurance of protections by the myriad of auto systems. Mix that with the barrier culture of Asian "face" and the risk of incident is increased immeasurably. The CVR will be an interesting if not indicting piece of evidence in MHO.... "




Funny. I don't remember Jacob Veldhuyzen van Zanten being Asian at all.

[B777TAC]

Looking at the debris field is that the right engine PW upside down up against the right side of the aircraft? If so where is the other engine?

[ReverseFlight]

I asked about 300 ft per mile approach profile for visual and non precision approaches

It's been ages since I last posted on this forum.

Just recalled the other rule of halving your ground speed to target your RoD ... it seems nobody cares about this rule of thumb either.

[nitpicker330]

All of the experienced Pilots know these rules of thumb and use them where needed. :ok:

[jugofpropwash]

According to CNN, the two deceased individuals found on the runway were both holders of Chinese passports. Would flight attendants have had Chinese passports?

[Salen]

From FLIGHTAWARE:
At 11.7 nm final 4200 feet (about 520 feet high)
At 800ft, ROD 1380ft/min 145kts
At 600ft , ROD 1320ft/min 141kts
At 100ft, ROD 120ft/min 109kts !!!
(Then at 200ft, ROD +120ft/min, 85kts) probably spurious or a Stall
"STABLE" ???

[suninmyeyes]

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.

Just a theory but I think it far more likely than engine failure, radalt failure or autothrottle failure and I suspect when the events are unravelled this will be what has happend.

[balus]

According to CNN, the two deceased individuals found on the runway were both holders of Chinese passports. Would flight attendants have had Chinese passports?

Quite possible, I know Korean Air uses Chinese cabin crew quite often.

[Loose rivets]

Poor souls. Looking at the jagged edge of the rear bulkhead, I'd imagine they may have been injured before hitting the ground.

Would there still be significant cabin pressure at that stage?

I'm really surprised at the way the dome is torn open. I assume there is no structural member attached to the centre that would have pulled on it when the tail came off.

[cactusbusdrvr]

I have been flying into SFO quite a bit recently. There has been construction on 28R and left for a while. The threshold has been displaced and the ILS and PAPI are OTS.

We do the FMS bridge visual to 28R almost exclusively. The only vertical guidance is the FMS VNAV path and my Mark 1 eyeballs. I haven't done an ILS into SFO in a long time, you don't need it if you know how to fly.

The 300' per nautical mile is ingrained in our flying, we do a visual in the sim with no aids every year (we only do 12 month AQP sessions).

This may turn out to be a repeat of the JAL DC8 accident in 1968. Maybe we will see an acknowledgement similar to Captain Asoh. Article 160 of the Korean criminal code provides for sentencing to a prison labor camp of you are responsible for aircraft damage. This will not be a good outcome for that crew. And it would be worse if they had been expats.

I was offered a contract at Asiana back in the 90s, I have friends flying in Korea and China now. The remarks you read hear about culture and competence are valid. These guys are not trained to fly anything but rigid procedures. They are not comfortable outside their tight little box. Aviation exists in too fluid an environment to be operated this way.

[ironbutt57]

Some passengers reported "rattling/shaking" just before initial impact...Stall??

[epc]

According to CNN, the two deceased individuals found on the runway were both holders of Chinese passports. Would flight attendants have had Chinese passports?

In this case, the fatalities are likely female students from a high school class trip. Chinese press is reporting that 2 female students have not checked in yet.

[Cool banana]

Asiana jet crash further tarnishes Korean carrier's safety record
By Jack Kim and Hyunjoo Jin | Reuters

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.

Asiana, South Korea's junior carrier, is a member of the Star Alliance with 91 international passenger routes, 28 cargo and 14 domestic routes. It operates a fleet of 80 aircraft.

Two years ago, one of its 747 cargo jets bound for Shanghai crashed into the sea off Korea's Jeju island after taking off from Incheon airport. Two pilots on board were killed in the crash, which was blamed on mechanical problems.

In 1993, an Asiana domestic flight from Seoul crashed in driving wind and extremely poor visibility in a botched landing attempt, killing 66 people and injuring 44.

An inquiry found pilot error was the cause of that crash when the plane began a descent while it was still passing over a mountain peak.

Asiana was founded in 1988 by the Kumho Asiana transport and construction conglomerate at a time when South Korea wanted to boost its international appeal as an emerging economic power.

It launched its first international route two years later with flights to Tokyo and Hong Kong, then added flights to Southeast Asia and Los Angeles the following year, gradually expanding destinations to Europe and the Americas.

Asiana has been serving only six U.S. cities and four in Europe, compared with the 21 routes it flies to Japan and more than 30 to China.

With almost 30 mid- to long-range Airbus A350s on order, it has been hoping to meet soaring long-range passenger demand. Six A380 planes are also on order.

Asiana and Korean Air have been vying to increase U.S. routes to cope with rising demand after South Korea was included in the U.S. visa waiver program in 2008.

The two South Korean carriers' fleets were previously flown mainly by former air force pilots, but they have been gradually adding more civilians to their cockpits. According to the Transport Ministry, the ratio is now roughly equal.

(Additional reporting by Ju-min Park; Editing by Paul Tait)
...

From Yahoo Canada

[629bus]

Weather does not look to be an issue. clear skys, day ops.

Fatigue may have contributed. Off body clock, long(ish) flight.

IMO, with no approach guidance they may have decided to complete a raw data visual approach with no auto throttle.

From my experience the 777 A/T is very good. Speed decay would not occur like this (viewing the speed alt data posted earlier).

So, they either decided to turn the A/T off for the approach or it was U/S. More like switched to be switched off as i doubt they would have dispatched with both A/T's U/S ex Seoul.

When you look at the speed vs alt data speed was within ball park approaching 600'. I am guessing they may have taken full flap @ 600' (or just prior) and left thrust at idle (manual thrust). speed was recorded at 85kts @ 120'!!! The stick shaker would have been activated shortly before this and this is when i am assume they attempted a go around? Manual full thrust, nose pitch up but it was all a bit late?? Kinda goes with what passengers reporting with engine noise.

None of this information is factual. Just my opinion on what I have seen and read so far.

Also out of interest, there was a 747-400 holding short of 28L. This could have been a disaster if they had speared left a little earlier.

[10 DME ARC]

In UK if a runway has no PAPI's then no commercial flights...........

[Trim Stab]

He says his Asian students come over here for their specialized JAA/EASA and FAA ab initio training

I worked a few years ago at a flight school which existed on Asian training contracts, mostly from China, Vietnam, and Korea. It was remarkable how many students simply did not want to be pilots. They were there because they had been told to become a pilot by either the state, or by family.

[Salen]

From FLIGHTAWARE:
At 11.7 nm final 4200 feet
At 800ft, ROD 1380ft/min 145kts
At 600ft , ROD 1320ft/min 141kts
At 100ft, ROD 120ft/min 109kts
Then at 200ft, ROD +120ft/min, 85kts (STALL or Spurious)
"STABLE" ???

[Jasavir]

PAPIs and VASIs were installed at airports all those years ago to enhance safety as they are aids in ensuring a stable approach during the visual segment of an approach to landing.

SFO 28L/R G/S have been Notamed out for the last 3 weeks and despite that, pilots from all different airlines and countries have done hundreds of visual approaches without incident.

So sure, the average airline crew is supposed to be able to do a visual approach to landing without an issue. However if Accident and Incident reports tell us one thing, its that they happen when we least expect them to and the reasons for their occurrence ranges from the sublime to the ridiculous.

Coming from the west, they would have been vectored for the downwind. If they found them selves high turning base they would have been busy trying to "get back into the slot". Without the traditional vertical guidance of the G/S and PAPI, it takes a little more brainwork (using their FMS or handy 3 in 1 rule would have helped) to make it all come together. However, if they haven't done any raw visuals in recent times it is possible to lose Situational Awareness (positional and operational) during the resulting "Arms and Elbows" moment.

In our business, Mr. Murphy is always lurking not too far in the background and with these safety enhancers unavailable, Statistics and Probability once again formed an alliance and the dreaded Swiss Cheese holes lined up, resulting in what looks to be an undershoot in this very Lonnnngg and Heaaaaavvy 777. (Go Around at Company Mandated Alt)

This is all speculation of course but I just can't see this accident happening if the ILS and/or PAPI was operational in SFO. My 2 cents.

But for the Grace of God go I....

[pabs1977]

In UK if a runway has no PAPI's then no commercial flights...........

Do you have a reference for that?

[Trim Stab]

In UK if a runway has no PAPI's then no commercial flights...........

I've never heard of that before. Reference? Possibly that is a requirement by some operators, but as far as I know it is not a regulatory requirement. If it is then I have been in infraction a few times!

[Wizofoz]

It's sounding more like Turkish at AMS than BA at Heathrow.....

[Mr Angry from Purley]

The same FB poster "Ben" has been interviewed on TV.
He says that the 2 fatalities were cabin crew thrown out the back of the plane, through a hole, on impact.

I'm not negating this but "Ben" from his seat in 30K, seems to have "seen" a lot of things happen?



He stayed on board and went to help down the back by the looks of tv reports.

[NigelOnDraft]

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.Can someone who flies/flew 777 and FBW Airbus, an insight into the similarities/differences between this and 'Alpha Floor' would be appreciated...

For the 777 guys not familiar with Alpha Floor, a summaryAlpha Floor is a low speed protection (in normal law) which is purely an autothrust mode. When activated, it provides TOGA thrust. As the aircraft decelerates into the alpha protection range, the Alpha Floor is activated, even if the autothrust is disengaged. Activation is roughly proportional to the rate of deceleration.

Alpha Floor is inhibited:
* below 100 feet radio Altitude,
* if autothrust unserviceable,
* following double engine failure on an A340 (or one engine out on the twins),
* following certain system/auto flight failures,
* above Mach 0.53.

[a1anx]

I went into SFO r28L last week, no glide slope, and no papis visual approach only and the DME doesn't read 0dme at the threshols!

Many, if not most pilots no longer have the background, training or experience to fly pure unaided visual approaches. This isn't their fault, it's just the way things are.

[gordonroxburgh]

Absolutely shocking that SFO had not pre-installed new PAPIs ahead of the new displaced threshold going in. Unexcusable. Especially if this is identified be root cause of accident.

[RexBanner]

I'm sorry but questions like "will the passengers get their bags back?" when two people are confirmed dead is banal, insensitive and distasteful.

[Latte tester]

A1anx...
Who are the examiners that are allowing this to happen?
Seems to me that if you can't 'fly the plane' and not the computer, maybe you should get a desk job at Microsoft...

[Ex Douglas Driver]

With the autothrottle armed, the autothrottle automatically activates if no autopilot or F/D is active or an autopilot or F/D is in VNAV XXX, ALT, V/S, or G/S, and:

• speed less than an FMC calculated value for one second

• thrust below reference thrust

• airplane altitude above 100 feet RA on approach, or airplane barometric altitude 400 feet above airport on takeoff

The autothrottle can support stall protection when armed and not activated. If speed decreases to near stick shaker activation, the autothrottle automatically activates in the appropriate mode (SPD or THR REF) and advances thrust to maintain minimum maneuvering speed (approximately the top of the amber band) or the speed set in the mode control speed window, whichever is greater. The EICAS message AIRSPEED LOW displays.

Note: When the pitch mode is FLCH or TOGA, or the airplane is below 400 feet above the airport on takeoff, or below 100 feet radio altitude on approach, the autothrottle will not automatically activate.

Note: During a descent in VNAV SPD, the autothrottle may activate in HOLD mode and will not support stall protection.

[Wizofoz]

From my experience the 777 A/T is very good. Speed decay would not occur like this (viewing the speed alt data posted earlier).


...Unless, as has been mentioned above, the A/T is in HOLD mode, in which case A/T Wake Up is not active.

As there was no ILS, they may have been descending in FLCH or VNAV SPD, conditioned by a thousand ILS and RNAV approaches to expect the A/T to take care of the speed, for it to just stay at idle.

I've had students come to their upgrade with thousands of hours on the type, unaware of this "feature' of the AFDS.

ETA- Crossed posts with Douglas, who's quote summarizes it very well.

[AerocatS2A]

Do you have a reference for that?
It is similar in Australia, no visual slope guidance means no commercial jets, however you can get a dispensation from CASA to be able to operate to an aerodrome with no slope guidance with various restrictions.

[Capn Bloggs]

Australian RPT Regs for slope guidance (in place for 30+ years):

5.3 Unless otherwise approved in writing by CASA and subject to paragraph 5.4, an operator must not permit turbo-jet aeroplanes to use runways that are not equipped with electronic or visual approach slope guidance.
5.4 Paragraph 5.3 does not apply to runways at nominated alternate aerodromes.
There are dispensations but only for a very limited timeframe, and the captain has to be specifically approved.

[Flingwing47]

The 3nm/1000 ft works just fine - but only to the DME position.
If you can set the rwy threshold as a fix, then you can use the miles to go to that fix using 3nm/1000ft - of course corrected for height above MSL which was zero in this case !!:ok:

[On2it]

I'm appalled at the racist comments in this thread several of which blame the crash on 'Asian' pilots.

If generalised racist comments about Asians are valid then entirely 'valid' observations can be made about Americans and Australians.

Could it be possibly relevant that:

* A fatigued crew has flown half way round the world
* SFO ATC changes the runway at the last minute
* The crew has to sidestep across on to a visual approach
* The new visual approach has a displaced threshold, no PAPI, no GS

But according to you racists it's entirely their fault because their eyes are the wrong shape...

Time will tell

[Fragman88]

ttowne 1267. Good call on the fuselage ignition source being friction, but if you look at the #2 engine, there is a lot of scorching on the fuselage around the ehaust and it is still attached by a solid-looking umbilical. If it was still getting fuel..... Well we saw with AF in Honolulu and more recently QF in SIN how difficult they are to stop (of which I normally strongly approve).

I've flown many times into SFO on 747 2/3/400, from the North, normally the Bay approach to RH visual cleared visual relatively high, and if you are not ready for getting into the descent fast, it's very easy to get into the high rate/low thrust area close in. 300' per mile has always worked for me and we were also taught on all the A/C I have flown (F27 and up) to know your stabilised 3' ROD on final.

Some good stuff on this post, the inspectors shoul be able to get the recorders, so all will be revealed.

[skkm]

Sounds like they may have been in the <100' RA inhibit zone when the speed decayed sufficient for activation – will the system 'kick in' if the RA subsequently goes back up above 100' threshold (as it appears happened here)?

[ASRAAM]

Suninmyeyes has probably got it close. It seems fairly obvious the aircraft got low and slow, impacting with a high angle of attack, the question of course is why that should happen on such a benign day.

My guess is that the crew were relying on the A/T to control their speed and failed to notice it wasn't . I know there will be howls,especially from those gents who flew older stuff about poor flying skills but I think that those of us who are completely honest with ourselves and fly modern aircraft like the 777 and the Airbus would admit that scanning the engine indications has almost dropped out of the scan pattern and that speed is perhaps not as well scanned as it should be.

Not for one second saying this is how it SHOULD be just being realistic. For most operators the crews are forbidden from practising A/T off approaches ( despite a U/S A/T not being a no dispatch item).

So my guess would be that the A/T was in a mode which did not auto wake up or had dropped out or been disconnected and the crew failed to notice the speed decay. A cognitive failure could also cause someone to press the A/T disconnect on the side of the thrust lever rather than the TOGA on the front of the thrust lever.

[AerocatS2A]

Flingwing47, it is easy enough to add or subtract altitude to account for the difference in distance between the runway threshold and the DME. A very basic example is if the DME is 0.5 NM beyond the threshold then you should use DME distance x 300 - 150'. You can also get anal about threshold crossing heights and touchdown points but given it is just a rough guide I don't see that as being necessary!

[aerostatic]

Similar rule in NZ (from NZ CAR Part 121):

(b) A holder of an air operator certificate must ensure that an aeroplane performing an air operation under the authority of the holder's certificate does not use an aerodrome for landing or taking-off unless the aerodrome has—

(1) rescue fire equipment that is appropriate to the aeroplane type and is acceptable to the Director; and

(2) for turbojet and turbofan powered aeroplanes, an operating visual approach slope indicator system, except when the aeroplane is performing a precision instrument approach that includes glideslope guidance.

[Onceapilot]

Regardless of the final analysis of this crash, it is time that the lack of automated low airspeed warning on approach is addressed. A stick shake at just before the stall is useless on short final. Average line crews have repeatedly proved they are incapable of reliably manually monitoring airspeed when their normal operating mode is ATS or A/T. Modern Nav is quite capable of calculating airspeed and I propose that a suitable audio warning system should be integrated that corelates energy/speed relative to config and approach speed, NOT just Vstall! Just my opinion.

[A pumps]

Ah get with it !

This flight had a heavy crew! 4 pilots !

Do you honestly think that none of these qualified 4 pilots observed a speed decay and decided not to speak up ?

[AerocatS2A]

Does anyone know how accurate the FlightAware data is and where it actually comes from? The last two data points for the accident aircraft have very slow speeds of 109 and 85 knots. Although the altitude still reads as one or two hundred feet I'm wondering if the aircraft was actually on the ground at that point and was sliding to a stop, or if they were airborne and stalling, or if the data just isn't good enough to be drawing any conclusions from it at all.

This is the data I'm talking about: Flight Track Log ? AAR214 ? 06-Jul-2013 ? RKSI / ICN - KSFO ? FlightAware (http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAR214/history/20130706/0730Z/RKSI/KSFO/tracklog)

[Alexe]

The "40 years in aviation" expert on US MSNBC tonight, ex PanAm captain Tom Bunn has just posted this:

Asiana Crash At San Francisco - National Fear of Flying | Examiner.com (http://www.examiner.com/article/asiana-crash-at-san-francisco)

In there he states, "As to height, there is more than adequate guidance; the runway sends ILS signals that show whether or not the plane is on the proper glide path. There is also a visual device to provide proper glide path information."

Seems the Capt needs to check his NOTAMS. Amazing how TV puts on such shallow publicity seekers

[Thomas Doubting]

From the pics on the Reuters site, what looks to be the battered remains of the other engine is well forward of the nose, and on the other side of the runway.

[fcotowerman]

it is apparent that there was no glide slope nor papi available, in Italy our civil aviation authority has a rule that no landing can be carried by a jet plane without papi especially if the approach is done at night or over featureless surfaces like water...
I think this rule is a legacy of one particular accident :

Alitalia Flight 4128 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alitalia_Flight_4128)

[AerocatS2A]

A pumps, the Colgan Dash 8 had two qualified crew who failed to note a speed decay and once it was pointed out to them by the stall warning system, failed to do anything constructive to recover. There have also been FOs who have silently sta there watching their captain fly them into the ground. So yeah, I think sometimes you can have a situation where 4 qualified crew could either not notice a speed decay or if they do, not speak up about it. People are unreliable machines.

[BOAC]

Asiana CEO quoted as saying there was no 'engine problem'.

EDIT: Correction "No mechanical problems"

[Oakape]

Average line crews have repeatedly proved they are incapable of reliably manually monitoring airspeed when their normal operating mode is ATS or A/T

In my experience, they are capable. They just don't believe it is necessary with modern technology and are too blase to be bothered.

Do you honestly think that none of these qualified 4 pilots observed a speed decay or decided not to speak up ?

Yes, as a matter of fact I believe that it is entirely possible! Whether or not this was the case in this accident remains to be seen.

[dsc810]

Passenger with any sense will indeed take their hand/carry on bags if this is at all possible in the circumstances. They ain't stupid:
They know full well that loosing their personal documentation, passports etc in those bags is going to cause major grief and aggro.
They know loosing their expensive cameras/computer/whatevers etc will start an endless round of argy-bargy with insurance companies. All of whom will try and delay/deny payment - particularly when it's returned "damaged" or mysteriously "lost" and exactly when it was damaged/lost becomes an issue. Then the insurance companies will start demanding purchase receipts for said items...........

Yup, I'd take my stuff as well

[fullforward]

Best posts from more than 350 so far.
Congrats.
Actually some of the few ones worth reading...:ok:
Guess you guys came very close, let's see.

[maxrpm]

Does anybody have a source stating that there really was no PAPI at the time of the accident?

[wasthatit]

"In our business, Mr. Murphy is always lurking not too far in the background and with these safety enhancers unavailable, Statistics and Probability once again formed an alliance and the dreaded Swiss Cheese holes lined up...." Jasavir

Jasavir, I couldn't agree with you more. By taking both the GS and PAPI out of service at the same time there was an extra hole cut in the cheese that probably needn't have been there.

If this is the case then I hope we can learn the lesson that the temporary removal of a safety barrier might have 'no immediate effect' but it does have an effect.

[A4]

@dcs810.... so if you're in a burning hull after an accident you'd really take your stuff with you? Have you thought about what the 10 second delay might mean to the people 20 deep behind you? IMHO anyone caught on camera taking possessions from a crashed aircraft where people died due to being unable to get out in time should be prosecuted for manslaughter. It's selfish stupidity at it worst. Shame on you.

[HPSOV L]

SFO and their notorious ATC instructed 'slam dunk' visual approaches from downwind have resulted in so many incidents at our airline that it is a regular item in recurent simulator training.
Throw in the lack of visual or electronic glideslope guidance and the holes are lined up. True, you can set up an LNAV/VNAV profile but this requires a bit of heads down time in the box at a busy phase, not easy unless you are expecting the manouvre.
Airport officials are probably hoping no-one mentions the similar incident last month. Ooops, I just did.

[viribus unitis]

dsc810 (http://www.pprune.org/members/273859-dsc810) Yup, I'd take my stuff as wellOh dear ...

[NamelessWonder]

Passenger with any sense will indeed take their hand/carry on bags if this is at all possible in the circumstances. They ain't stupid:
They know full well that loosing their personal documentation, passports etc in those bags is going to cause major grief and aggro.
They know loosing their expensive cameras/computer/whatevers etc will start an endless round of argy-bargy with insurance companies. All of whom will try and delay/deny payment - particularly when it's returned "damaged" or mysteriously "lost" and exactly when it was damaged/lost becomes an issue. Then the insurance companies will start demanding purchase receipts for said items...........

Yup, I'd take my stuff as well And therein lies the root of that particular problem - utter selfishness and greed. :ugh:

[nitpicker330]

Don't you think as the Engines were ripped off and the AC power dropped off line the tracking data would be lost :D
So anything after the wack on the wall would be invalid data .:ugh:

[silverstrata]

What a strange idea, pilots being required to fly their airplane to a visual landing on a clear blue day....who'd expect that?


Yup. Unfortunately that is the way aviation is going. More automation, more specialisation, less manual flying. So when called upon to go manual and visual, this may be the first time in, well, a couple of years. Suddenly the pressure is on.

Just as an example: old schoolers will use a 3x profile for the approach (300' per mile), with no additions here (sea level). Recently I asked for height call outs for an approach to a sea-level airport (as pre-briefed) and the f/o pulled out his iPhone. He had an App for that!

So I asked for the altitude at 8nm - "err hold on a minute..." (frantic keying)
So I asked for the altitude at 6nm - "err hold on a minute..." (frantic keying)
So I asked for the altitude at 4nm - "err hold on a minute..." (frantic keying)

Never did get an altitude check. This is not rocket science, you know.

[worldpilot]

ASRAAM

clear blue skies and 4 highly trained pilots at the controls and none is able to scan the speed indicators?

I won't speculate on the flight envelope that led to this situation but the circumstances (charlie weather and 4 pilots) couldn't be better though.

It is certain that situational awareness in the cockpit must have been unusual for the RWY 28L approach to SFO.

[nitpicker330]

NO IT DOES NOT JUSTIFY TAKING YOUR BAGS WITH YOU.:D

Wow some people.........:{

If you want to take your bag then:-
1/ sit in a window seat
2/ wait and be the last one off

Because I'm not waiting for you.

In accidents like this "seconds" can make all the difference.

Ever heard of a British Airtours 737 Fire on takeoff in 1985 Manchester and how many died from smoke and not the Fire.....?

[NamelessWonder]

Eclan - There's no reason why, given enough time, a bag can't be carried by someone with enough coordination to do so.Taking what's in your lap is one thing - getting a wheel-type bag out of an overhead locker when you are close to the front of a queue to get off a smouldering wreck when several of the other exits are U/S is imbecillic.:eek: (look at the woman in blue and all the people behind her!)

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/130706190825-san-francisco-plane-crash-18b-story-top.jpg

[ShyTorque]

"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.

What a fantastic example of leadership (not)...... :ugh:

[changer]

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

From Yahoo Canada
with 43 hours on the 777, this may have been an OE trip (with a check pilot)

[mm43]

What Mode are we in?

Time will tell, but reference to ADIRU Accident Submission (http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~johnson/papers/ISSC09/ADIRU_Accident_Submission.pdf) will IMHO feature in factors leading to this unfortunate accident.

[NamelessWonder]

First image I have seen of what appears to be the "missing "engine

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSXUbIVxlbq8YG9S9sko59IbJHysxYzmtwrbkM8RxM ZRj-CTcpV

[Cows getting bigger]

Swiss cheese.

Assuming many of the above assumptions have some weight, it seems to me that the ethos of our flight safety culture has been to add more layers of cheese by the application of various technologies thus reducing the chances of the holes lining-up. Maybe by doing this we have taken our eye off the ball somewhat and not noticed that the holes in the human factors layers have become significantly bigger.

[nitpicker330]

Wow the Engine went a long way from the fuselage!! Lucky no other Aircraft was collected by it...:eek:

[yssy.ymel]

Least of all the UA 744 holding short. They must have had a good view of the incident. Their story will be worth hearing.

[Ranmore]

SFO and their notorious ATC instructed 'slam dunk' visual approaches from downwind have resulted in so many incidents at our airline that it is a regular item in recurent simulator training.
Throw in the lack of visual or electronic glideslope guidance and the holes are lined up.

Well said - I couldn't agree more.

I would agree that as a professional pilot we should of course be more than capable of rising to the challenge of such an ATC imposed "slam dunk" approach - however please consider these factors that could all conspire to affect pilot performance
>a long 10 to 12 hour flight
>middle of the night body clock time
>to an airport that you may be not so familiar with (long haul pilot roster - you may only visit the destination once in two or three years)
>a slam dunk procedure that would be a challenge at the best of times (I bet even the short-haul/ domestic colleagues get it "not quite right" on occasions.

For what it's worth - I am of the opinion that slam dunk approaches for "Heavy" jets like the B777 these have no place at a major international airports.
In a "heavy" jet it's always (in my experience) a challenge to "get down & slow down" and become stabilised on this particular approach at SFO - something that sometimes ATC fail to appreciate.

Throw into the mix this runway allegedly not having any functioning ILS or even visual vertical reference guidance system - then it all adds to the possibility of "an accident waiting to happen."

Unfortunately first impressions regarding the Asiana B777 tend to point toward something awry in the handling of the aircraft (that horrible phrase "pilot error")
However - I will be watching and listening with interest to see what the FAA/NTSB have to say about these ATC procedures onto 28L & 28R at SFO.

[DaveReidUK]

Does anyone know how accurate the FlightAware data is and where it actually comes from? The last two data points for the accident aircraft have very slow speeds of 109 and 85 knots. Although the altitude still reads as one or two hundred feet I'm wondering if the aircraft was actually on the ground at that point and was sliding to a stop, or if they were airborne and stalling, or if the data just isn't good enough to be drawing any conclusions from it at all.How accurate? The answer is, in all likelihood, not very.

The data on FlightAware will have come from one (or both) of two possible sources.

One is FAA radar data, via ASDI, though that's fairly coarse data and I don't see how speeds that precise could have been resolved from a radar feed.

The second is ADS-B data which, depending on the aircraft fit, is likely to be both considerably more accurate and have better time resolution.

BUT, with ADS-B the caveats are:

Speed will almost certainly be groundspeed rather than TAS/IAS and so without knowing the wind on the nose should be used with caution.

Altitude is relative to QNE (in other words it's effectively a flight level, even below the transition altitude) so you would need to know the local QNH at the time of the accident to derive height AMSL or AGL.

[AN2 Driver]

Passenger with any sense will indeed take their hand/carry on bags if this is at all possible in the circumstances. ......

Yup, I'd take my stuff as well


First of all, I DO understand this statements on the point of view of passengers usually not involed in aviation. They usually take their "precious" items in carry on because they are exactly scared of loosing them in checked bags. Or in an accident like this. Neither does a policy of LCC's charging for checked in baggage help this situation!

Secondly, it is not unknown that people do react totally unreasonable in such extreme situations. People tend to set their priorities totally wrong and that is why we do get unnecessary victims at accidents, fires and other incidents. We won't be much able to change that. Cabin crews only have a limited amount of power over this as well. In an evac, they will tell anyone to leave their stuff and enforce it where possible, yet, if someone with a bag turns up at the slide, what can you do? Stop the flow and wrestle the bag of the guy or just throw him out with it?

Here, the media COULD help after an accident like that. Instead of babbling wild theories, they could show the problems and make it clear that anyone who does that WILL endanger the rest of the passengers. They might even point out in this instance that baggage in the hold has a better chance of "survival" than in the cabin (from these pics here...). Yes, sometimes you need unreasonable arguments in order to bring across the essential.

My practice since long has been to have my papers, passport, cards e.t.c on my person, in a pocket from where they can't fall in a hurry. I usually carry my phone in the same pocket. I also have a very flat strap bag which holds tablet, tickets and so on next to me and which I can carry under my jacket (which I am usually wearing for take off and landing). This way, the problem with papers and immediate stuff won't arise. And I would not be tempted to dig in the overhead bin either.

We here who are aviation folks should simply not forget that passengers usually are not the likes of us who KNOW the risks and problems. They will try to safeguard their possessions and it is against their instincts not to do so, particularly if they can't see any direct danger and are shell shocked.

[A4]

For all those espousing the benefits/rights/convenience of taking your possessions with you, might I suggest you do a bit of research about "flashover" fires? Perhaps this might educate you a little on the risks of delaying an evacuation and why some of the Professionals on here are getting so vociferous about it. :hmm:

The modern travelling public seem to have a "I know best attitude" hence the inattention to the safety demo, mobile phones going on as you rollout on the runway, standing up whilst taxiing in etc etc.

Please, for you own sakes and those around you just be a bit more adult - it might just save your life.

[silverstrata]

On2it

I'm appalled at the racist comments in this thread several of which blame the crash on 'Asian' pilots.

If generalised racist comments about Asians are valid then entirely 'valid' observations can be made about Americans and Australians.



Right on cue, here comes the liberal apologist. Welcome, On2it, what took you so long? But sorry, we know your game, On2it, because we have had 15 years of this tripe, but it ain't going to work no more. We have become immune.

What you want to do here is close down honest debate and deny the truth, because the truth hurts sometimes, doesn't it, On2it. Sorry, matey, but we will not take that tripe any more. We need the truth, if we are to achieve genuine flight safety.

And the truth is, On2it, that not all cultures in this world are the same. Can you handle that, On2it? Or are you going to deny the truth and deny reality? I can see you now, with your fingers in your ears, screaming: 'la,la, la, I cannot hear you.'

And the reality of human life means that in some cultures:

Only the rich and influential become pilots, because the profession is expensive and has glamour.
But rich and influential sons do not always want to become pilots.
So some rich and influential sons scrape through the course doing the absolute bare minimum.
And some of these rich and influential sons should not have been given command of bicycle, let alone a wide-body.
But they are pushed through the course anyway.
Because his father is rich and powerful, and the instructor want to keep his job.
So the instructor holds his breath, and awards him his wings.
And these same rich and influential sons then spend the whole flight chatting up the prettiest hostess and posing for photos (with open neck and shades), rather than taking the job seriously.
And you fly behind these guys sometimes.

Welcome to the real world, On2it.

[Toruk Macto]

It would be quicker to allow some passengers to take their bag . Telling them to leave their bag behind would increase the time to evacuate with the ensuing arguments or feigned no understand look .

[silverstrata]

First image I have seen of what appears to be the "missing "engine



If the engine was on full power as the aircraft 'touched down', then it would tend to shoot forward under its own thrust, as it detaches. This is probably what happened here.

[Uplinker]

but I think that those of us who are completely honest with ourselves and fly modern aircraft like the 777 and the Airbus would admit that scanning the engine indications has almost dropped out of the scan pattern and that speed is perhaps not as well scanned as it should be.

What ? NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!! For goodness sake scan the instruments people !!

Are you pilots or amoebas?


And if you need an iphone app to work out altitude versus distance; Go back to flight school. Seriously. This is really important.

[RoyHudd]

Correct Silver. Some people groups, like Asian and Arab are notorious for having favourite sons (not daughters) shuffled through training and onto the line. The low competence levels exist in about 20-25% of locals, which is 20-25% too many for safety. Africa can be worse. These people end up with commands, which is when things become dangerous. This system does not function in Westernized nations.

(You can exclude the Japs from this generalization but a whole host of ME and Far East companies spring to mind. Just ask any Western trainer and you will learn this.)

This is not a racist comment; distinguishing different groups of people by their abilities or lack of is not racism. Air safety should never be politically correct.

[N380UA]

Excellent post. The QAR should be able to give first data on A/T settings and actual thrust produced. The FDR and CVR would, if indeed that is the case, support that theory as well as the statement from the flight crew.
As far as flight training and procedures are concerned, our profession has changed from flying the aircraft as pilots to flying the aircraft as system administrators. This inherent and latent danger will become clearer over the coming years and hasn’t just started with this or the AF447 flight.
For the investigation of this accident, it would also be of interest if the crew, however augmented, originated from Shanghai or took the flight at Incheon and what their FDTL and FTL were.

[de facto]

Air safety should never be politically correct.

Finally some sensible sentence after 20 pages of utter:mad:

[skit_uk]

One of the other big issues with pax taking their baggage would be the risk of damage to the slides possibly resulting in slide deflating. Not to mention heavy baggage hitting people at the bottom of the slides and generally slowing down the evacuation.

[silverstrata]

Uplinker:

What ? NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!! For goodness sake scan the instruments people !! Are you pilots or amoebas?

And if you need an iphone app to work out altitude versus distance; Go back to flight school. Seriously. This is really important.



Be careful what you are promoting, Uplinker. It is comments like this that have new f/os playing with the FMC at 200' on final approach (visual or otherwise).

This was a visual approach. The big picture is outside, and not in the cockpit. At most you need a quick glance at the airspeed every 10 seconds or so, that's all. The NFP should be making a call out of 'on profile' or not. And we all trust the NFP, don't we?

Remember power and attitude? A stable aircraft on profile will remain, well, stable and on profile. And if you cannot feel an engine rollback or a windshear change through the seat of your pants, well perhaps you are one of those who should have gone into the bicycle courier business.

[threemiles]

Quote:
Does anyone know how accurate the FlightAware data is and where it actually comes from? The last two data points for the accident aircraft have very slow speeds of 109 and 85 knots. Although the altitude still reads as one or two hundred feet I'm wondering if the aircraft was actually on the ground at that point and was sliding to a stop, or if they were airborne and stalling, or if the data just isn't good enough to be drawing any conclusions from it at all.
How accurate? The answer is, in all likelihood, not very.

The data on FlightAware will have come from one (or both) of two possible sources.

One is FAA radar data, via ASDI, though that's fairly coarse data and I don't see how speeds that precise could have been resolved from a radar feed.

The second is ADS-B data which, depending on the aircraft fit, is likely to be both considerably more accurate and have better time resolution.

BUT, with ADS-B the caveats are:

Speed will almost certainly be groundspeed rather than TAS/IAS and so without knowing the wind on the nose should be used with caution.

Altitude is relative to QNE (in other words it's effectively a flight level, even below the transition altitude) so you would need to know the local QNH at the time of the accident to derive height AMSL or AGL.

Speed is always GS in kts
At time of accident (1900Z):
Wind 210/07
QNH 1009.

Speed showing almost correct, altimeter a little on the high side.

The appraoch track and last three positions are here:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/e47bckfnefp9hgs/eU7Tw_WfBM

It appears after what's a normal south traffic pattern 105 kts right before the runway threshold is very slow, also 123 kts on the previous position is slow. The last position is the wreckage.

Reminds me of the Amsterdam TK 737 crash, when autothrottle disengagement went undetected.

[Centaurus]

Interesting bit on the safety culture at KAL.



All motherhood statements and studiously avoided the delicate sensitivities of Korean managements. Nothing really about culture and aircraft accidents.

[Rashid Bacon]

Airbus and Boeing need to grapple with the problem of poor handling skills v autopilot usage.

From the mid 1980's ever since the A320 was introduced, there has been a slow but steady reduction in manual flying skills as the manufacturers focused on the capacity of automatic flight control systems.

Various accidents have highlighted just how important these manual handling skills are, and also that there is currently no flight control system that can guarantee this accident today and others previously can be 100% avoided. Add cultural elements into the mix and pretty obviously there is a real problem.

Until such failsafe systems are available (or even pilotless passenger aircraft), we need to go back to basics and teach people to fly again.

A visual approach is a visual approach, PROVIDED one has been trained how to fly it!

[jimsmitty01]

Looking at some of the speculation, a high energy approach would have been a particular threat on this occasion. I see a lot of people complaining that modern pilots can't fly the aeroplane manually anymore, but there is a lot more involved other than just disconnecting the autopilot and flight directors and flying visually to the runway.

In a 300T jet careful energy management is very important, and visual approaches need prior planning. If ATC request a short notice visual approach, and you haven't planned for it (i.e. your too high and fast) then pilots should not be accepting such requests. ATC should be working for pilots not the other way around.

A second option would be to accept the request, but state the number of miles required to touch down.

Thirdly, if it all goes wrong and you can't get the aeroplane stablised by the landing "gate", then its a missed approach and everyone lives to fight another day.

Lets wait for the report from the NTSB and try and learn from this event.

[silverstrata]

Royhudd:

Air safety should never be politically correct.

De Facto:
Finally some sensible sentence after 20 pages of utter :mad:



Well said Royhudd. More succinct than my post, so well said.

And well seconded, De Facto - we need to nip these liberal fantasists in the bud. Remember that denying that there is a difference between cultures is a racist position, and so there is nothing quite as racist as someone who screams 'racism'.

[yssy.ymel]

"It appears after what's a normal south traffic pattern 105 kts right before the runway threshold is very slow, also 123 kts on the previous position is slow. The last position is the wreckage."

Actually, no, that is not the last position. It's quite a way back from there.

[A4]

@Eclan

I'm alarmed that you think most pilots, and you apparently, don't know about "flashover" - were they asleep in the SEP Training? What have I said that indicates I'm "panicked" about anything outside the box? Seriously.

[wasthatit]

"we need to nip these liberal fantasists in the bud"

I 100% agree that there is no place in aviation for either political correctness or nepotism, but nipping people in the bud just because they have a different position smacks a bit of 'captains right mate'

[NigelOnDraft]

Airbus and Boeing need to grapple with the problem of poor handling skills v autopilot usage.I am curious why companies who build aeroplanes "need to grapple" with airline pilot handling skills? Surely that is the domain of airlines and regulators?

Airbus for instance are quite clear on providing systems and manuals for manual flying / visual circuits. It is the airlines that fail to provide the training / practice / and currency - and above all instill a culture of "fear" of taking some/all automatics out to keep skills current. And regulators on failing to keep the airlines in check?

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Do we know who the handling pilot was? Perhaps another case of Captain getting it wrong and the F/O not speaking up?

[JAARule]

No, Squirrel, we don't know much apart from a 777 crashed, which is why this thread is filled with complete and utter BS.

[roving]

Some are not so quick to lay the blame on the aircrew ...

This from a US metals investors forum ...

Asiana Flight 214 Incident at SFO | TF Metals Report (http://www.tfmetalsreport.com/comment/329436)

see also this link referred to in the link above ...

Feds Warn of Delays at SFO Due to Sequester Cuts | KQED News Fix (http://blogs.kqed.org/newsfix/2013/04/22/airlines-warn-of-delays-at-sfo/)

However the US NTSB 'shares out' the blame, the simple fact is that neither ILS and PAPI were operational. Added to which the number of air traffic controllers on duty may have been reduced by the US sequester (the automatic budget cuts applied proportionately to all Federal spending, following the failure of Congress to agree the President's budget).

[JAARule]

I stand corrected, Mr. Squirrel:


South Korean transport ministry said Sunday that there were four crew members assigned to the cockpit.

It identified the chief pilot as Lee Jeong-min, who has worked at Asiana since 1996.

The co-pilot, Lee Kang-guk, joined Asiana in 1994 as a pilot trainee and won his passenger jet pilot’s license in 2001

It seems Mr. Lee was the handling pilot.

[OrvilleW]

JAARule....the one sensible comment in all of this. And we still don't.

[McBruce]

2 pax ejected from the rear. I suspect the cabbies in the rear where able to walk away due the multi point harness?

If this was another CFIT then I think the going rate for western trained pilots just went up. Sad affairs that one can't land an aircraft in cavok. That's real basic stuff and criminal that people have lost their lives....

[What Traffic]

As a passenger: If the crew is commanding an emergency evacuation, and you are in the aisle attempting to recover baggage and are between me and the nearest exit, I will do my best to disable you, and if you get trampled by the rest of the passengers on their way out, TFB.

I understand that there are cultural differences that may lead many passengers to place inadvisable value on their baggage. If so, it is the responsibility of the carrier to staff their cabin crew adequately to ensure that such passengers are motivated effectively.

I can hear the protests already. "They'd need a team of UFC fighters to get everyone off the airplane in good time!".

Too bad. It's a safety issue. Either correct it, or stop flying. If every carrier that encountered the issue stopped flying, the market would adapt to deal with it. Some people could no longer afford to fly. The rest would pay what it took to get where they needed to go.

I expect some more one post wonders to come on and start crying about racism. It's not about race. It's about culture. This also applies to CRM. I suspect that this will be lost on those commenters.

[rdr]

You're asking for trouble when you are expected to perform optimally after an 11 hr pacific crossing with the ILS and VASIS turned off, regardless of the CAVOK conditions.
Aviation safety is about catering for the weakest in the chain through prevention, not a cowboy can do attitude, so prevalent in the profession.

[slowto280]

Lack of motors, sturdy wing and 'in the dirt' reasons for little (if any) exterior fire??? Just wondering. (No mention by me of low fuel state.)

[drivez]

"Be careful what you are promoting, Uplinker. It is comments like this that have new f/os playing with the FMC at 200' on final approach (visual or otherwise).

This was a visual approach. The big picture is outside, and not in the cockpit. At most you need a quick glance at the airspeed every 10 seconds or so, that's all. The NFP should be making a call out of 'on profile' or not. And we all trust the NFP, don't we?

Remember power and attitude? A stable aircraft on profile will remain, well, stable and on profile. And if you cannot feel an engine rollback or a windshear change through the seat of your pants, well perhaps you are one of those who should have gone into the bicycle courier business"

Silver strata whilst I very much respect your opinion, I think there is a huge difference between a pilot going in to the FMC at 200' and a pilot scanning his airspeed, VSI and ED coming down the approach as Uplinker seemed to promote.

Even on a visual approach, that basic scan has to remain surely, I'm not talking about a complete heads in, but as you said a glance every few seconds. A stable aircraft on profile coming down a G/s is one thing, one where the power remains constant and the attitude is changing to get the "picture" is another.

I don't think anyone at this stage can conclusively point the finger at anything. Particularly not the pilots, because if some unknown mechanical failure has occurred or other phenomena then in a few days time we could be commending the pilots fantastic flying ability on these very pages. If the investigation shows pilot error, then this should become about identifying why those errors occurred. None of us are infallible, and none of us perfect, however learning from others mistakes can make us more aware of those short comings.

[What Traffic]

Aviation safety is about catering for the weakest in the chain through prevention, not a cowboy can do attitude, so prevalent in the profession.

Strongly agree. A healthy culture of safety works from the bottom of the risk pyramid up. On the other hand, pilots, trainers, and staffers should be held to, and select from, the top of the pyramid. Institutional and regulatory standards should foster a high level of competence. In this case, we may find failures on both ends. That is yet to be seen.

The important thing is that in considering safety, the after action review should be ruthless and impartial. Just because one side erred does not mean the other should be absolved. In the case of air accidents, there are often numerous factors which arranged themselves just right to kill people. It's a dangerous mindset that calls on failures on one side to acquit the other.

[overthewing]

From the few eye-witness reports I've read/heard, it doesn't sound as if the cabin crew were organising the evacuation. It sounds as if the passengers were managing the situation largely by themselves. So there may not have been many loud voices shouting 'No hand luggage! Jump!'

If Korean flight crew are dubiously trained, is the cabin crew training any better?

I always travel with my passport, documents, money and cards in a small pouch that I keep with me and usually have attached to my person at take-off and landing. I'm quite surprised that this isn't standard advice from airlines, and equally surprised that duty-free outlets don't cash in with sales of small cross-body pouches.

[lurkio]

As I don't have the charts here and can only work off what is on the net can someone confirm for me that the last two data points on the Flight Aware track log for the speeds of 109 and 85 knots are actually west of the 28 threshold? That would explain the really slow speeds.

[pull-up-terrain]

I wonder if the first officer with 40 hours on type played a role in this crash?

[cats_five]

And therein lies the root of that particular problem - utter selfishness and greed. :ugh:

Some of us of course would be thinking about the medication in our bags...

[BBK]

Silverstrata

Do you have access to the FDR and CVR? Are you involved in the NTSB investigation? In fact, is it worth even conducting the investigation. It is obvious that it was just a case of slitty eyed incompetents who screwed up. Not MY view obviously as I'll explain.

Alternatively, we could let the NTSB get on with their job in a thorough, methodical and professional manner. I'm not saying that the crew did not or could not have made errors but in the absence of any info I would be a moron to make accusations without evidence. You don't have that evidence either but it doesn't stop you making unsubstantiated claims.

I'm well aware of the alleged culture in some Asian carriers. Maybe that will prove to be a factor but this is way too early to make that accusation. The word prejudiced, and I would apply that to you, is appropriate because you are "pre judging".

Regarding visual approaches I don't think it's right that a long haul crew, after a long duty, who don't, by the nature of long haul flying get much practise landing have to fly an approach without any guidance. I love visual approaches....if I'm in a Cub or Chipmunk! But after a long day or night not conducive to flight safety.

The guys who have experience on the 777 who have posted regarding the modes pertaining FLCH, A/T etc are contributing something worthwhile. Thank you.

[Mimpe]

I've never felt comfortable with Prof Reason's "swiss cheese safety" description. It implies that environments such as aviation and medical care are naturally benign, with multiple protections in place, all functioning to optimum. Sounds nice on paper.

My experience of adverse incidents in both industries is that often "protections" are chronically suboptimal or below the reasonable level at which they can function as genuine "cheese", and many situations have at best only one layer of protection before disaster. Skilled operators see situations where protections are weak at an early stage in the evolution of the potential problem.

So.. if the papi is down, the ILS is down, you are forced to fly a difficult late approach profile, you may not practice hand flown landings with A/T disconnected, the PNF may not want to tell you "low and slow" and he/she are tired anyway, theres a bit of language problem and not much familiarity with the local environment, etc etc etc ... then there is not that much cheese around in the first place, just sub-threshold protections.

[fft100]

it might sound flippant, but many of you probably havnt considered the problem foreign pax at any American airport would have without passport/visa/est etc.

With the current mentality at the USA gateways, I can see many nationalities not being let in (maybe none) and that could be a *major* problem for many people. Pilots/cabin crew are probably ok as they are on a checked list afaik. The ability to be able to contact people (I.e. the phone as I cant remember numbers either) is also essential. And as for money (ATM cards)....

It is a huge incentive to get the bag with the passports, money and phone. rollabags is a bit far though....

Perhaps passengers should be given a small clear plastic bag to put in phone, money and passport which they can keep with them whilst on the plane.

[llondel]

I've never felt comfortable with Prof Reason's "swiss cheese safety" description. It implies that environments such as aviation and medical care are naturally benign, with multiple protections in place, all functioning to optimum. Sounds nice on paper.

You're looking at it wrong. The Swiss cheese is in slices. Each slice has holes in it, which reflects the understanding that the process or check that it represents will not catch everything. However, with enough good slices, there won't be a hole through the whole stack and something will catch all the errors. Sometimes, as with this one, there may be extra holes in some of the layers, such as "airfield landing aids not functioning" and you've got a failure path all the way through because it's lined up with "pilot didn't notice X" or "Instrument gave incorrect reading" or similar. Sometimes it's as far back as "pilots were trained to do something which turns out to be wrong" (AA 191) and the fix is to teach them not to do that any more.

[Willie Everlearn]

I'm not sure if this has been posted yet or not, but Goodrich are the supplier of FADEC to both Asiana and British Airways engines.
Judging by the "accounts" and "animation" this crew may well have had thrust issues over the approach lights.
Eerily similar to BA at LHR.

[roving]

I can try ... but here is the direct link to it ...


http://www.koreadaily.com/_data/article_img/newsis/NISI20130707_0008409256.jpg

[Squawk_ident]

@AerocatS2A

Does anyone know how accurate the FlightAware data is and where it actually comes from? The last two data points for the accident aircraft have very slow speeds of 109 and 85 knots. Although the altitude still reads as one or two hundred feet I'm wondering if the aircraft was actually on the ground at that point and was sliding to a stop, or if they were airborne and stalling, or if the data just isn't good enough to be drawing any conclusions from it at all.


As DaveReidUK said, the FA sources is the ADS-B transmission from the equipped aircraft. The source is likely to come from FR24. The source seems to be a feeder at, or near KOAK. The last speed recorded (85kt) from this source is the same that have been mentioned here and indicated by FA.
The last "good" position of the aircraft has been received at:
37.6123 -122.3595 with an altitude of 75ft and speed 113kt for-384 fpm. The position is reliable, but the other parameters are delayed ones because the a/c was on the ground at these coordinates. The previous ADS-B received transmission indicates a position at 37.5954 -122.319 (approx 3925m/2.12NM from 28L threshold) at 1100ft with 149kt and -1535fpm rod. The previous was received at 37.5726 -122.2652 at 9307m/5NM from THR with 2175ft/186kt/-1152fpm.
The very last position received of the a/c is not coherent because of the receiver/feeder software and/or FR24 server. Some software or setting allows a "projection" of the aircraft and the server may also react with some delays.
I think that the wreck is at 37.6135 -122.3646 from what I can see on various TV footage.

[green granite]

Someone, a few pages back, queried how we knew the PAPIs were out:

NOTAM SFO 07/046

!SFO 07/046 SFO RWY 28L PAPI OTS WEF 1307062219
CREATED: 06 Jul 2013 22:19:00
SOURCE: KOAKYFYX

also:
NOTAM SFO 06/005

!SFO 06/005 SFO NAV ILS RWY 28L GP OTS WEF 1306011400-1308222359
CREATED: 01 Jun 2013 13:40:00
SOURCE: KOAKYFYX

For all current SFO NOTAMs: NOTAMS for San Francisco International Airport (http://ourairports.mobi/airports/KSFO/notams.html)

[Lost in Saigon]

I can try ... but here is the direct link to it ...


http://www.koreadaily.com/_data/article_img/newsis/NISI20130707_0008409256.jpg



It looks like your post got deleted. Probably because it was over-sized. Here it is re-sized.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17/msowsun/photo%20stuff/Photo13/05a_zpsf0c7b135.jpg

[roving]

http://media.oregonlive.com/oregonian/photo/2013/07/13049784-essay.jpg

[roving]

http://media.oregonlive.com/oregonian/photo/2013/07/-30febcea587a6088.jpg

[BOAC]

Still interested in the PAPI situation]NOTAM SFO 07/046

!SFO 07/046 SFO RWY 28L PAPI OTS WEF 1307062219
CREATED: 06 Jul 2013 22:19:00
SOURCE: KOAKYFYX - that is post crash probably due to damage.

Post #74 says 'not working' and post #78 says 'working'?? Any NOTAMS around to clarify?

[Al Murdoch]

Why would they notam the PAPIs out of action post-crash when the whole AD was notam'd closed?

[longi]

Plane, engines not at fault in Asiana crash: CEO (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/07/us-usa-crash-asiana-ceo-idUSBRE96604O20130707)

Not sure why that guy would say this in his position. Lends credibility to the hypothesis being developed here.

[nigegilb]

Elcan made this comment;

"Some bright spark pointed out that there's been hundreds of succesful approaches since these works have been underway with no mishaps but this is nothing more than the amount of time it took for the inevitable to happen.

I suspect we will find out in the next year or two as legal due process following this accident gets underway that operating an international airport at which aircraft operated by airlines with poor safety records (like OZ) arrive after 10, 12, 14 hour and longer flights, without a temporary PAPI or VASIS let alone a glideslope and expecting nothing to go wrong means they are complicit in the end result.

Applying aggressive ATC standards, which are aimed at the level of familiarity of the locals who operate into the field on a regular basis, to these hapless foreign operators after ULR flights, knowing they are not the sharpest, does not help."

I am frankly staggered that an international airfield is allowed to operate in such a fashion, no ILS no PAPIS and frequent very high feed-ins due to a compressed and difficult airspace situation. There is a lot more to this tragedy than the initial reaction implies.

[DaveReidUK]

The last "good" position of the aircraft has been received at:
37.6123 -122.3595 with an altitude of 75ft and speed 113kt for-384 fpm. The position is reliable, but the other parameters are delayed ones because the a/c was on the ground at these coordinates.Yes, while the aircraft is airborne it sends position/altitude and groundspeed/track angle in separate transmissions, not at the same time. The software that produces the data feed used by FlightAware and other online resources wrongly combines this data so as to imply that those value are sent simultaneously.

The previous ADS-B received transmission indicates a position at 37.5954 -122.319 (approx 3925m/2.12NM from 28L threshold) at 1100ft with For reasons I don't understand, the FlightAware data quotes height at 100' intervals, despite the fact that the aircraft is sending it in 25' increments.

[Jazz Hands]

According to CNN, the two deceased individuals found on the runway were both holders of Chinese passports. Would flight attendants have had Chinese passports?

Asiana has confirmed their identities. Both are 16-year old Chinese students. :(

[Uplinker]

Be careful what you are promoting, Uplinker. It is comments like this that have new f/os playing with the FMC at 200' on final approach (visual or otherwise).

This was a visual approach. The big picture is outside, and not in the cockpit. At most you need a quick glance at the airspeed every 10 seconds or so, that's all. The NFP should be making a call out of 'on profile' or not. And we all trust the NFP, don't we?

Remember power and attitude? A stable aircraft on profile will remain, well, stable and on profile. And if you cannot feel an engine rollback or a windshear change through the seat of your pants, well perhaps you are one of those who should have gone into the bicycle courier business.




Er, hang on a minute, silver. I was replying to someone who said they didn't keep the airspeed in their scan. Don't you think that's important? I certainly do !

Power and attitude flying is valid, but are you really telling me that you set a fixed power from memory and then leave it and only look out of the window? Of course you don't. How do you know if the A/C is stable if you're not looking at the instrumentation??? And what about following ground speed mini?

A visual approach still needs you to look at the instruments. It does not imply that anyone should be programming the FMGEC at 200'

[rdr]

CAPTJN
What... on a CAVOK day!?!? Ya gotta be kidding me. What in the hell is so difficult for a so-called competent airman to accomplish a visual approach? As a check airman, a skipper has to demonstrate a visual approach without the use of an ILS, VOR, ADF, or automation. They are required to land in the touchdown zone on centerline. What excuse could they offer had all the airport experienced a total power failure, ei, primary, and backup generators, especially under ideal CAVOK conditions?




Its obvious that you are a "little Fokker pilot" flying 6 sector days, 10X5.
Think out of your box to guys who are in the bin through the nite for 11 hrs.
Then in the morning sun, having to shoot an approach with no profile guidance. And guess what its their 2nd leg in 2 weeks.

SFO is darned stupid to notam their way to shutting down multiple aids, leaving a foreign crew, who probably last came to their field 4 months ago, barely able to speak English, the luxury of a visual approach.

If this is not asking for it, you can have the cheese, and eat it.

[steelbranch]

What is a slam dunk approach? Get 'em in and down asap?

[Captain Calamity]

With every year that passes people seem to get ruder, greedier and more selfish.

I can't see this situation changing any time soon, and even here on this thread we have people saying "but what about my medication" and "what about my passport". If I am stuck behind you in a smoke filled cabin I am more concerned about getting the hell out of there ASAP than your need to save a trip to the local pharmacist and embassy :mad:

I think there is an easy and affordable answer - lock the overhead bins for takeoff and landing, and tell people that they will only be unlocked after takeoff when the seatbelt light is out, and also when the A/C is chocked at the gate with the engines stopped. It might also help stop the increasing number of halfwits who feel the need to be stood in the aisle with their bag before the A/C has even arrived at the gate.

[Mimpe]

This is a fascinating eyewitness account from the BBC, with the last part f the approach observed and described - the man mentions that the aircraft control " seemed quite wobbly" compared to the usual aircraft he observes living in the area.

BBC News - San Francisco Asiana Airlines crash: 'Plane was out of control' (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23214500)

[Buttscratcher]

PAPI Glide path guidance is mandatory for an RPT jet ( over here, anyway )

Therefore, brother Despegue, it must be kinda important
....... You'd think, huh

But since you reckon it's an over-rated enhancement for folks of lesser ability than yourself, then perhaps you can pen a strongly worded letter to the controlling Authority seeking a dispensation when flying overseas.

[themel]

Re the hand luggage, pax will always try to take it off with them.
On BA38 they did as well
Caught on camera: Last moments of Flight BA38's dramatic descent into Heathrow | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-509646/Caught-camera-Last-moments-Flight-BA38s-dramatic-descent-Heathrow.html)

You can see the guy coming out door 2R he has hand luggage

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/01_04/p31plane3DM_800x512.jpg

[Locked door]

I departed SFO a few hours before this tragic accident in a heavy jet.

Our approach to SFO was 'interesting' to say the least. It was the usual, over the field and downwind at 11000 ft, full speedbrake and lots of flap to get down before the inevitable early turn to base.
Cleared for a visual on 28L maintaining own separation from an A320 joining visually on 28R.
High ROD to catch up with the ideal vertical approach path while turning final while watching the other jet.
28L LOC transmitting so followed that, back to Vref+5 early to avoid overtaking the A320 on 28R but end up alongside.
Below 1000ft the (local) A320 flying visually on the right wanders off the centreline towards us. TCAS TA goes bananas but RA inhibited below 800ft. We quickly discuss going around before he corrects back towards his centreline. Look forwards to see four whites on the PAPI's (I had been concentrating looking right at the VERY close A320 for approx 10 secs).
Reduce thrust, set 1000ft ROD, regain profile by 200ft, flare and touch down.

All this after a ten hour flight when it's past 4am on my body clock. How nice it would have been to fly a nice lazy ILS instead.

It's an accident waiting to happen, and it did.

[captjns]

RDR seems to think or rather justify Its obvious that you are a "little Fokker pilot" flying 6 sector days, 10X5.
Think out of your box to guys who are in the bin through the nite for 11 hrs.
Then in the morning sun, having to shoot an approach with no profile guidance. And guess what its their 2nd leg in 2 weeks.

SFO is darned stupid to notam their way to shutting down multiple aids, leaving a foreign crew, who probably last came to their field 4 months ago, barely able to speak English, the luxury of a visual approach.

If this is not asking for it, you can have the cheese, and eat it.

Sorry RDR, I'm not a Microsoft pilot. I've got 38 years experience ranging from open cockpit to the highly automated Boeings. Yes... long haul back side of the clock flying too. I've never managed to land short, long, or at the wrong airport. Can you say "Situational Awareness?" I've executed a few go-arounds in my day when I was not comfortable with the approach, be it IMC or VMC. Bottom line RDR one needs to rely on their basic airmanship rather than automation... wouldn't you agree? That said RDR, your comments don't lend a valid defense. Perhaps a Microsoft pilot or even a child of the magenta line (green line for Airbus) may see it differently.

Compared to the necessary accident? Wrong choice of words.

[Squawk_ident]

For reasons I don't understand, the FlightAware data quotes height at 100' intervals, despite the fact that the aircraft is sending it in 25' increments.
May be to alleviate the server. I didn't checked in FA what they've said before. May be it's extrapolation. FA takes its data from someone but who, when and how...
FR24 in the LAX area is not very well implemented and the F5M feeder is five minutes delay so I guess FA relies on FR24 or PF. The feeder near KOAK might also have a coverage issue in this sector.
At least we know that the aircraft maintained 11000ft for a while. It might stop the BA38 similitude debate.

[Montrealguy]

I expect some more one post wonders to come on and start crying about racism. It's not about race. It's about culture.

I guess there were "cultural" issues here too ?

The flight crew and five commuting pilots riding as passengers all tossed out their luggage and Christmas gifts out the window as they were evacuating a burning aircraft, endangering the lives of those behind them.

The accident was caused by a hard landing after a visual approach. The flying pilot was not a Korean but was a US female. Anyone want to risk writing about the airmenship of the female pilots they flew with here or is this kind of liberty taboo and only allowed when speaking of non-western people ?

Fed Ex Flight 647 Airline Crash - YouTube

[Jaxon]

Setting aside the fact that the cause is as yet undetermined, but sounding off on the presumptions from the crowd.... it is more staggering that the industry has so merrily leaned so heavily on technology to provide safety in place of basic airmanship.

What can be more basic than looking outside and landing an airplane?

I completely agree that vertical guidance should definitely be available at an international airport like SFO, but come on!

[rab-k]

LiveLeak.com - Animation-San Francisco Boeing 777 Crash-Asiana Airlines Flight 214 crash-vedat-?afak-yam?

[caber]

Have to say I'm shocked by the number of posters on here who think the problem comes from no ils or papi. One, you do not have to accept a visual on atc's terms. If you are too high, extend the downwind. Two, visual or not if you feel like you just don't have the skills required to fly such a fearsome maneuver, put another approach in such as the rnav and use that for guidance. I'm fairly sure nobody operates into sfo that doesn't have rnav capability. If they do operate without it, I'm sure they have the competence to fly the dreaded visual.

[BBK]

I think locked door and rdr have made valid points. Why people can't understand that a crew who have just crossed the Pacific might be a tad fatigued is beyond me. Of course we should be able to fly a visual approach with at least PAPIs available. Without them how can you determine if your approach is stable unless there is some form of cross check.

[despegue]

No where in my post do I mention that a PAPI is not a great help. it IS, and operating into a runway without one is certainly more challenging, but NOT forbidden in EASA land, at least not in daylight. At night, count me out indeed.

[Wingsofglass]

I apologize for posting here. I’m just an ignorant bug-smasher flying general aviation private pilot. I have no idea what it’s like to fly real planes for a living so my question may be totally ridiculous. But if I was flying into SFO and there was no ILS or PAPIs and I was assigned the 28L visual, I would load the RNAV 28L approach which has LPV precision guidance and use it as a check to make sure I was doing the right thing on the right runway. Is there some reason why you wouldn’t do the same in a 777? Frankly if given the choice, I'd rather have LPV guidance than PAPI/VASIs.

[NWSRG]

1. Yes, any professional pilot should be able to fly a visual approach. But that's what PAPIs are there to assist. Without them, the pilot loses one of the basic aids to a visual approach.
2. The 777 airframe did a fantastic job in protecting the occupants in a high energy impact.
3. Was the high ROD approach a factor? If so, are ATC regularly expecting pilots to perform non-standard approaches (think Turkish at AMS). Just because a pilot should be capable of flying these approaches, doesn't mean they should become normal operations.
4. If the passengers felt that the aircraft had come to rest, and all seemed ok (apparently backed up by a normal arrival announcement), then I think I too might think it ok to carry off my hand luggage. It is possible that those at the front of the aircraft (and still in shock anyway) did not realise the severity of what was happening. This is going to be a useful case study in passenger behaviour following a major incident.
5. I'd be happy to fly on a 777 tomorrow...I'd be more reserved about flying with a Korean based operator.

[My names Turkish]

Interesting Picture, apologies if its been posted before.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/68593000/jpg/_68593615_plane_crash_624.jpg

BBC News - San Francisco Boeing 777 crash 'not mechanical failure' (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23216587)

[skit_uk]

BBK

You cross check by having the PNF call out altitude variations at set DME distances, PF will then adjust rate of descent to keep on profile.

I suspect there may be some variation in exactly how this is done depending on the operator.

[nigegilb]

Try and look at it another way. I don't think anyone is arguing against the fact that airline pilots should be able to cope with a visual approach with no g/s info. However, would it be safer to have functioning PAPIs at a LH international destination when conducting visual approaches? Of course. And safety is the name of the game, especially when conducting close proximity parallel approaches with variable set ups.

[aterpster]

Having operated into KSFO many, many times I can point out a lot of technical issues with the airport. Flying a visual to Runway 28 left on a nice, clear day isn't one of them. Not even without any vertical guidance aids.

[Al Murdoch]

Perhaps that's because you are a) American and b) have flown there "many, many times".

[Huck]

A word about the Fedex MD10: I was there that day and have been thoroughly briefed on what happened, including the ground egress.

The fuselage was canted to the right so that the left (upwind) side slide merely curled under the fuselage. The jumpseaters thought incorrectly that it wasn't inflated. They pulled a T-handle on the slide thinking it would encourage inflation and it separated the raft from the airframe instead.

The right side door showed smoke and flame through the window so they didn't open it.

The only route of egress available was the captain's DV window. All 7 people aboard formed a line to get out. It takes a moment or two to contort oneself out a window and transfer one's weight to a strap. Thus, there was a bit of a delay. The jumpseaters, at the end of the line, decided to make themselves useful and pitched a few bags out the open L1 door.

Perhaps they got a little task-oriented, but I thought the resulting criticism was harsh. Window egress takes alot longer than a slide.

[Callsign Kilo]

If some are trying to justify the fact that a heavy crew flying a visual approach into a major international airport operating a parallel runway system deserve some slack for crashing the aircraft then I'm dumbfounded. Yes there are numerous factors that may possibly be contributing, however if this is a simple case of a visual Manoueuvre in CAVOK gone tits truly up then the overriding blame stops with the two guys at the pointy end. GO the :mad: AROUND!!

I for one cross my fingers & hope that this isn't the case of a poorly managed approach and blatant disregard for the landing gate. The holes in said cheese will start with the fact that the crew was aware of the state of play at SFO and didn't plan for it appropriately. Yes thy might be tired, yes ATC might have tightened their track miles and yes there may have been separation concerns but ultimately its the two guys at front who are left to deal with the situation.

If this is the true cause of the accident then you can't argue that this could happen to anyone. It simply shouldn't

[robertbartsch]

Has the crew discussed the incident with the media or is this something that will not happen?

[pudljumpr]

Having just retired off long haul 777 ops I second the opinion of possibly crew competency. Forget the race issue ; this is not a prejudiced view but an observation of culture.
Regarding visuals , I stopped encouraging my FOs to do visuals after long days. I had 2 cases where it was muffed it so bad I had to "help".
And these were both men with background but lacking in recency, and then add in fatigue issues . My fault as a commander to put them in that position.
Now throw in a 37 year old CA hired straight out of star fleet academy at 20,spends his apprenticeship before the mast in an autocratic society , a FO not encourage to even pick his crew meal , and then throw in a no aids approach. A lot of if s but a possibility. One more variable. A programmed VNAV blindly followed to the scene of the accident.
Food for thought.

[steelbranch]

Still wondering what a slam dunk approach is. If it means to get down asap, to me at least it sounds like asking for trouble, especially with procedure-oriented Asian crews who are not used to deviating from the norm, combined with the lack of ILS/GS etc, and the seeming reliance of these crews on such aids even in clear, bright weather. Not to mention Asiana's CRM policies, which I am not sure has been mentioned.

ATC doesn't acknowledge his first call on 7-mile final. Maybe he felt he had to continue and sort it out, not incurring the loss of face that a go-around might bring. Not as bad as what ended up happening of course.

Fair points about fatigue/lack of familiarity with the region, but possibly all these factors together caused him to lose stability in the approach. At the end though, he wouldn't have been the only guy coming into SFO in recent weeks tired after a red-eye and not 100% familiar with the place.

[nigegilb]

Yeah, blame the crew entirely, and crack on as though it never happened. That is an impressive approach to safety management.

If you don't mind, I'd prefer to learn the lessons and try and prevent another occurrence.

[glad rag]

Edit

redacted post due to incorrect info, apologies to all :\

[Buttscratcher]

Could the lack of vertical guidance provided at the destination have been contributory in this accident?
Most likely
I can't make that much clearer, really

[probes]

Re the hand luggage, pax will always try to take it off with them.

people panic and do not behave rational. Years ago I happened to be in an office when the house (3 floors) caught fire somewhere 'up there' (a flat on the top floor, as it appeared later). Everyone grabbed the papers on the desks (me, too, as that's what was going on around me) and run out. How's that explainable? It's not even like walking out of the plane with 2 hands in your pocket, to a foreign country for many.

[Lost in Saigon]

https://soundcloud.com/kgoradio/tower-audio-aar214-crash

Action starts just before one minute in-talk of emergency vehicle request and tower responding. More, much more to this accident than is being released....

Any mention of emergency vehicles was AFTER the aircraft crashed. The last thing the pilot said before he crashed was "Cleared to land, Asiana 214". Everything else you here is after they crashed.

[mojobreakfast]

Question from a rank amateur and non-pilot. How are comms from the crew to the tower possible with the aircraft in its end state? What are the chances anything on the flight deck are still lit with the plane in this shape? Is it SOP to have portables for backup? Believe the BA flight also had post-crash comms.

[Huck]

Comm radio hooked to the battery bus....

[llondel]

Steelbranch:

Still wondering what a slam dunk approach is

I asked the question over in the Spectator's Balcony (http://www.pprune.org/spectators-balcony-spotters-corner/518616-so-whats-slam-dunk.html), go read that.

[dargentw]

On the day of their arrival NOTAMS FOR SFO showed the following=
KSFO /SFO SAN FRANCISCO INTL
RUNWAY
1A1066/13
NAV ILS RWY 28R IM U/S
1A1051/13
RWY 28R ALS U/S
APPROACH PROCEDURE
1A1307/13 VALID: 1307061500 - 1307070300
SAN FRANCISCO VOR/DME SFO FREQ 115.8 MHZ CH105X OUT OF SERVICE
1A1246/13
ILS OR LOC Z RWY 28R, AMDT 11A...
ILS RWY 28R CAT II?III, AMDT 11A...
ILS OR LOC Z RWY 28L, AMDT 23A...
LDA/DME RWY 28R, AMDT 1A...
LDA PRM RWY 28R (SIMULTANEOUS CLOSE PARALLEL), AMDT 1A...
ILS PRM RWY 28L (SIMULTANEOUS CLOSE PARALLEL), AMDT 2...
PROCEDURE NA.
1A1065/13
LDA - LOCALIZER DIRECTIONAL AID RWY 28R GP U/S
1A1064/13
RWY 28R RVRT U/S
1A1062/13
ILS RWY 28R CAT 2/3 NOT AUTH.
1A1056/13
ILS RWY 28L GP U/S
1A1053/13
NAV ILS RWY 28R GP U/S
GP 28 L was U/S is has been for a while far as I know and there were aware of it but what I mentioned on the previous post big problem nowadays is that pilots , specially in the big Asian airlines had no exposure to non precision approaches in their career nor thear recurrent training emhesases much of it. Company policies discourage pilots to practise manual flying and normaly AP is not disengaged bellow 1000 or 500 ft. Those pilots actually never had a chance to learn good manual handling of the airplane not to mention non precision or visuall approach. Looks like long expecting and predicted result of those deficiencies in pilot training created this situation. PF probably got sucked into tunnel vision of the touch down point and without electronic path kept runway in the same place on the windshield......... Sad , it actually happen quite often to young FOs eaven with GP but its corrected by captain. In this case it should be at least 3 of them in the cockpit and at least one should of noticed......something wary wrong with their CRM

[Kraus]

Korea + no glide slope = disaster

Check out the KIA crash at Guam.

[Lost in Saigon]

Question from a rank amateur and non-pilot. How are comms from the crew to the tower possible with the aircraft in its end state? What are the chances anything on the flight deck are still lit with the plane in this shape? Is it SOP to have portables for backup? Believe the BA flight also had post-crash comms.

At least one of the radios will have emergency power from an independent source.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17/msowsun/photo%20stuff/Photo13/10_zps3558c6fd.jpg

[Speed of Sound]

Now throw in a 37 year old CA hired straight out of star fleet academy at 20,spends his apprenticeship before the mast in an autocratic society , a FO not encourage to even pick his crew meal , and then throw in a no aids approach.

Except that these 37 year olds have been hand flying visual approaches to this runway without incident, every day for the last three weeks.


History ? Asiana #214 ? FlightAware (http://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/AAR214/history)

[Lost in Saigon]

Any idea as to this versions engines as they were fitted with all three top manufacturers engine types?
Engines
maximum thrust Pratt & Whitney 4077
77,000 lb
Rolls-Royce Trent 877
76,000 lb
General Electric GE90-77B
77,000 lb
Pratt & Whitney 4090
90,000 lb
Rolls-Royce Trent 895
93,400 lb
General Electric 90-94B
93,700 lb

The aircraft had PW4090 engines but why do you care? They were reporting to be operating normally.

HL7742 Asiana Airlines Boeing 777-28E(ER) - cn 29171 / ln 553 - Planespotters.net Just Aviation (http://www.planespotters.net/Production_List/Boeing/777/29171,HL7742-Asiana-Airlines.php)

[Kraus]

NOTAM 07/046: San Francisco International Airport (KSFO)
!SFO 07/046 SFO RWY 28L PAPI OTS WEF 1307062219
CREATED: 06 Jul 2013 22:19:00
SOURCE: KOAKYFYX

NOTAM 07/051: San Francisco International Airport (KSFO)
!SFO 07/051 SFO NAV ILS RWY 28L LLZ/DME OTS WEF 1307071700
CREATED: 07 Jul 2013 03:08:00
SOURCE: KOAKYFYX


What runway did they "land" on?


Oh......28L....

[Ivanbogus]

I've never flown into SFO, but just wondering if the PRM's are used on visual approaches and if so there might have been some sort of a distraction from an aircraft on final 28R?

[Cubbie]

Interesting overhead shot of the accident scene from the bbc, clearly shows the debris fields and both engine impact points and that the right engine is the one furthest away( if you follow the score marks on the runway,- so that means its the left engine sitting outside door 2R.

[lowvaeater]

Slam dunk approach is one where aeroplane is being kept high on approach by either ATC or altitude constrain, after which you start the decent with higher than normal rate to catch up on your profile.

It is sometimes difficult for heavy jet doing this maneuver due to momentum, it takes time to reach the required decent rate and anticipation to arrest the rate back to normal.

Normal procedure for 777 is to have A/T engaged through out approach, it automatically retards at around 25 feet. For a normal approach it reduces pilot workload, for an undeshot approach it could retard where additional thrust is actually required. But again the movement of which can always be overridden by pilot.

Quite surprised to see on this reletively professional forum filled with racism comments even before any investigation been carried out. No such comments were made when European and American carriers had catastrophic accident due to reason not for me to comment. The only facts here are the pilots are male, Korean and flying experience, nothing regarding to culture.

[jugofpropwash]

I can see that in some cases, it might be reasonable to carry items off the plane with you. (If overhead bins have opened and deposited items in your lap or the aisle, taking them with you as you exit may be the fastest way to get them out of the way - even if they are not your bags.) I can even understand the instinct to take a bag that's with you under the seat. However - photos seem to suggest at least a few coming off this plane lugging all their luggage. :eek:

[SLFplatine]

From a story in the WSJ eyewitness Pax making his 173rd flight inti SFO:
Mr. Rah saw a flight attendant carrying injured passengers down the aisle. "She was a hero," he said. "This tiny, little girl was carrying people piggyback, running everywhere, with tears running down her face. She was crying, but she was still so calm and helping people."
Mr. Rah said the flight attendants got everyone off the plane as the smoke billowed inside.

[doughnworry]

so why is no-one talking about similarities with british Airways crash of their 777 when there was no power increase final? iced up fuel lines thought to be probable cause. Not a hint on any network that that might explain it all. and the missing engine? Torn off by the sea wall. everyone is ignoring its loss. if the same reason would have high seriosness for Boeing 777 fleet!

[Ct.Yankee]

(Irrespective as to whether it contributed to this accident in any way, it's outrageous that an airport the size of KSFO has no electronic or visual G/S.

Temporary VASIS or PAPIS can't have been that expensive until R/W works were complete.)
Last edited by skol; 7th Jul 2013 at 01:23.


Let's see, wind, 5kts, slight cross, temp comfortable, vis., you can see Napa,
clouds, no shade today. Student pilots make vis. app at 1hrs. So you need outside support for a BASIC aviation function? Another play station pilot?
Just follow the magenta line!

[Jasavir]

Eclan, I was the bright spark you mention but if you understand the context of what I said by reading the next paragraph of my post, you will realize that we are basically making the same point. Here it is below for a refresher:

"SFO 28L/R G/S have been Notamed out for the last 3 weeks and despite that, pilots from all different airlines and countries have done hundreds of visual approaches without incident.

So sure, the average airline crew is supposed to be able to do a visual approach to landing without an issue. However if Accident and Incident reports tell us one thing, its that they happen when we least expect them to and the reasons for their occurrence ranges from the sublime to the ridiculous."

[Lost in Saigon]

so why is no-one talking about similarities with british Airways crash of their 777 when there was no power increase final? iced up fuel lines thought to be probable cause. Not a hint on any network that that might explain it all. and the missing engine? Torn off by the sea wall. everyone is ignoring its loss. if the same reason would have high seriosness for Boeing 777 fleet!

Why? Because there are no similarities. Witnesses report an engine power increase prior to impact.

What missing engine? Both engines are visible in the photos. One beside the right fuselage and one farther ahead and to the right of the aircraft.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17/msowsun/photo%20stuff/Photo13/10a_zpsfdba8618.jpg

[skit_uk]

Mainly because this aircraft had different engines to the BA one, the issue with the BA engines were due to the fuel/oil heat exchanger, which has now ben modified anyway. Also procedures were brought in to clear any ice during the descent.

[Ian W]

WingsofGlass
I apologize for posting here. I’m just an ignorant bug-smasher flying general aviation private pilot. I have no idea what it’s like to fly real planes for a living so my question may be totally ridiculous. But if I was flying into SFO and there was no ILS or PAPIs and I was assigned the 28L visual, I would load the RNAV 28L approach which has LPV precision guidance and use it as a check to make sure I was doing the right thing on the right runway. Is there some reason why you wouldn’t do the same in a 777? Frankly if given the choice, I'd rather have LPV guidance than PAPI/VASIs.

There have been many commenting in a similar way. However, the same beancounters that want to 'save the cost of training' by not allowing manual flight at high level and training in visual approaches also save money by not training crews in use of the RNP capabilities of the aircraft. This is true of many European carriers as well so crews may not (officially) know how to use the capabilities of their avionics. This is the reason for RNP-Authorization Required, the aircraft AND the crew need to be authorized as capable.

For me I just cannot understand SFO not putting out some temporary PAPIs its not like we are talking about Little Podunk International - this is a major international airport with a runway over water which gives pilots very poor altitude perception. I agree that is no problem to people who fly in and out VFR every day, and the probability is only 1 in 1000 that someone less experienced would undershoot. Well congratulations you bet it all on red and red came up. Remember USA is one of the very few countries in the world whereVFR approaches by commercial passenger carrying aircraft are legal.

[phil gollin]

Mainly because this aircraft had different engines to the BA one, the issue with the BA engines were due to the fuel/oil heat exchanger, which has now ben modified anyway. Also procedures were brought in to clear any ice during the descent.



The testing NEVER reproduced the accident conditions properly. They only managed to have engine failures using totally unrepresentative amounts of water in the test fuel system.

[Speed of Sound]

so why is no-one talking about similarities with british Airways crash of their 777 ............Not a hint on any network that that might explain it all

It was actually the first thing that some networks discussed but the comparison was dropped when it was realised

a) this aircraft had different engines to BA038

b) the high altitude temperature profile of this flight was completely different to BA038

c) a number of witnesses, including passengers on the actual flight itself, report the engines spooling up just prior to 'touchdown'.

The missing #2 engine came to rest ahead of the main wreckage probably because it was still providing thrust when it detached from the wing.

[superq7]

What if this was a plastic/ composite aircraft crash? Elephant and room come to mind

[Ian W]

Doughnworry
so why is no-one talking about similarities with british Airways crash of their 777 when there was no power increase final? iced up fuel lines thought to be probable cause. Not a hint on any network that that might explain it all. and the missing engine? Torn off by the sea wall. everyone is ignoring its loss. if the same reason would have high seriosness for Boeing 777 fleet!

The only similarity is that both aircraft landed short and the low number of fatalities.

In the British Airways 38 case the aircraft had been flying in extremely cold minus 70C and lower temperatures for a long time it then carried out a Continuous Descent Approach which at Heathrow is clean from 8000 feet or above with engines at close to idle and then dropping gear and flap and spooling up at 4 miles to be in landing configuration at 2 miles from touchdown. The BA engines both failed to spool up correctly due to ice slush in the fuel filters.

In this case the aircraft had not been flying in extremely cold air and had not carried out a continuous descent approach. From witness statements just before the impact the aircraft engines had spooled up but too late to prevent impact. Which is possibly the reason that the detached engine was quite a long way further up the runway than the aircraft,

[ZimmerFly]

NOTAM 07/046: San Francisco International Airport (KSFO)
!SFO 07/046 SFO RWY 28L PAPI OTS WEF 1307062219
CREATED: 06 Jul 2013 22:19:00
SOURCE: KOAKYFYX

Perhaps Asiana "deleted" the PAPI at 1828Z, about 4 hours before the Notam was issued........

[horsfalli]

If it was a composite aircraft the outcome would almost certainly have been better. Metals and composites are completely different animals and the way they work in a crash would be different. Metals are tough in the sense that they are hard to damage but the energy required to part the bits is relatively low. Composites are easy to damage but very difficult to drag the bits apart. Consequently you would not wear a metallic crash helmet (or combat helmet) and right from the off composite race cars where much more survivable than metal ones.

[UAVop]

SFO just recently started using simultaneous CSP runway operations.


This aircraft had different engines than the ones from the iced up that were blamed for the incident at Heathrow.

[MountainBear]

First, commercial airline accidents involving deaths are by definition extremely unusual events. So the precise chain of causation and the specific contributing factors are typically different in each case. Moreover, it is often the case that the accident investigation team is left with choosing between different theories each of which is not likely. This is the reason the accident report reads probable cause and not 100% guaranteed cause. Sometimes it obvious what happened. At other times the facts are such that reasonable minds can differ on the actual cause of the accident. BA38 is one such example. At the end of the day the official cause is the official cause and the burden is on the nay-sayers to prove others, a burden they so far have been unable to carry in regards to BA38.

Second, please stop bashing the passengers with the luggage. While it is obvious to arm-chair analysts that this is not proper behavior in the aftermath of an accident people do not always behave in logical ways. Besides, the luggage could have been something that fell from the overhead bin and the passengers picked it up and took it off the plane because it was blocking the aisle. The cabin crew has enough to do in an accident without fighting with the passengers over carry-on luggage. The fact is that the only two people who died (so far) were ejected so that means the cabin crew did their job well under intense stress.

[Dushan]

Question from a rank amateur and non-pilot. How are comms from the crew to the tower possible with the aircraft in its end state? What are the chances anything on the flight deck are still lit with the plane in this shape? Is it SOP to have portables for backup? Believe the BA flight also had post-crash comms.

Multiple, redundancy, systems in a big machine like a 777.

[RatherBeFlying]

From Captain CalamityI think there is an easy and affordable answer - lock the overhead bins for takeoff and landing, and tell people that they will only be unlocked after takeoff when the seatbelt light is out, and also when the A/C is chocked at the gate with the engines stopped.Wire it to the Fasten Seatbelt sign.

[jolihokistix]

Airframe 9% composites on 777.

[Turbine D]

Lets assume for a moment they were hand flying, but initially high on a normal glide slope to the runway and the A/T or SPD was engaged for engine thrust management. If they thought they were descending at too rapid a rate and in the last seconds of flight applied significant thrust (manually), could that account for some of the unusual attitude of the aircraft that was observed by some people? With underslung (under the wing engines) doesn't the aircraft want to pitch up with application of thrust? I suppose the FDR will tell all...

[Boxster]

Interesting photograph.
The shape of the score mark gives credibility to the "cartwheel" report, although it probably spun like a saucer, and spinning off the engine that came to rest some distance away.

[Capt. On Heat]

Remember USA is one of the very few countries in the world whereVFR approaches by commercial passenger carrying aircraft are legal.

Ian. Rubbish.

[PAXboy]

A4For all those espousing the benefits/rights/convenience of taking your possessions with you, might I suggest you do a bit of research about "flashover" fires?
Indeed.
BUT some of us are saying: "Keep your personal items of Passport/ID, money and cell phone on you until in the cruise. At ToD, once again place them in your pockets or in a SLIM-LINE wallet/bag over your shoulder or put your jacket on."

Then you do not have to do anything to get them as they are already with you.

Lastly, keep your lace up shoes on until the cruise and refasten them at ToD.

[aterpster]

Al Murdoch:

Perhaps that's because you are a) American and b) have flown there "many, many times".

Let me be more explicit: There are combinations of weather and runways in use that can make KSFO a real challenge. However, a visual to 28L during the daytime with the good weather that existed at the time should be no challenge for any professional air carrier, even though it may be their first time there.

My point about my experience there (I was based there some of my career) is to point out that a visual to 28L on a nice day is hardly a technical challenge for any qualified air carrier pilot, experienced at the airport or not.

[texasjet]

I have about as much idea as anyone (except the crew) as to what really happened, however some of the post on here are mind-blowing. Again - not saying this about the crew (see first statement) - but to some of the previous posters:

If you can't land a heavy jet to a visual approach w/o a glideslope or VASI/PAPI in CAVU conditions, I don't want you flying my family or me, period dot.

I hate to say this, I'm not the best pilot ever, and like many of you, I have flown Asia-US, overnight, tired, etc as a PIC to visual conditions. I have had the luxury/benefit of some very good training programs from ASEL private to my last PC. I thought this was basic stuff!!!

I have not flown the 777, but I would imagine that there are similar rules of thumb to calculate a ROD wag from your groundspeed, 3 to 1 rules, etc. None of these require VASI/PAPI or glideslope/path indicators.

My basic frustration is some of you thinking that a failed cross check is an excuse. Am I on my visual profile profile (900' @ 3miles, 600' @ 2miles, etc). I am? Good. Aimpoint, Airspeed. Still on profile? Ok. Aimpoint, Airspeed. Yes, there is more that goes into it as we introduce automation, but c'mon - is this or isn't this a stabilized approach??? If not, fix it or go-around. We've got way too much responsibility to be 'lazy' - and I thought I was the laziest type 'z' person I knew.

Again, my best to the crew. I can't even imagine the guilt (whether or not it was their 'fault') of having a fatality associated with one of my flights.
For the rest of us, please - if you really don't know how to do something that should be trivial, fess up and learn it and incorporate that in your bag of SA.

Cheers

[llondel]

Boxster:
The shape of the score mark gives credibility to the "cartwheel" report, although it probably spun like a saucer, and spinning off the engine that came to rest some distance away.

Look at the UA232 crash video, I always thought that had cartwheeled but it was just one wing lifting high before settling down again. This one could have done the same thing, and it might account for the position of #1 engine.

PAXboy:

BUT some of us are saying: "Keep your personal items of Passport/ID, money and cell phone on you until in the cruise. At ToD, once again place them in your pockets or in a SLIM-LINE wallet/bag over your shoulder or put your jacket on."

The grim side to that is that it's also easier to identify casualties.

[halfmanhalfbiscuit]

Perhaps this lion air accident has similarities, landing over water short of runway?

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/512476-lionair-plane-down-bali.html

Boeing article on tail strikes.
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_1_07/AERO_Q107_article2.pdf

[wiggy]

With underslung (under the wing engines) doesn't the aircraft want to pitch up with application of thrust?

Not on the Triple if the FBW is working properly.

[Jasavir]

Its been a very interesting thread so far and as usual the opinions are as varied as could be expected.

A few points to consider:

1. For those like myself who are speculating about the G/S and PAPI being a factor to this particular accident on this particular day, that's all it is. A FACTOR. We are not (at least I am not) excusing the crew for making the error (if that was the case) but just pointing out FACTORS (along with fatigue, unfamiliar airports, aircraft system idiosyncrasies, slam dunk approaches, etc, etc, etc..) that could have contributed to errors being made....

2. If you have flown for 32 years and never had an accident, kudos to you. It demonstrates professionalism, experience, good airmanship and perhaps a little luck but you may end up having an accident in your 33rd year. No pilot goes flying with the intention to have an accident. There is no reason to assume that the crew have not flown a visual into this or another airports before at some point in their career. How many highly decorated, multi 10,000 hr pilots have had accidents? Appreciate the unexpected nature of accidents and have empathy for our compatriots when they end up with the short end of stick.

3. It is said by those who have had a chance to observe the culture (and interestingly those who have not), that the Asians, the Africans and Middle Eastern pilots are rigid in their thinking and training and find it difficult to adapt to dynamic and fluid situations. That may or may not be the case but STATISTICALLY airline accidents occur all over the world including Europe and the U.S. which suggests that accidents occurs for other reasons other than being able to "think outside the box".

Accident rates have gone down considerably in the US over the years, but our past history is replete with crews making all kinds of errors that led to disaster. Could it be that we are further along the aviation evolutionary curve than other regions?

So, lets keep the speculation going, indeed that's what the board is for - to express our opinions based on experience, knowledge and things we have heard- but lets keep it respectful, professional and empathetic....

[kellykelpie]

Is this the first 777 hull loss/accident involving fatalities??

[Agaricus bisporus]

I'm surprised no one has commented on what a narrow escape this event had.

Pictures of the impact on the sea wall show that the Stbd engine struck the ground within the first few yards of the terrain suggesting that the gear must have been some, what? 8 - 10 ft below the level of the landing surface. This would suggest a fuselage impact on the crest of the sea wall fairly close behind the main gear which seems indicated by the photo on the previous page (see distortion of lwr aft fuselage), the detachment of the empennage so early in the event and the severe upward crushing of the aft pressure bulkhead which suggests it was way below the level of the terrain when it struck. I don't think this was a tailstrike, more a mid-body strike and the debris on the runway suggests mangled baggage remains from the aft belly being torn out to me.

My view is that if the aircraft had been a foot or two lower, just that much, the bodycount would have been in the hundreds.

As it is, the profile so graphically shown on page 7 or 8 of this thread shows a clear picture of a high approach, rapid descent to compensate, descent over-corrected at low level and aircraft fallen short . Eye witness reports (for once some seem credible) suggest the aircraft was seen to have handling difficulties which is quite in keeping with this scenario, struggling to prolong a glide while engines spooled up, plus on board reports of the power coming on late in the event.

Time will tell and no doubt there will be other factors involved but the scenario suggested above seems as credible as any.

[RobertS975]

This is the first 777 accident with fatalities in about 20 years of service.

[Dushan]

From Captain CalamityWire it to the Fasten Seatbelt sign.

Except that the guy who took his steamer trunk from the overhead, just before the sign went on, would not be able to put it back in. What do we do with him?

[TCAS_Alert]

https://soundcloud.com/kgoradio/towe...o-aar214-crash

Action starts just before one minute in-talk of emergency vehicle request and tower responding. More, much more to this accident than is being released....


Just before all hell breaks loose when the aircraft impacts, you can hear what sounds like the Asiana pilot shouting '1 AND 2' (over the top of another transmission). I wonder if this comment has any significance?

[ribt4t]

As a passenger: If the crew is commanding an emergency evacuation, and you are in the aisle attempting to recover baggage and are between me and the nearest exit, I will do my best to disable you, and if you get trampled by the rest of the passengers on their way out, TFB.

People don't always react rationally to stress and a pile of bodies in the aisle is not going to help evacuate the plane.

[TCAS_Alert]

Is this the first 777 hull loss/accident involving fatalities??


First fatal hull loss yes, but a member of ground crew was killed in the BA 777 ground fire at DEN, so not the first fatality involving the 777.

[Toruk Macto]

How about night ops onto 28 L ? Same visual app ?

[RexBanner]

To the idiotic suggestion of locking the overhead bins with the seatbelt signs, we're going to start evacuating aircraft with the seatbelt signs ON now are we??

(Admittedly the punters don't pay too much attention to them anyway but still...)

[rer47]

Several people have commented on the final points in the FlightAware track log and their reliability. The last three points are interesting - the first two of these plot horizontally exactly on the extended centerline (as they should), but the final one plots about 3,000 feet beyond the aircraft's final resting place (on the centerline of 1R/19L).

The second to last point is about 750 feet from the sea wall, and the ROD is 120. The time interval between these positions is about 10 seconds. The final point would have been recorded after the tail strike on the sea wall, which would have occurred about 4 seconds after the next to last point was recorded. Therefore, the 120 fpm rate of climb given for the final point is meaningless, as is its altitude - the aircraft was already on the ground. The reason for the erroneous lat/long for the final point is unknown. The FDR data will resolve all of this.

See these posts and compare them to the Google Earth image of the runway:
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/518568-asiana-flight-crash-san-francisco-20.html#post7926888
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/518568-asiana-flight-crash-san-francisco-23.html#post7927198

[Mr Angry from Purley]

[quote] A fatigued crew has flown half way round the world[quote]
Is this the standard aircrew opt out now days?
There were 4 crew onboard, at best maybe suffering from sleepiness, fatigue oh well let's wait for the enquiry..............:ugh::\

[A Squared]

Someone, a few pages back, queried how we knew the PAPIs were out:

NOTAM SFO 07/046

!SFO 07/046 SFO RWY 28L PAPI OTS WEF 1307062219
CREATED: 06 Jul 2013 22:19:00
SOURCE: KOAKYFYX

also:
NOTAM SFO 06/005

!SFO 06/005 SFO NAV ILS RWY 28L GP OTS WEF 1306011400-1308222359
CREATED: 01 Jun 2013 13:40:00
SOURCE: KOAKYFYX

That doesn't tell us anything about the status of the PAPI at the time of the accident. Note that the Effective date/time is a couple of hours after the crash. Compare to the NOTAM about the ILS GP, which has an effective date/time of 1 June 2013, 1400Z