Asiana 777 crash at KSFO

[supatiger]

Asiana just crashed a 777 at San Fran!

[sheiken around]

We are all are wishing the very best for the pax and crew of this accident...but, just wait for it...all of the 777/"widebodied" heroes are sleeping now. When they awake from their slumber, we'll all be bombarded with their "knowledgeable" assessment of what occurred.
Us normal people involved in aviation wish only the best to the pax and crew of this flight...and hope that as many souls as possible were saved.

[cerbus]

EK 225 diverted to SEA. The company thinks they are going to take off in 90 mins. Asiana wreckage is still on the runway and will be for another 2 days.
Captains discretion at its worst.

[AQUAPLANE1]

Did this flight divert back into DXB this morning?

[fliion]

Cerbus,

"Let he who hath no sin...."

f.

[mooseknuckles]

Witnesses reported seeing the plane abnormally nose high. Passengers reported feeling a distinct shuddering before impact and, for what its worth, flight aware reported airspeed of 85 knots at 200 feet. I hope that last one is a mistake.

[Tears for Fears]

Any similarities with the Ba 38 accident at Lhr airport back to 2008 ?

[Wizofoz]

It sounds to me it has more in common with the Turkish 737 crash at AMS than than BA38- details of the approach parameters are on the main thread in Rumours and News- speed allowed to decay late in the approach- 85kts at 120'!!

Sounding to me like no Auto-throttle and a lack of ability to fly without it.

[fringhtok]

I think Wiz may be on the mark. I also think FLVLCH and 'Hold' on the FMA is a reasonable chance........

[Mr Good Cat]

I don't like to speculate on causes of a crash until the preliminary fndings or substantial evidence is present.

However, there is a lot of discussion on other threads about the 'threat' of the Autothrottle potentially having no wake-up mode when using FLCH or V/S on a visual approach using the autopilot.

Is it just me who finds the idea of using V/S or FLCH in the last 500' of a visual approach absurd? Would any posters on here really do this?

What happened to reverting the most appropriate level of automation? For me A/P and F/Ds off with the PMs back on and fly the airplane. Seemed to work in the past.:ok:

[nolimitholdem]

Yeah we wouldn't want any speculation on a website with "Rumour Network" in its title, would we.

ILS 28L GP is Notam-ed U/S for the period.

Methinks they armed the APP instead of LOC, either accidentally or intentionally, and followed an either non-existent or falsely transmitting G/S. Then when they looked around and realized that perhaps being at 10ft radio altitude at 400 metres from the threshold wasn't the best plan, found it too late to recover.

Would be very interested in the cultural makeup of the crew.

[Wizofoz]

By the way, why aren't you trainers teaching the FOs about A/T HOLD prior to their upgrades? IE one would think FO transition training might be the time to teach it.


I for one do so at every opportunity- I think it's a big hole in the AFDS logic of the aircraft.

It is included in the type course, but not sufficiently emphasized nor recurrently trained IMHO.

[Wizofoz]

However, there is a lot of discussion on other threads about the 'threat' of the Autothrottle potentially having no wake-up mode when using FLCH or V/S on a visual approach using the autopilot.

Is it just me who finds the idea of using V/S or FLCH in the last 500' of a visual approach absurd? Would any posters on here really do this?


Not having a go at you, Mr GC, but this is a good example of the fact that knowledge of the AFDS is lacking in otherwise competent guys, and yes, that is a failing of the training department and needs addressing.

A/T wake up IS available in V/S, as the A/T is in SPD mode.

The times it is not available is when the A/T is in HOLD, which is a few seconds after the thrust is at idle in FLCH and VNAV SPD.

As to use of those modes on approach, you really have to spend some time with an Asian carrier to get a grasp of what dependence on Automation is really like.

[The Turtle]

SFO Crash....meet phase 6.

[millerscourt]

Without speculating as to the cause of this accident those of us who were brought up on types like B707 and B737-200 had a good scan which we never lost even when we went on to the likes of Airbus A340 or B777.

Those of us operating for UK Charter outfits doing visuals came second nature into places like Iraklion, Kos, Corfu at night and places like Samos, Mikonos, Funchal etc during the day

We had to hand fly those approaches with no Autothrust. The only time I used Autothrust on a manual approach was into Kai Tak on B767 whilst in the turn onto R/W 13.

I noticed when in SQ that F/O's would never do a visual into say Bali when I suggested it in to R/W 27 to save time even with all the gizmos of extended C/L and with an ILS as a back up and as for taking out the autothrust they would never do that even though radar send you downwind on the F/O's side so runway in sight all the time.

The modern breed of computer nerds entering the flight deck is a cause for concern and the worrying lack of airmanship is all too evident.

[ironbutt57]

If FLCH were selected with a go-around altitude or otherwise set in the MCP, wouldn't the airplane commence a climb to that level? (ala 767)

The modern breed of computer nerds entering the flight deck is a cause for concern and the worrying lack of airmanship is all too evident.

Very true Millers...however this maybe brought on in part by airlines' hammering crews for even the slightest instability on an approach, so they tend to just "get 'er down, lock on the automatics, and drag 'er in"...especially at the end of a long duty

[donpizmeov]

Aw bless, its good to see they woke up.

The Don

[Old King Coal]

The fact that some airlines have to bring their crews into the simulator in order to have them conduct manual handling exercises, speaks volumes !

[falconeasydriver]

Just had a listen to the NTSB admin lady give out the details of the CVR and FDR. It would appear that they lost airspeed, failed to recover that airspeed, called to GA, and then impacted shortly after.
Engines were responding normally, the aircraft was configured normally, the crew accepted a visual approach.
I know what I think most likely happened.
I wonder if the crew flew with their hands on the thrust levers? I wonder if the crew ever operated into airports with NDB's and VOR's, I wonder if the crew had any GA experience? I wonder, I wonder, I wonder...
I then think to myself, how many guys do I fly with who would struggle to maintain S/L without a FD or AT.
Be careful out there people, and remember we fly a big C172, it does all the same things.

[Atebis]

Video shows plane's moment of impact - CNN.com Video (http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/us/2013/07/07/vo-plane-sf-plane-crash-on-cam.courtesy-fred-hayes.html)

[crewmeal]

The modern breed of computer nerds entering the flight deck is a cause for concern and the worrying lack of airmanship is all too evident.

Sky quoting Asiana saying the pilot only had 43 hours on type and was training.

San Francisco Plane Crash: Pilot Was Training (http://news.sky.com/story/1112759/san-francisco-plane-crash-pilot-was-training)

[Wally Mk2]

Terrible, just terrible, I feel for the lives changed in all this:-(

I only now hope that a thorough report is made in a timely manor so we can all learn from these sorts of accidents so the couple of young & innocent lives lost won't be in vain. In Gods hands they live on.

Wmk2

[The Zohan]

In Gods hands they live on.

ya, right. wouldn't hold my breath waiting for his mercy.
if the plane crashed and the girls died was his will to start with, right?

tz

[Jet II]

Looks like one of the girls that died was actually run over by one of the response vehicles - if so then for an accident of this magnitude to cause only one death is a remarkable tribute to the design of the 777.

[mooseknuckles]

The fact that a perfectly healthy 777 can allow itself to stall is an interesting design feature, and the fact that it crashed on a beautiful VFR day is a remarkable statement about the Asiana training department and airline culture. Sounds eerily familiar.

Pilot Error Eyed in San Francisco Plane Crash - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323823004578591422758092016.html)

[Wally Mk2]

I'm not a huge believer of a hereafter as such but if these two girls had to go ( by the hands of others) then I hope at least they are somewhere peaceful.
Religion may not be everyone's cup of tea but if it is for some then I would respect that.

Vis App, clear day, with two qualified pilots up front, who was minding the 'shop'? To let a transport Cat A/C especially of this size get slow (& low) means someone wasn't minding the counter.
Out of all the sophisticated instruments, the amazing capabilities of today's modern A/C the intense training it still only takes a human to destroy all that hard work not to mention the lives lost b4 them learning the hard way.

To me the single most important instrument under these conditions is the 'speedo', that single inst tells a LOT about the health of a plane in any stage of flight especially low to the ground.

Wmk2

[Non Zero]

I guess I'm writing this out of frustration hoping someone in a position of power will stop and think long and hard.

Only the FAA can satisfy your frustration ... the majority of other civilian organizations have demonstrate to be very wick ...

[fliion]

Zohan - well said. A crutch for the intellectually weak.

Four pilots on an 11 hr flight, wonder how long the layover is. I've done close to that through the night in winter with only two of us.

As a perverse knock on to this, and I take no joy in saying it, there will be more jobs available in Asiana if the NTSB cites cockpit culture as a factor. With their experience with Guam & KAL they may well have a jaundiced view.

f.

[Ynot]

LR3
In no way should this be construed as an attempt to lay the majority of blame anywhere else then the flight deck but have a think about how you feel at 5am, landing after your third night turn in a week.Missing radio calls,forgetting if you have been cleared to land, wondering if you have sat the crew down 10 seconds after you just did it.

LR3 and all of that before touch down...I just heard (rumors Network again) that an A380 skipper was demoted for turning into the wrong taxiway and having had to be tagged out...

Non Zero - Only the FAA can satisfy your frustration ... the majority of other civilian organizations have demonstrate to be very wick ...
Non Zero I Agree...unfortunately...

Old King Coal
The fact that some airlines have to bring their crews into the simulator in order to have them conduct manual handling exercises, speaks volumes !

yes it does...it's called being proactive not reactive...but I agree in the fact that what brought us here is too much reliance in automation and luck of piston/turboprop/GA or even 737/320 rural ops exposure...much more valuable exposure than being a HF/CPDLC operator for hours and ending up with 3 landings per month if lucky and that in usually good weather with an ILS....

Ynot

[Swan Man]

The difference here is 4 pilots for a 10 hour flight vs 2 pilots for a 10 hour flight at Emirates, at times.
EK has been extremely lucky and with the conditions they put us under it is just a matter of time.
Good luck to us all.

[GoreTex]

for sure swanie, but of course its our fault because we are not allowed to fly if we are fatigued.

[Ghost_Rider737]

Years of Long Range flying is beyond fatiguing !!

I think it shortens your lifespan and kills healthy brain cells :}

[Non Zero]

I think it shortens your lifespan and kills healthy brain cells

Yes it is ... I propose a pay raise for all the brain damaged pilots ...

[Trader]

Another reason to have the UAE cadets spend 5 years at flydubai--get the hands and feet moving actually FLYING an airplane.

[Old King Coal]

Trader: Hear, hear, and what a novel idea, i.e. jet pilots actually flying the f'ing aeroplane... maybe it'll catch on ?!

Ps. in flydubai we're not so anal as to actually poo-poo the idea of flying the aeroplane (i.e. without recourse to engaging the f'ing autopilot at the earliest opportunity) and indeed manual / hands-on-the-yolk & throttles flying is actively encouraged (albeit within the provisos of workload, Wx, & RVSM requirements, etc) and therein we're not required to visit the sim, on a regular basis (like some), for 'manual handling' practice!

[fliion]

DEC policy check - Another interesting knock on effect is the 'actuarial' factor.

We were told a number of years ago in wash-up that one of the factors behind DECs was that the Actuaries were concerned with the overall flight hour number of the upgrading FOs.

One of the first things the insurance industry does in the aftermath of an incident such as this is to have a mass scramble and reassess the algorithms. If you have seen the'CNN video that shows the approach and subsequent crash - you can see that the corkscrew at the end got very close to a flip....in which case...game over.

So now AIG, Zurich Re, Lloyd's will make a polite call to Dubai with the following question:

Actuary:
"You guys don't have guys in the LHS with 43 hours on type do you? I mean obviously in their previous gig they flew heavies from the left?"

Dubai:
"Actually Mr actuary, we have guys in the LHS that have less than 43 who didn't fly anything bigger than a 737 before we put them there...But it's all good, we saved money on training"

Actuary:
"Ah thats great thanks and just to clear things up, one more pertinent question...you guys don't run 11 hour flights with less than four pilots right?"

Dubai
"Huh? next question"

Actuary
"Okeedokee , lemme call you guys back in five"

5mins later.

Actuary:
"Yo..it's me again...I guess the good news for my insurance co. Is that at least you don't have these, whadya call em DECs, jumping into the LHS of the 380. I mean all the guys who upgrade are high on Airbus 380 time right?"

Dubai:
"Hmm, not excactly...but we save money in training by putting the 777 guys on the 380"

Watch this space...we've been saying it for years... Bypassing seniority and experience is a big wise invitation to Karma to come a knocking.....disgraceful.

Got spin?..,work it habibi

f.

[BYMONEK]

f

So what's the overriding factor, experience or seniority? You appear to contradict yourself in that last post.

Let me re phrase your question. Who would be better qualified to fly a 777 (hypothetically speaking), a 5 year Captain transitioning off A380 who's only flown Airbus throughout their career or a B777 FO with 4 years in Company and 7 years previous command and all Boeing time? Experience can be difficult to judge and individual ability should never be related to aircraft size.That's what the final command sign off is for..... either you're safe, or you're not.

At the end of the day it matters bugger all what size airplane you fly, 500 passengers, 350 or 2. The investigation is the same regardless of lives lost!

[crewmeal]

So what about those Captains and FOs with zero hours on the 380 and 787? When those pilots started flying on them surely it was the blind leading the blind. So far so good no pilot related incidents, infact pilots on these aircraft have had to deal with all the teething problems.

This whole Asiana crash must be down to training and SOPs. Do Asiana have their on 777 sim? What is the difference between their training and say EK's? I cannot believe that the crew on that flight could not visually see they were well below the glidescope.

Oh well lets see what 'Terror in the skies' or 'Aircrash investigation' make of it

[Non Zero]

So what's the overriding factor, experience or seniority?

Well we definitely mastered the way we calculate Seniority but how do you measure Experience? Someone on the big thread in R&N said 9000 time 1 hour doesn't mean 9000 hours flight experience?


So what about those Captains and FOs with zero hours on the 380 and 787?

Changing platform from LHS to LHS and from Heavy to Heavy shouldn't be a big deal also if you change the aircraft philosophy.
But upgrading a RHS medium platform to heavy LHS new philosophy platform can be challenging. Not impossible but you definitely introduce more variable with more chances of failure.

[fliion]

BYMOMEK,

the point is that if the policy is there because of a new type A380/787 and obviously there are not qual'd guys then fine...the training program on a new type will be tailored as such.

But this $ saving racket of having guys who are sitting in the RHS of the 777 - who because the DEC recruitment was stopped at the time they joined - are now sitting beside guys from FR in the LHS who have less experience than them on the 738 never mind thre years on the 777...that's silly....actually it's greed.

On the 380 side we have FOs with perfect record who are going into their 7th year on the Bus - who because of FCI - are now waiting even longer ....just as a Capt junior to him from a different type now gets his slot.

We know that there is no pure seniority here because cross typing costs the union majors lots.
But the DEC is a $ issue ....the cost of which when it goes wrong is hard to calculate.

Point taken on proper training ...if you are signed off ...you are signed off BUT we have all done things after sign off that have been less than stellar where experience would have helped.

Separate point...if fatigue is a factor...how are we gong to look with crews doing 30 hours on board with 22 hours at hotel in DC if they determine it was a factor?

f.

[eldee5]

"Ps. in flydubai we're not so anal as to actually poo-poo the idea of flying the aeroplane (i.e. without recourse to engaging the f'ing autopilot at the earliest opportunity) and indeed manual / hands-on-the-yolk & throttles flying is actively encouraged (albeit within the provisos of workload, Wx, & RVSM requirements, etc) and therein we're not required to visit the sim, on a regular basis (like some), for 'manual handling' practice! "

Wait, what makes you think all EK pilots turn the AP on right away? The trend I have been noticing lately is significantly more hands on flying. And in training, they are shifting the corporate culture's paradigm when it comes to hand flying. 10000 feet is the hard deck when it comes to automation. Common sense dictates the appropriate level of automation needed, depending of the situation. No one, or nothing prevents us from hand flying, should we desire to do so. Just saying...

[Non Zero]

Separate point...if fatigue is a factor...how are we gong to look with crews doing 30 hours on board with 22 hours at hotel in DC if they determine it was a factor?

Dude if you want to score the fatigue point try to be a bit more realistic! 30 hours on a plane you almost circumnavigate the globe!

[nolimitholdem]

Pretty sure he meant round trip. Point was obvious to me, anyway. Lot more ULR time than rest time.

[falconeasydriver]

So after all this backwards and forwards, the DEC teeth gnashing, the unfairness on various fleets etc, do you think you could fly a visual approach on a beautiful day...without undershooting? I managed it the other day somewhere else on the same type with an unreliable ILS signal, PAPI's that you couldn't see and a functional DME signal, and I only ever get 3's in the sim:E

[NoJoy]

I'm still trying to figure out why this thread is in the middle east part of the forum... :confused:

[break dancer]

I guess with EK being the largest B777 operator in the world, there is some relevance to the investigation outcome.......

[Old King Coal]

Wrt: And in training, they are shifting the corporate culture's paradigm when it comes to hand flying. 10000 feet is the hard deck when it comes to automation. Common sense dictates the appropriate level of automation needed, depending of the situation. No one, or nothing prevents us from hand flying, should we desire to do so.Well that's good to hear, albeit that it seems somewhat at odds with the reality of 'sims for manual handling' and / or what 'Trader (http://www.pprune.org/middle-east/518571-asiana-777-crash-ksfo-post7930098.html#post7930098)' said: "Another reason to have the UAE cadets spend 5 years at flydubai--get the hands and feet moving actually FLYING an airplane.Fwiw, the only 'deck' in flydubai, wrt hand flying (be that with or without flight directors), is the requirement for autopilots to be used when within RVSM airspace.

aside - I was flying with one of our young Emirate' F/O's only the other day and can admit to being highly impressed when he asked me if I minded if he continue without the use of any automation or FD guidance (this when at FL250) and to which I consented, and he then delivered a perfectly flown (including a number of level-offs) descent and visual approach, in what was modestly challenging conditions too,... and don't even think the lad has even 1000 hrs total time. It was a true delight to watch him having a go at it - and well done young man!

I can also attest that vast majority of my (your EK) Emirate colleagues are a delight to fly with, are very capable, and will be missed when they leave flydubai.

$0.02

[Non Zero]

Pretty sure he meant round trip. Point was obvious to me, anyway. Lot more ULR time than rest time.

True and point made! But I think we have to blame all the extremely well payed company that study the circadian rhythm and of course they came out with a theory that makes the airlines save tons of money in logistics.

I personally think one of the major misunderstanding those circadian-rhythm-companies is to conducted multiple research studies try to maintain a roughly 24-hour periodicity despite the changing kinetics. But again I personally think for a ULR pilots the real cycle is 24+12. "24+12" is one circadian day for a ULR pilot.
But the NTSB is constantly studying fatigue and now they have an other case to add to their study and statistic.

[Neptunus Rex]

fliion

:sad: 'Actuary' - an accountant who found his life too exciting.

[Payscale]

Apparently the instructor in the right hard seat was on his first roster as an instructor...
Maybe having an instructor in the front seat made the two other pilot culturally uncomfortable to speak up.

Asiana should send their pilots to Emirates for training. I wonder how that would go...

[Iver]

Obviously overall experience matters more than time on type. Why else would Norwegian contract with Virgin Atlantic to have some of their senior pilots "train" Norwegian longhaul 787 pilots on Transatlantic flying???? None of the VS training pilots have 787 experience...

[musicrab]

After seeing the horrendous landing home video on CNN I am utterly amazed that the main fuselage didn't break. That - to me - was more of a miracle than the Hudson...

[Landflap]

Nojoy, possibly a new bunch of Mods who will delete what they do not like or if you criticise them. Apart from deletion, some entire threads are deleted or locked out. Freedom of speech ? Anonymous posting ? Sad days. Oh and yeah, thread has no place in "Middle East" forums but don't tell them that...............you'll get deleted. Oh, and "Contact us"; don't bother, you'll get slapped down with a silly computerised reply. C'mon Mods, I am timing this one to see how long it takes. Shame .

[PPRuNe Towers]

This topic is running in several areas of the site. It's 8 pages long on the private Southwest Airlines forum to put this one into perspective.

As to the main R+N forum 25 to 30% of the posts in a major crash thread get binned. It's a signal to noise mechanism. Landflap got his nose out of joint for being part of the noise and stating he should be heard because he has 20,000 hours. That experience does not prevent him having finger trouble when he claims he's been writing to us - he hasn't.

Let's be blunt - it's editorial control not speakers' corner and that is to stop the main accident threads being a complete zoo.

Rob

[Old King Coal]

Corsair_F4U... just as per yourself, there's (fortunately) a few of us, old enough and long enough in the tooth, to recall the debacle that is Korean aviation (and training & standards therein).... 'nuff said !

[Trader]

With that scenario--multiple, multiple serious failures---equals emergency and, to be blunt, were a TRE to be truly that difficult he could go shove it you know where!

With a mayday you can do ANYTHING you like to bring the aircraft to safety.

I would guess those TREs are few and far between.

[Kamelchaser]

It's interesting to assess what ramifications this accident may have for EK.

I recall a quote from the "Flying High" movie.... "I picked a great day to give up sniffing glue"

We're in the middle of some serious cost cutting in training, and indeed throughout the whole airline.

CRM is being taken away from the hands of FOs and Captains who have very good qualifications in the subject. We have 80+ (?) nationalities in the flight deck..along with all the different mind sets that come with that. Is this a good time to hand off CRM to ground instructors who may or may not have any experience in the subject?

We have a lot of cadets coming through..many of whom are very capable when everything is working well, but I've seen it myself on many an occasion; when a situation occurs that is outside their extremely limited experience paradigm, 250-700 hours of total time doesn't cut it on a wide bodied jet, and their hands and feet skills simply let them down.

We're trying to squeeze more and more arrivals into an already over congested airport. ATC are studying reduced separation approaches, with some sort of offset approach onto 30R using visual separation. I suspect extremely high workload stuff.

We do very few visual approaches.....most of the ones I see are poorly executed.

Training has worked hard over past few years to pre-empt these issues. But the elephant (or in our case the CRM gorilla wandering thru the basketball game) is still there. It is indeed a particularly bad time to give up the glue sniffing.

[Gulf News]

It's interesting to assess what ramifications this accident may have for EK.


If company history is anything to go by don't expect any reasoned analyses. What we can expect is more restrictive and punitive rules for approaches imposed by those who have little relevant experience in the area. The aim will be to frighten crews into taking the most conservative approach rather than the most practical with a threat of disciplinary action if anything goes wrong.The wider systemic issues will be ignored as irrelevant and the focus placed on the crews actions not what got them into that position. The upstairs philosophy at EK is "The Emirates way is the best and it is only the lazy rouge pilots who don't follow our orders that will have problems"

The training department will be proactive and I imagine that ATQP will address the relevant issues when they become fact but only in future phases. Phase six is already cemented. Perhaps when more details emerge SFO will be incorporated in the manual handling Sim.

[ironbutt57]

The aim will be to frighten crews into taking the most conservative approach rather than the most practical with a threat of disciplinary action if anything goes wrong.


already there...

[fliion]

Don't be surprised if EK react to this.

Every time there has been a headline incident there has been a swift response.

Melbourne: all hauled in for PIC & 2IC briefs, strict application of Perf SOPs

BA @ LHR: bulletins and handling sims with double engine failure on 12nm final.

UPS DXB: Lithium fire socks.

Industry wide unstable approaches incl FDX in Japan: Smart Landing system

And now this: I just cannot see them continuing with narrow body DECs (not to mention trainers who have no more than six months in the LHS)

We shall see

f.

[Wizofoz]

And now this: I just cannot see them continuing with narrow body DECs

I don't see how that's relevant, fil- guys with lots of sectors flying short-haul are LESS likely to have the kind of Automation dependent, skills degraded syndrome that seems to have caused this crash.

[fliion]

Wiz

His previous eight years were on the 320.

FO to LHS will have had the benefit of watching, learning and understanding FMA/VNAV/automation that cannot be fully downloaded in six weeks (heck it does things now that I get confused about sometimes - then again I'm no test pilot for sure)

You may be right but how will protective senior management and insurers react.

I suspect with caution.

Can you imagine the reputational risk with the media frenzy if we headlined an incident while a new DEC with no previous type experience (or heavy time) had a mishap?

Think of the "we told you so" positioning from German & Canadian vested interests.

Watch this space.

f.

[Trader]

Why would EK have to react to this accident?? They have been VERY proactive on the stabilized criteria front and, by and large, our crews do an excellent job!!

While you can't say it will never happen I believe the VAST majority of EK crews would have went around at 1000' but certainly by 500' when this crew was laterally off as well as vertically off (based on what the NTSB has said so far).

The comments regarding CRM are right on though!! I hope the cost cutting does not bring in non pilot (or non active pilot) instructors. The EK CRM course is the absolute best CRM I have seen and, in my opinion, probably an industry leader. ND, who runs it, is brilliant in his job and ,I hope, is not being hamstrung by new leadership.

This recent cost cutting is worrisome. EK has built a good system which they seem to be dismantling now.

The flying hour increase was the start of the narrow minded, short term cost measures.

[Wizofoz]

Hmmmm....Sum Dum Fuk at NTSB is probably joining the ranks of the unemployed over that one...totally unacceptable...how embarrassing

Apparently the NTSB "Official" who confirmed the names was an unpaid intern!

You get what you pay for....

[Non Zero]

“During the approach, there were statements made in the cockpit, first about being over the glide path, then about being on the glide path, then about being under the glide path, Hersman explained, citing the CVR. One pilot has told investigators he realized the aircraft was too low at about 500 feet, or about 34 seconds to impact with SFO’s sea wall."

But even as the pilots were aware of being too high and then too low, they did not realize the 777’s speed had dropped from a target speed of 137 knots to 103 knots until seconds before impact, according to NTSB.

NTSB completes work at Asiana 777 crash site; no systems anomalies found | Safety content from ATWOnline (http://atwonline.com/safety/ntsb-completes-work-asiana-777-crash-site-no-systems-anomalies-found?NL=ATW-04&Issue=ATW-04_20130712_ATW-04_236&[email protected]&YM_MID=1408525&sfvc4enews=42)

[Capt Jack Rosen]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=related&v=JhoAfgYhhs0

[Fearless Leader]

Capt. Sum Ting Wong


F***king Brillant!!!!!

[HPSOV L]

Wizofoz:

Can you help me out here...imagine I am downwind descending in FLCH HOLD and ATC says “y'all make a visual approach now, follow xx”. I set 1000' on the MCP, disconnect the autopilot and perform one of my exemplary visual approaches. F/D off but PM leaves his on. We set a higher alt on the MCP when stabilised.
Will the autothrottle stay in HOLD?

PS -sorry guys they had 4 pilots because the trainee has to fly with a TRI, normally it would be 3 out to 12:30.

[falconeasydriver]

HPSOV L,

Yes, your speed will decay all the way into the amber band and you will eventually stall unless of course you are not automagic dependent, no AT wakeup, is my understanding.

[Wizofoz]

feds correct- no A/T wakeup in that scenario- but further I think the speculation is the Asiana crew set the MCP alt to zero.

[HPSOV L]

Crikey, they should get that fixed or put a sign up before someone has a nasty accident...;)

[Non Zero]

no A/T wakeup in that scenario- but further I think the speculation is the Asiana crew set the MCP alt to zero.

Minimum Maneuvering Speed
Indicates maneuver speed margin to stick shaker or low speed buffet. Top of the bar is the airspeed that provides:
1.3g maneuver capability to stick shaker with flaps down

EICAS message AIRSPEED LOW
Level: Caution
Aural: Beeper
Message Logic: Airspeed is below Minimum Maneuvering Speed

The autothrottle can support stall protection if 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 panel speed window, whichever is greater.
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.

The A/T ARM Switches looks like they were in OFF. Or the airplane went below Minimum Maneuvering Speed below 100 ft RA. But still AIRSPEED LOW + beeper + Caution at 100ft RA ...

[Non Zero]

Will the autothrottle stay in HOLD?

I will exclude the HOLD FLCH SPD unless the crew had a diabolic willing to set the MCP Speed below VREF30+10 (or+5). When in HOLD and the speed reaches the MCP speed automatically changes in THR to maintain the selected speed.

[Wizofoz]

When in HOLD and the speed reaches the MCP speed automatically changes in THR to maintain the selected speed.

No it absolutely does not.


IF auto-throttle wake-up engages, it puts the A/T into SPD mode, and either targets a speed just outside the low speed amber band if the selected speed is INSIDE the amber band, OR targets the bugged speed if the bug is OUTSIDE the amber band.

BUT- Auto-throttle wake-up does NOT function when the A/T is in HOLD (Typically when climbing or descending in FLCH or VNAV SPD)

THAT is consistent with what you quoted here-

Note: When the pitch mode is FLCH or TOGA, or the airplane is below 400 feet above the airport on take-off, or below 100 feet radio altitude on approach, the auto-throttle will not automatically activate.


The NTSB has confirmed the A/T switches were in "ARM"- so being in FLCH and thus with A/T in "Hold" seems a likely scenario.

Yes. they would have gotten an "Airspeed Low" EICAS- but seem to have been slow to respond to it.

[Dropp the Pilot]

"FOR A START THR does not act to maintain a speed- it sets the power to whatever is the currently annunciated maximum thrust on the Thrust Rating Panel"

Wrong.

It would be "THR REF" that does that. "THR" applies power as required by the current mode - you have no idea what amount that will be.

[HPSOV L]

I'm still a little alarmed that the concept of this trap had never occured to me.

1. I deduce that talk of autothrottle wakeup in HOLD mode is perhaps misleading as it is already 'awake'- ie: it is already activated in HOLD mode. Maybe this is the crux of why there is no stall protection logic.


2. Could the accident aircraft have been in VNAV SPD with 0' or a MAA set on the MCP?

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

[falconeasydriver]

I'm still a little alarmed that the concept of this trap had never occured to me.

1. I deduce that talk of autothrottle wakeup in HOLD mode is perhaps misleading as it is already 'awake'- ie: it is already activated in HOLD mode. Maybe this is the crux of why there is no stall protection logic.


2. Could the accident aircraft have been in VNAV SPD with 0' or a MAA set on the MCP?

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


3. Am I correct in saying that if there is no altitude set on the MCP for FLCH to capture you effectively have no autothrottle? And that the only way to regain the autothrottle is to change modes or turn the f/ds off, whereby the autothrottle mode changes to SPD?

The sad thing is, the A/T is virtually identical the 757/767, and almost all the little traps existed when I flew that as well. All these traps were demonstrated when I did my 757 course 12 years ago, by experienced trainers with many many years of TRI/TRE experience.
Sadly inspite of the inevitable well meaning protestations of a few, my 777 course lacked the depth of understanding to even delve close to the depth I encountered previously, the net result being a lower level of systems knowledge.
I pity the guys who continue to baffle themselves in the hold using VNAV who scratch their heads when the thing decides to climb....:hmm:
It must be a real shock for an aeerboos convert.

[Wizofoz]

"FOR A START THR does not act to maintain a speed- it sets the power to whatever is the currently annunciated maximum thrust on the Thrust Rating Panel"

Wrong.

It would be "THR REF" that does that. "THR" applies power as required by the current mode - you have no idea what amount that will be.

Quite correct- thanks for the pick up.

[fringhtok]

You guys who weren't shown this 'feature', did you do your training with EK? I'm curious because I was definitely shown during initial at least twice, and I've seen it again doing manual handling. I bet we'll all be seeing it in the near future. For what it's worth, the TRE told me 'If the FMA says HOLD, that means hold the thrust levers with your hand'. I suppose it's a little geeky, but I do just religiously. My 2 dirhams........

[clear to land]

It is most definately was a part of the initial TR at EK (8yrs ago), and it still is!

[HPSOV L]

I spent 9 joyous years at EK and, with respect, I don't recall it being pointed out to me.
Lets be clear we are talking about a rare but conceivable situation where you have transitioned to a manual approach with a certain MCP and F/D configuration. In this particular case you may intuitively incorrectly assume you are in SPD mode and/or that stall protection is available.
Not to confused with understanding what FLCH HOLD means.
No comments please about FMA monitoring etc! Not the point...

[fringhtok]

Not to confused with understanding what FLCH HOLD means.
No comments please about FMA monitoring etc! Not the point...

I respectfully disagree. It doesn't matter what MCP or F/D mode you are in. If the first word on the FMA is 'HOLD', the A/T is on but it will not 'wake up' and it offers no stall protection. There are a few different modes that will cause A/T HOLD and none are: rare but conceivable

Maybe I'm missing your point?

[HPSOV L]

You'd have to go back a couple of pages, but here is an example of what I'm trying to say.
You are descending to an altitude in HOLD at idle. You are cleared a visual approach and, for arguments sake, inadvertantly set 0' on the MCP or wind it to a higher MAA.
You turn off your F/D but the PM forgets to cycle his so it remains on. You are a little hot and high and assume that the autothrottles are attempting to control speed in idle as you aim to be stable at 500'. Like they have done in every approach you've flown to date. You don't notice the FMA is still HOLD and assume it changed to SPD when you turned your F/D off.
When you lift the nose to intercept the glidepath from above speed decays rapidly ....:(
I have never seen this scenario happen; I'm surmising from the FCOM.
I'd be happy to be corrected.

[Dropp the Pilot]

Oy.

Standard ops: planning to do some manual manoeuvring? Both FDs off, PMs FD back on. "HOLD" cannot occur.


RTFM

[fringhtok]

HPSOV- Got you. That is an interesting one. Of course there are many ways that mistake could, and should, have been caught but it's an interesting way to get yourself in a predicament......

Dropp- I know what the manual says and these guys probably do too. That's not the point. If they followed the manual to the letter, they wouldn't have made the news. It's all just an exercise to see how a perfectly good airplane ended up written off with several dead and many injured. Did they make a mistake I might repeat? That's my interest.

[White Knight]

You turn off your F/D but the PM forgets to cycle his so it remains on.

I'm genuinely interested by this statement. I'm not Boeing bashing here but just want to compare SOPS. I seem to recall that on the 330/340 the PF would (on a visual or Non-ILS) call for FDs off and PNF would select BOTH off. I know the Autothrust systems are different but this technique would make sense anyway.

Happily the 380 has only one FD PB which sets both captain/FO FDs on or off at the same time.

Safe flying chaps..........

[Non Zero]

When in HOLD and the speed reaches the MCP speed automatically changes in THR to maintain the selected speed.
No it absolutely does not.


IF auto-throttle wake-up engages, it puts the A/T into SPD mode, and either targets a speed just outside the low speed amber band if the selected speed is INSIDE the amber band, OR targets the bugged speed if the bug is OUTSIDE the amber band.

Correct ... when in Flight Envelope Protection (stall protection) mode the Autothrottle goes in SPD and on the FMA you'll see SPD.

In a normal descent when you select FLCH the FMA changes in FLCH SPD and the Autothrottle will change in either THR, IDLE, or HOLD. In FLCH the airplane will try to maintain the selected speed in MCP with the pitch attitude. The FMA will change into SPD when you reach and intermediate altitude but you are not in FLCH anymore since the Pitch changes into ALT

[GoreTex]

on the bus the A/T is on or off, makes it pretty simple, maybe on the john deere they should remove it at all if its too complicated for most of the drivers

[glofish]

Some gloating by the AB fraction here! You all forgot Bangalore, or may be you were still wearing Pampers then, but a perfectly working Bus went CFIT in India in Open Mode .... You can do that stunt in any aluminium tube! :ugh:

Oh, i forgot, maybe not in a king of the road, or should i say Road King? You know, the big fat and loud thing that is impressive on Route66, always first at the gas station, last on top of any small hill and not quite so impressive when you look at its mechanics.

The jockey from Asiana came from the Bus. Maybe in a flashback he thought everything was alright if the levers stay dead ..... Not to pretend that the AT from the T7 is a piece of art, it might need revisiting, but maybe Bus-drivers should be confined to just that, driving Buses and leave the handflying skilled guys on the John Deere. Maybe this would be a safer world ...... ;)

[donpizmeov]

OH NO! Did someone blaspheme about the profit Boeing?

Think its safe to say no matter how smart and shiny the equipment is there is always someone who will find a way of making it dirty in the mud.

The Don

[falconeasydriver]

Good god Don, I'm agreeing with you again, whats the world coming too?

If these numpties just flew the aeroplane, 3 people wouldn't have died.

[ironbutt57]

Airbus came 5 months later with the modification that fixed the problem and ever since not a single mishap.

Yah a limitation regarding the use of open descent during non precision approaches...ignore the limitation, and the same could happen..

[Kamelchaser]

I don't normally get involved in the Boeing vs Airbus debate....but Sandhound, seriously?...."GREAT PEACES OF JUNK"?

Your argument sounds like something I'd hear from an eight year old.

And you could also learn to spell.

Grow up chum.

[lowstandard]

Good thing a spelling test is not part of a PPC.

The system was mismanaged, kind of like blaming the cruise control on your car for going through a red light.

[falconeasydriver]

I am sure you speak and write at least 7 languages. Congratulations. I only do 5

Smells like cow manure in here....

Honestly, who cares how many languages are spoken/written, its not indicative of your level of intelligence, the argument could be put forward "jack of all trades, master of none"

As to the AB/B debate, go and have a look at the AF threads, 1000's of posts and still it goes on. This accident, well, most of us are fairly certain we know the nuts and bolts of what happened.
The difference here is one of philosophy, I HAVE flown both AB and B along with other french jets and even a Dutch one, and my view is I prefer the conventional philosophy because it was how I was trained, the AB philosophy goes against many of the basic motor skills we all learnt when we first started flying which is why I don't like it, it doesn't matter if AB made it, Dassault or anyone else for that matter.

[ruserious]

I thought the 777 had moving throttles and this is why it is superior to the AB, as pilots ALWAYS know what their throttles are going :confused:

[Schnowzer]

Forget the moding, what if there had been a subtle failure or a ground system wasn't working as advertised? Isn't the pilot's job to scan the PFD, "Attitude, Height, Heading, Speed" and make certain they meet requirements? If the FD info is a tad off do we blindly follow it or "look through it" and make it work?

Best will in the world there will always be traps and failures that will catch pilots out but is it acceptable for a TRI and 2 other pilots to sit and watch a trainee fly 30kts below Vref?

If this had happened in an Airbus, Alpha Floor would have kicked in but what if it didn't? In any aircraft surely our expectation would have been a "Speed" call followed by someone moving the ^*+%#^% thrust levers or an actual pilot taking over.

I don't claim to be a sky god but the continuing dumbing down of our profession saps my will to live, the mistakes that are leading to deaths right now are those that any trained pilot had beaten out of them in their first 200 hours of aviation and have nothing to do with FMS and moding issues!

Happy to eat humble pie but on a CAVOK day, a crew with a perfectly working aircraft managed to miss a runway and kill and maim a bunch of people due to base incompetence. This is the third time it has happened this year and it is wholly unacceptable!

[Rather Be Skiing]

Looking through threads like this always leaves me wondering how it is possible for so many children to, apparently, be in charge of any airplane.

[doubletap]

Uh oh. Sounds like another case of airliner operatives pretending to be pilots.;)

[Non Zero]

The good old days

Douglas DC-4 - "Landing SFO" - 1956 - YouTube

[Non Zero]

back in 1990s

Children of the Magenta on Vimeo

[glofish]

You guys hit the nail on the head! Moving throttles are just great ..... Because they move forward when thrust increases. When not, no thrust!
Now if a thrust increase is anticipated or desired and they do not move, what on earth could be the reason?

- malfunction (already discarded by NRSB)
- bad/insufficient training?
- old AB habits?
- bad monitoring of crew for whatever reason?

To conclude: amen again to Schnowzer

[pilotday]

Doris Day did better than the average manual handling sim session.

[clear to land]

Aviating 101-Power + Attitude=Performance.
Landing 101-Aimpoint, Aspect, Airspeed.
Applies in an AB, a Boeing and even in a Helicopter. What has happened is that the people in the crew seats were not AVIATING!!!!!! Who cares what mode/where thrust levers are etc-either the aircraft is doing what you want it to do-or you make it! That is what did not happen!!!!
AIRMANSHIP-pure and simple.

[pilotday]

watching "children of the magenta" should be required course material once a year...however, alarmingly amount of pilots are unable to drop to the lowest level of automation without near crashing. No manual handling sim will fix that. What to do?

[ironbutt57]

Of course, the 777 does have moving throttles.
When the autothrottle is in HOLD mode, aircraft speed is assumed to be controlled by pitch, so the thrust does not change. The surprising thing is that there is no 'wake-up' from this mode.
The assumption is that the correct pitch will be maintained by the (auto)pilot and that a lower altitude will always be selected in the MCP.

Sounds like 767, but since VS mode was selected in this instance, would the A/T have been in HOLD mode?

[glofish]

No!

That's why i hate the FLCH mode below 6000agl.

It lacks the wake-up mode and, anyway, in below 15-10k you are prone to inversions which make this mode give you some high rod's.
Add to that requested fast speed reductions, configuration changes, then the rate is a good guess at most, mainly unmonitored by most modern aviators, and top that with a rather sluggish spin-up (if the correct alt is set) and you have what leads to the many ASRs stating "short line-up by ATC" or "unexpected shortcut" leading to a GA. At least these blokes went around, but they most probably stuffed-up the approach by not dominating the rod.

That's why I do not use FLCH below 6000agl. V/S does just fine, i control my rod and i even 'assist' the spin-up with my hands. Not only for comfort reasons, but to stay in the loop, to train my subconscious to control speed even with the AT on. I like that symbiosis, that's what i was lacking on the Bus. There it was either 'him' or 'me', (unless A-prot sets in).

The whole bs started during training when some TREs called V/S = very seldom and religiously preached FLCH. Or VNAV even in holdings or when extending centreline on vectors.
Now they have to mend fences with another FCI when their products stuff up!

(Brace for that revolutionary FCI telling us to use V/S when intercepting .... )

[Three Wire]

Wrong, very wrong.

[BuzzLightyears]

watching "children of the magenta" should be required course material once a year...however, alarmingly amount of pilots are unable to drop to the lowest level of automation without near crashing. No manual handling sim will fix that. What to do?

You are 110% absolutely correct! And the video is quite entertaining too. Very very interesting ... highly recommended!

[fliion]

Couple of points:

1). Bus V. Boeing again?.? .. Nauseatingly immature.

2). Not sure this FLCH discussion is relevant ...the MCP set altitude would dictate THR-FD (probably off) ..unlikely the RWY threshold was set in MCP...and if so - hard to believe. It did not become unstable until after 500'

3). Has anyone ever had a line training flight where the TRE/I encourages or suggests flying it from 10000'. No, because although they say its training and that's the time to do it...it's checking...and he will will "2" you if you get it wrong...."But I thought this was training" won't get you anywhere with the Interview panel....never mind that the TRI could have only been a Capt for six months anyway.

Changes coming?

f.

[TLB]

Quote:
watching "children of the magenta" should be required course material once a year...however, alarmingly amount of pilots are unable to drop to the lowest level of automation without near crashing. No manual handling sim will fix that. What to do?

You are 110% absolutely correct! And the video is quite entertaining too. Very very interesting ... highly recommended!

And the really scary part about that video is that it was made 16 years ago !

[BlackWater01]

"Childern of the Magenta" excellent video ... never obsolete ... and it was 1997!

Has anyone ever had a line training flight where the TRE/I encourages or suggests flying it from 10000'. No, because although they say its training and that's the time to do it...it's checking...and he will will "2" you if you get it wrong...."But I thought this was training" won't get you anywhere with the Interview panel....never mind that the TRI could have only been a Capt for six months anyway.

Spot on ... especially in a far-east cockpit environment where they fail you for not correctly holding the heading knob. Cannot imagine a training flight with a korean TRI/E shooting an approach in FLCH ...



Bus V. Boeing again?.? .. Nauseatingly immature.

It is but just a quick reply ... using FLCH for an approach is as bad as trying to pull up on a fully developed stall ...

[Non Zero]

I recommend also the Doris Day video too :)... there'r lot of good learning points too ...

[169west]

watching "children of the magenta" should be required course material once a year...however, alarmingly amount of pilots are unable to drop to the lowest level of automation without near crashing. No manual handling sim will fix that. What to do?

You are 110% absolutely correct! And the video is quite entertaining too. Very very interesting ... highly recommended!

And the really scary part about that video is that it was made 16 years ago !

16 years ago but it's never to late to learn ... at least till pilots are required to fly a plane!

I like the red box FLY THE AIRPLANE FIRST

[Mr Good Cat]

I like the red box FLY THE AIRPLANE FIRST

Second.

In EK you should first retrieve the ASR form in case you were nearly unstable at 20 DME from touchdown.

[Denti]

Has anyone ever had a line training flight where the TRE/I encourages or suggests flying it from 10000'. No, because although they say its training and that's the time to do it...it's checking...and he will will "2" you if you get it wrong...."But I thought this was training" won't get you anywhere with the Interview panel....never mind that the TRI could have only been a Capt for six months anyway.

Dunno, first flight on the line with on a jet during linetraining and the trainer asked me to switch it all off at FL170 and fly it manually raw data for the rest. From there it happened at least once a day, qite often for the whole sector, until i was out of line training. And since i thought it a nice idea i do the same still today. However, that was training in europe in an airline that had a serious training department.

[OnceBitten]

Clear to Land, you are the man!

Aviating 101-Power + Attitude=Performance.
Landing 101-Aimpoint, Aspect, Airspeed.
Applies in an AB, a Boeing and even in a Helicopter. What has happened is that the people in the crew seats were not AVIATING!!!!!! Who cares what mode/where thrust levers are etc-either the aircraft is doing what you want it to do-or you make it! That is what did not happen!!!!
AIRMANSHIP-pure and simple.

Agree 100%.

I have read 7 pages of this crap to get to what is truly the issue of flying a visual approach in gin clear conditions. A 777 or C182, who cares, they all are push and pull, stick and rudder stuff, same basic flying principles. Remember that basic stuff we all learnt on day one in a circuit area? Still applies!

Well said C2L!. :D

[Non Zero]

Maybe we should all admit that, however many years flying, we all can learn something from these incidents.

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

I learned how to use the smilies!

But see what you did ... you made us all emotional now ... your post should have been the last one before closing the thread!

Well said

[max AB]

Fliion I take it you are a Boeing boy, next time you are checking the crew's licences, turn yours over and notice that it says you are rated on the B777. That means you are supposed to be already competent at handling the big jet, before line training... If you fail to demonstrate that ability even on a training flight you need to get back into the sim. I would think a 2 is most appropriate, ie you get more TRAINING... Perhaps if that had happened to our Korean colleagues this thread would not have started....?

[ironbutt57]

another...Oztronaut speaking....another TRI who has turned line TRAINING into line checking....go figure...forgotten your OWN line training have you??:ugh:

[Metro man]

The lawyers must be drooling over this:

Asiana passengers file lawsuit against Boeing - Channel NewsAsia (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/asiana-passengers-file/746890.html)

CHICAGO, Illinois: A group of 83 passengers aboard an Asiana Airlines flight which crash-landed in San Francisco has filed a lawsuit seeking millions from the aircraft's manufacturer Boeing, their lawyers said Tuesday.

While a final determination of what caused the deadly crash of the Boeing 777 is years away,Chicago-based Ribbeck Law said initial reports indicate it could have been caused by a mechanical malfunction of the auto-throttle.

Boeing could also have been at fault for the design of sliding ramps which deployed inside the plane, "further injuring passengers and blocking their exit to safety," Ribbeck said in a press release.

There were also possibly problems with the seatbelts given that police officers "had to pass knives to crew members inside the burning wreckage" so they could cut passengers free," Ribbeck said.

The class action lawsuit was filed in Chicago, Boeing's corporate headquarters.

It will be expanded in coming days to include Asiana and several component part manufacturers "who may be responsible for this disaster," Ribbeck said.

The Asiana jet from Shanghai via Seoul clipped a sea wall with its tail as it came in to land at the US airport on July 6 and skidded out of control before catching fire, leaving three dead and more than 180 injured.

Zhang Yuan, who suffered severe spinal injuries and a broken leg, said it was important that victims protect their rights "immediately."

"It is terrible that the sliding ramps deployed inside the plane blocking our way to the exit door, trapping us inside the burning plane," she said in the statement.

"My husband, my daughter, other passengers and I would not have suffered such terrible injuries if the sliding ramps and the seat belts would not have trapped us in the burning wreckage."

Ribbeck filed a motion Monday seeking to require Boeing to provide details about the jet's design and maintenance and will seek access to all of the evidence discovered in the course of the investigation.

Swift legal action is "vital" for the victims and their families because international treaties prohibit US safety regulators from making determinations of liability or fault.

"Just compensation to these families cannot be provided under the law, until liability of all parties is established first," Kelly said.

"Ribbeck Law's independent experts will monitor the official investigation and will conduct our own investigation for our clients to assign fault to each of the responsible parties for this tragedy."

[falconeasydriver]

Well, I managed to cheat fate again in the Boeing death trap yesterday by conducting "dangerous" visual approach :eek:

I think I need counseling, but amazingly, by putting one hand on the thrust levers and the other on the yoke, the aeroplane did exactly as I expected :eek:

Should I sue?

[glofish]

OMG, falcon, how were you able to survive such a stunt?
Did you actually feel something with your bare hands?

Yeah, I guess a lawsuit is the correct answer to such problems. We have to eliminate manufacturers who design aircraft with moving controls, because it is too dangerous for some jockeys who forget why they are in a plane when these controls don't, for whatever reason.

Redundancy get's a whole new meaning: If something does not work as intended, sue later rather than intervene on the spot (or rather than train the guys who should intervene).

And everyone thinks it's ok. Because it can generate money, .... again.
I told my son this morning to become a lawyer, it pays more and is safer ....
Brave new world. :yuk:

[max AB]

IButt we differ then, I don't think it's acceptable to use a commercial flight with 500 punters in the back to train a pilot who has just demonstrated an inability to pole the jet....you obviously do, each to their own. By Fliion's reckoning the Asiana Captain could not have failed this training flight, just put him back in another jet and practise on line training flights till he gets it right I suppose?

I do remember my line training...I was a hopeless joke.

[HPSOV L]

Awww...this thread started so well too:hmm:
I think most of you have missed the subtlety of what likely happened. That means you are still candidates for it. Especially given the fatigue levels I remember in the 'pit;)
PS; watch that secondary stall...

[millerscourt]

Any Pilot worth his/her salt should know the approximate engine power setting for an approach with whatever flap has been selected and should be included in the constant scan regardless of whether the thrust levers move or not when auto throttle selected.

From my B767/757 days I cannot recall ever using V/S mode and was always told of its dangers. Don't know anything about the B777 which seems to have an inherent problem for those pilots with a lack of awareness of what is going on around them ie airmanship.

[fliion]

Max AB,

What can I say other than - thank you for so aptly articulating my point.

That's the spirit - just fail the 'trainee' in 'training' - "

"where we're from you have no business being in the seat if you need training after the sim -- so on back there you go junior"

What comes around swings around Chuck.

f.

[donpizmeov]

I don't think that is what he was say F. I believe he was suggesting that rather than train something a trainee is having trouble with in an Aircraft full of fare paying punters, maybe they should be sent back to the SIM, and be retrained there. Nothing sinister about that.

The Don

[max AB]

As this flight was a training event it's pretty sure that the accident report will allocate pages to that. Consider the previous sector, hypothetically the trainee could have done a similar thing yet the more experienced instructor TRI Fliion took over and safely landed. After a good debrief TRI Fliion sent him on his way to pracitise on his next flight to SFO.... On training you fail to progress, that gets you the extra training you need....how is that a bad thing for anyone? But don't practise with punters if you are below a minimum standard.

The law suit against Boeing reminds me of the mid eighties when Cessna stopped building pistons....apparently if you spun them into the ground you would end up dead???

[fliion]

Plenty of times where Trainers/Captains/ & occasionally FOs have had to intervene where the answer is NOT to fail and send to the sim.

If there was a 'dual control' monitoring system in the Boeing, could you imagine the ASRs with the proportionate amount of 777s - 100+

You can shut the sims down...if you guys had your way.

f.

[BYMONEK]

Millerscourt

Agree 100% with your first paragraph. However, the problem with many 'children of the magenta line' is that they do not and could not tell you what are the appropriate power settings. Those that flew 737, DC-9, 1-11 etc had to know them. Today, much faith and trust is placed in automation and aircraft reliability. Modern systems are far more reliable then previous generations so our trust is not misguided. Technology, whether it be phones, cars, TV's etc are expected to work as advertised and a generation is being brought up on trust and expectation. I guess in the context of the modern pilot you could call it complacency.

The more senior pilots have a healthy dose of suspicion running through their veins due to many years of less than reliable systems and this is known as resilience. When things do fail, they are less likely to be caught out by the startle factor. They also have the core skills to deal with it because they experienced it more frequently.

I guess the art of 'managing' modern aircraft is the ability to adopt both skills into the flight deck. Your last paragraph aptly demonstrates why there is also no place on modern flight decks for those trained by ignorant pilots of aircraft now in museums. This is not a criticism of you, but of the training organisation that put you on the B767,757. The same statement that may well apply to Asiana and the culture that exists there once a full investigation has taken place.

Whatever the outcome, Asiana will not be the only airline looking rather nervously at how they train their modern pilots. This accident, along with AF447, may well be a game changer for the industry.

[donpizmeov]

Fliion,

I think we are debating about if extra training should be done in the SIM or on the aircraft. Don't you think this should be considered on a case by case basis? That is what is done now. I am not sure about the Boeing Airline here, but just because someone has a bad day and gets a two at the Airbus airline does not mean a SIM visit is mandatory. It all depends on the circumstances.
What would you suggest as a better way?

The Don

[millerscourt]

BYMONEK

Never had a problem myself managing modern aircraft despite being brought up on B707's and B737-200's so what is your beef about the training organisation that put me on the B767/757? Same airline as you you ex brownie!

On giving the matter further thought I did use V/S from above to get on a glide slope when necessary but not in a climb. Do I pass now??:D As it was a long time ago I reserve the right to have forgotten that.

When in GF and watching our leader of the day ( from AUH ) going into LHR and told to maintain 250kts which he duly dialled up but left aircraft in VNav, I watched the speed built up to 280kts before I suggested FLCH. Some Pilots are just not with it regardless of their background.

[fliion]

Don

Point taken BUT

My issue was with MaxAB suggestion that one should be completely competent if they left the training college with a piece of paper 'BEFORE' they go line flying..that's rubbish.

What would I suggest?

As one poster mentioned before TRI/Es encouraging hand flying in line training both as PM (just as important) and PF without the threat of a punitive outcome.

We need to do a lot more of it.

I do it when I'm not tired...which is not very often.

f.

[millerscourt]

fliion

What is this PM thing? Is it an EK thing only or has it replaced PNF worldwide?

[BYMONEK]

PM refers to Pilot Monitoring. It 'replaces' the term PNF (Pilot Not Flying) as it better encapsulates the role of the 'non handling' pilot. In other words, even the non handling pilot should be actively monitoring. PNF may imply that because you're not flying, you can put your feet up and relax.

To be honest, it makes bugger all difference what it's called and ultimately comes down to the individual pilot on the day, not some fancy term that's fashionable for a few years until the next legally acceptable title comes along. It's not just an Emirates term.

By the way Miller, I may have been a scout in my younger days, but never a Brownie! My beef was that trainers in your previous Company, no doubt from a generation before glass cockpits, had taught you the dangers of V/S but not the advantages. As a result of which, you 'never' used it although you did retract that statement later. That was the point of my post, balancing reliability of modern automation against healthy suspicion and resilience.

I didn't doubt for one minute that a man of your vast experience, calibre and knowledge would be guilty of anything other than supreme airmanship, whatever aircraft you flew! :E

[millerscourt]

Oh dear, sounds like BA and their Monitored Approach which no other Airline in the world uses. I always thought every approach was monitored by the other Pilot regardless of the terminology in use. Who dream't up PM instead of PNF? Did not seem to stop 4 Pilots was it at MEL cocking it up. Perhaps that was in PNF days so that's OK then I guess and now we have PM everything is safe again.

PS Bymonek The brownie bit referred to your old mob at EMA

[fliion]

Miller

It's an operational philosophy adopted by Boeing. Al their relevant type FCTMs
/Manuals etc now reflect this.

f.

[kennedy]

Considering that a lot of us are children of the magenta line, I have been asking my fellow pilots in the right seat for a while now, ( line flying not training flights)

At top of climb, "What do you think the box will say for level off altitude and more importantly, the drift down speed will be, before you select the engine out VNAV page?"

Or when working it out for the approach, 'what will be the braking distance/FOLD? ' BEFORE they press the magic box! Just so they start to get a feel for the ballpark figure before the box comes out with the answer, because we know the problem with magic boxes is ' rubbish in rubbish out'

Hopefully they will then pick up the fxxk up, before they end up in the office for tea and biscuits.

Just my little effort to get pilots to think, hope one day it will help someone.

Not that hopeful, because none of them have even thought about the figures before, and trust the magic box totally!!!

[BYMONEK]

Nothing to do with BA's monitored approach. Every approach they do is monitored because the person who does the take off and landing does not 'fly' the climb cruise or initial descent part. There are other airlines that use the monitored approach philosophy and having used both in my career, actually prefer them when landing in poor visibility. That, however, is another subject altogether.

As I said previously, whatever it's called, it's down to the pilot on the day to use the airmanship they have or were trained to have. Some people find it acceptable to use mobile phones whilst the other pilot is taxiing. Some pilots can't see a problem with adding up the times on the flight plan in the climb passing FL200 even though the flight is 8 hours long. Others are happy to do a goodbye PA during descent even though they just had 7 and a half hours on their arse showing photos on their Ipad. And all of the above in a Company with a rigid and enforced culture of SOP adherence.

Back to the thread I think.

[falconeasydriver]

At top of climb, "What do you think the box will say for level off altitude and more importantly, the drift down speed will be, before you select the engine out VNAV page?"

Or when working it out for the approach, 'what will be the braking distance/FOLD? ' BEFORE they press the magic box! Just so they start to get a feel for the ballpark figure before the box comes out with the answer, because we know the problem with magic boxes is ' rubbish in rubbish out'

Hopefully they will then pick up the fxxk up, before they end up in the office for tea and biscuits.

Just my little effort to get pilots to think, hope one day it will help someone.

Not that hopeful, because none of them have even thought about the figures before, and trust the magic box totally!!!

The trouble is Ken, if I did that on a training sector theres a better than even chance I'd get me arse handed to me, particularly the landing distance calculation.
With respect to the drift down, I did a line check to a place where there are no terrain constraints (I'll let you guess, but the flight number starts with a "6") and on discussion on my sector, I noted the drift down was virtually irrelevant given it was a tanking sector, and there was no terrain...queue tut tutting from the occasional line checker who lives in the sim.
The trouble with the practical application is that one person encourages it, the next actively discourages it, and the third one can't fathom what you are talking about because they can't find an FCOM or OMA reference to it.
THATS the problem IMHO when you have people with little or no experience of having to think for themselves...aka children of the magenta line.
Funnily enough, I'm finding I'm flying with the same guys on the freighter lately, all of whom seem to have a much better grasp of being practical.

[max AB]

My issue was with MaxAB suggestion that one should be completely competent if they left the training college with a piece of paper 'BEFORE' they go line flying..that's rubbish.

Fliion on your 777 transition you did a Skills Test and also Zero Flight Time, you then got your rating, ie you displayed a satisfactory competence, you are 777 qualified. The regulator is happy for you to trot off and fly a 777....line training is defined as route familiarisation only....that airlines (EK) give you more is a (good) bonus. If you can't display that competence specifically in handling, you get additional training to regain it. How hard is that to understand...? On a scale of 1 -5 where 2 requires additional training (fail) and a 3 is adequate, what would you score the Asiana trainee for handling?

[fliion]

Max

According you your theory...said Asiana pilot was erroneously signed off as he clearly was not ready ...

...after all its only route familiarization.

Not the skippers fault at all...just the skills TRE right?

Answer: NO. Skills tests and ZFTs are scripted - line flying is not and a lot has to be covered by the Trainer $ Trainee.

Any line jockey can give an FO route Fam...we do all the time
.
Stop talking bollox

Your idiom represents all that is wrong with some people in our industry: this arrogant sense of 'no room at the Inn' for these mensch who are not in full control of the destiny of the hundreds who sit behind him when they leave the school house....because after all way back when in my day when I got the signed piece of paper for the first time...all I needed was a little bit of 'route Fam' and I was good to go

Vomit.

f.

[max AB]

Ok ..so I'm guessing it was a 3.....I'll leave it at that, I cannot understand much of what you say, good luck.

[ironbutt57]

Any line jockey can give an FO route Fam...we do all the time

Maybe where you are...but in most other operations LTI's (line training capts are vetted and receive assessment and training, not to the level of TRI...TRI is required prior to Initial line check..LTI thereafter until final line check...IOE in the USA was also required to be conducted under a line training (IOE) capt which was an authority issued by the FAA..

[donpizmeov]

Fliion,

You are proving to be as sharp as a bowling ball.

Max has stated, correctly, that once ZFT and Skill tests are successfully completed you have a type rating. He also says that if, during line training, some handling weakness is found, the trainee may be sent back to the SIM for more training. Sounds reasonable to me...where is your problem with this?

You also state that TRIs and TRE s should encourage more hand flying, but you would , but wont because you are too tired. And they aren't?
You also want this extra hand flying to be punitive free. Is sending them to the SIM if required for more training Punitive? Or is it better to say to them "Fella you are sh@t at landings, stay away from doing them and you should be ok".:ugh:

The Don

[8che]

Just to add to the chorus Fliion,

So you are suggesting that in line training if you manually fly something badly you should be given a company standard 3 ?

Therefore preventing the company, the authority, or any other instructor from being able to access an accurate training record for you and as a result prevent the training department from helping you.

Millerscourt, I also have to take exception to your avoidance of V/S mode. Why would you avoid using a great mode that the manufacturer spent time installing. Perhaps you could explain how with the Autopilot engaged in descent you responded if the speed decayed while in FLCH or VNAVSPD due turbulence etc ? Let me guess you had to disconnect the A/P ?

and no V/S in climb ? why.... because it doesn't prevent speed decay ? That will be the same as manual flight then. Try climbing in an empty B777/767/757.

There but for the grace of god we all go with this accident. The requirement to leave the autothrottle engaged for all landings on this type (and airbus) is certainly eroding my skills.

[fliion]

Gents

After this ill leave you the last word -

Don, you need to reread what I wrote. I am saying that it is unrealistic to have someone fully trained and then leave the school house. If the guy is a basket case - he should never have left in the first place. Much can be tweaked on the line - including handling particularly in the landing phase. Max's theory is that if there is any intervention from TRI in line training- then the guy should never have had his ticket.

Remember the point he originally made was not about said Asiana pilot - it was about everyone should be qual'd once they come on-line. I stand by my point - rubbish

Re: being tired, it was a TIC dig at the Co.'s rostering..

All yours,

f.

[White Knight]

Some Pilots are just not with it regardless of their background.

And that hits the nail BANG on the head...........

I have to add that VS is a great mode if you know how to use it on the approach. What with CDAs all over Europe and UK etc...

[White Knight]

There but for the grace of god we all go with this accident

Rubbish......

Good aeroplane. CAVOK day. CFIT pure and simple! I could be harsher but pprune mods being as they are:D:D

[millerscourt]

8che

Although I had 10 years on the B767 It was over 16 years ago but despite operating across the Atlantic and to the Far East and Australia I suppose I must have encountered turbulence in the descent from time to time but I never had to disconnect the A/P so you guessed wrong. I cannot for the life of me remember how I survived without using the V/S mode except as I later mentioned when wanting to get on the G/S from above.

As it was a long time ago I do not really want to get into the technical merits of FLCH v V/S but surely if I was descending in VNAV at say 320 IAS and wanted to reduce to say 280 due turbulence going to FLCH and winding in 280 would have the same effect as using V/S and reducing the rate of descent? Bit like going from Managed to Selected in the Airbus surely?

[pilotday]

I have no idea what Ozonaught and Fliion are arguing about.

But a Couple points,

1. Fliion, you say you are from the USA, but I've never heard an American say "rubbish"

2. Checking/Training, whatever. During line training, a student shows clear deficiency on hand flying and they are dangerous. Call it remedial training/failure, doesn't matter. The 1 stripers are always sent back to sim after nearly killing 300 Indians when the TRI takes over the landing.

3. Another student can fly the airplane well, but has trouble with the radio or SOP through unfamiliar environment. Don't anyone dare "FAIL" that poor guy and send him back to the sim. What is he going to learn in the sim? TEACH him, watch for improvement on the return sector. Do they teach TRI's "fundamentals of instruction?" The definition of learning is a change of behavior.

4. Final point, Has anyone ever failed a manual handling sim? I've seen a few guys that should have.

These accidents come in three's. We are due for a 3rd "children of the magenta" crash. a. Air France, b. Asiana, C. ???????

[8che]

Millerscourt,

To be fair that's not what I asked. My question was considering your evasion of V/S on the B767 how do you deal with an undesirable speed decay from your selected speed when in the descent with FLCH and/or VNAVSPD ?

What annoys me is a complete avoidance of a designed mode for absolutely no operational reason and actually in contradiction to the manufacturers advice.

White knight

If you think an accident doesnt apply to you because of a seemingly obvious poor crew conduct and you're perfect record so far then you have a lot to learn about how our industry has developed. The vast majority of us have never come close to this or any other accident but there will always be lessons (or reminders) for all of us. I would hardly classify it as CFIT. There was nothing controlled about it.

[what_goes_up]

2. Checking/Training, whatever. During line training, a student shows clear deficiency on hand flying and they are dangerous. Call it remedial training/failure, doesn't matter. The 1 stripers are always sent back to sim after nearly killing 300 Indians when the TRI takes over the landing.

Not only the 1 stripers... Anyone having 1 or 2 in handling goes back to the SIM. No landing training on a commercial flight.

3. Another student can fly the airplane well, but has trouble with the radio or SOP through unfamiliar environment. Don't anyone dare "FAIL" that poor guy and send him back to the sim. What is he going to learn in the sim? TEACH him, watch for improvement on the return sector. Do they teach TRI's "fundamentals of instruction?" The definition of learning is a change of behavior.
That is what is being done... No one goes back into the SIM for SOP or radio and the like. But if it is the flows, IPT might help. If it is energy management, an additional SIM helps more than a talked down approach.

[White Knight]

If you think an accident doesnt apply to you because of a seemingly obvious poor crew conduct and you're perfect record so far then you have a lot to learn about how our industry has developed. The vast majority of us have never come close to this or any other accident but there will always be lessons (or reminders) for all of us. I would hardly classify it as CFIT. There was nothing controlled about it.

Many years says I watch the trends! This was cr@p flying at the lowest level. I wouldn't have signed off one of my PPL students back in the 80s if they'd flown an approach like this in a Cessna 182!!!!!

Of course it was CFIT. It's an Oxymoron but maybe you need help with these long words too:=:=:=

[8che]

What does CFIT stand for ? Can you spell out the words or do you need help with that ?

When you have finished spelling it out have a look at the definition of the word "controlled".

Then pick up any safety magazine and have a look how they define CFIT. Oh of course you probably don't read those as none of it applies to you !

[JAARule]

Yes, Knight, but that's because you come from what you freely admit is a sheltered workshop. Try flying in a demanding environment with the product of your own system. Your lot have a lot to answer for these days and are widely seen for being exactly what they have espoused over the years and not just due to world politics and lousy diplomacy policies. Now it's biting you (and US) in the arse. Take a look at your own back yard before you push your barrow..... :D:D:=:=

[millerscourt]

JAARule

I don't understand a word of what you are trying to say. I would have thought that EK with its extensive network is a pretty demanding flying environment.

[Wizofoz]

Controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) describes an accident in which an airworthy aircraft, under pilot control, is unintentionally flown into the ground, a mountain, water, or an obstacle

I disagree that this accident meets that definition, as it wasn't under proper control. CFIT is more about descending into terrain you didn't know was there, then not having the ability to avoid terrain you DO know is there.

[millerscourt]

Wiz

Whether that incident was CFIT by definition is irrelevant as what I assume WK was saying was that all those at the sharp end were totally out of the loop as to what the aircraft was doing whilst in CAVOK conditions and as such makes one wonder about these children of the magenta line.

[airtractor]

Agree with wizz and 8che

This accident would be classified as a LOC (Loss Of Control) in flight, not a CFIT.

On a different note, Have you seen the potential fatigue factor mentioned anywhere in the media?

[Wizofoz]

miller,

It's relevant because the lessons learnt and emphasis put in future training often come down to what is currently the most prevalent cause of accidents.

training and EGPWS has reduced CFIT from being the most common cause of preventable crashes to almost zero- and LOC has replaced it.

[Laker]

Airtractor,

whoa whoa whoa...You mentioned "fatigue." I think what you meant to say was 'tired.' Fatigue is a medical condition that most pilots don't seem to understand. It requires a certain set of pre-conditions to be valid and, consequently, does not exist in our industry. Certainly not at any of the middle eastern carriers.

[olasek]

LOC could be a category for this accident but there is even better one - ARC - Abnormal Runway Contact, it basically covers all botched landings.

[hopingforemirates]

I'm from the USA. I say 'rubbish' now. Also, to my chagrin, 'whilst' and 'amongst'. I refuse, however, to say 'maths', 'zed' or 'full stop'.

[troff]

I say "mobile" not "cell", "car park" not "parking lot", "ice" hockey because it's just easier that way. I still don't undrstand cricket. Rugby is pretty good. AFL is for guys that wear short shorts and tight shirts... but I really don't care because my wife makes more than I do, she's American, and she likes it here. And now, to get back on the thread: Those guys didn't know WTF was going on in that airplane and they crashed it, plain and simple. Lucky more were not lost.
NEXT?
:}

[hopingforemirates]

Oh yeah, and sometimes I use V/S and other times I use FLCH. Sometimes VNAV. I'm all over the map, MCP-wise.

[White Knight]

Yes, Knight, but that's because you come from what you freely admit is a sheltered workshop

I have no idea what you are talking about.... Please explain:ugh::{:ugh::{ Numpty:rolleyes::rolleyes: WTF is a 'sheltered workshop'? I have no idea what you are waffling on about unless you're an Australian who can't bear to be 2-0 down in the cricket!!!!

And yes wiz, CFIT descibes LOC very well........... It's an Oxymoron for putting a perfectly good aeroplane into the ground painfully:{ The Asiana 777 was under 'control'. Just not as Boeing designed it to be:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Wizofoz]

Sorry, WK, but CFIT and LOC are two quite distinct types of accident.

How can it be "Controlled flight into terrain" if control has been lost?

[yoyonow]

WK, as has already been pointed out. CFIT is not the same as LOC and it's certainly not an oxymoron. Apart from that you are entirely correct......

[pilotday]

Incident: EVA B773 at San Francisco on Jul 23rd 2013, descended below safe height (http://avherald.com/h?article=465e38db&opt=0)

Almost happened again for rwy 28L?

[White Knight]

Sorry folks; not LOC. the thing was still flying. Albeit barely..... If you chaps bothered reading accident reports you'll find CFIT is used far more than LOC for this kind of prang...

It was upright, still flying if a little slowly, all bits working. Ergo CFIT.

[White Knight]

Dear Lord....Please do not let White Knights over confidence exceed his inability least the ground rise up and strike him dead.

Something you've posted publicly old man.

Care to back up your inane comment?

[Wizofoz]

LOC

Description



Loss of control in flight is a major cause of fatal aircraft accidents. Loss of control usually occurs because the aircraft enters a flight regime which is outside its normal envelope.


107 KTS at 200' with thrust at idle meets this description.

Controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) describes an accident in which an airworthy aircraft, under pilot control, is unintentionally flown into the ground, a mountain, water, or an obstacle.[

It was NO under proper pilot control, but was INTENTIONALLY flown to the runway.



Stop flogging a dead horse WK.

[pilotday]

Stop flogging a dead horse WK.

This whole back and forth about Loss of Control or CFIT is good discussion, maybe a new category. "Miscellaneous Asian F* ups"

[donpizmeov]

I didn't know your parents were Asian Pilotday.

The Don

[Visual Procedures]

Ba duum tish! BWAAAHAHAHAHA.. Nice one :ok:

[pilotday]

KSFO-AM - FAA Places Restrictions on Foreign Pilots Landing at San Francisco [From ABC News] (http://www.ksfo560.com/common/more.php?m=58&ts=1375059003&article=DC164B8FF82B11E286DEFEFDADE6840A&mode=2)

FAA restricts non-US airlines from doing the dreaded CAVOK visual approach in SFO

[Left Coaster]

Foreign... as in only US carriers can fly the visual...not Canadian or British or German etc etc etc? That narrows it down a little hey? Carry extra fuel as SFO just got waaaaaay busier!

[pilotday]

Canadian and others will get visuals.

Sounds like the lawyers get involved with political correctness. Just think "foreign airline" means Air China, Asiana et al. Not Air Canada, Jazz, Speedbird, Qantas, Lufthansa...

This is nothing new, US Controllers have always treated "foreign airlines" with kit gloves.

[Metro man]

It sounds perfectly reasonable, if an airline cannot train it's pilots to perform a visual approach safely then they shouldn't be flying them. Some would argue if this is the case then they shouldn't be flying at all.

To ensure safety either increase piloting standards or reduce the level to which they need to perform. Obviously the first option is preferable but if not practical then restrict them to coupled ILS approaches on long runways with higher minima and leave the non precision approaches in poor weather to pilots competent to fly them.

[737er]

http://youtu.be/h3kREPMzMLk

25 minutes but I think you guys and gals will like it.

[harry the cod]

Interesting. Next SFO I do, i'll ask for the visual and tell them ''I'm British don't you know!'' Only problem with that is for the radio work as I would need to be PM. So, unless I have another capable Westerner sat next to me, I'm buggered as it's noodle boy doing the landing!

I could always get my Asian/Arabic F/O to do the PM role but unless he tells them the Captains OK ''cause he's British'', we wouldn't be offered the visual.

The 3rd alternative is that SFO ATC gets its **** together and starts providing the sort of service that many other International airports do automatically. Why make life more difficult than it really needs to be? JFK is another guilty party at times. ATC please note. You are there to provide US a service, not the other way round!

I'm not trying to make excuses for what will probably turn out as pilot error. Whether it is blamed on poor training, cultural issues or simply that the guy's ability was below average, flying into modern and busy ATC environments should be made as easy as possible regardless. It's called CRM. 'The use of all available resources, whether it be the aircraft, crew, ATC, engineering or any other resource for the safe operation of the flight. I don't think having a serviceable ILS available is too much to ask, is it?

Harry

[millerscourt]

I remember the days when going into London Gatwick in the early hours when dark and being offered visual inside East Grinstead which we all accepted with thanks.

Is this still on offer when quiet and weather good?

Clearly that was for locals only as for SFO now. Having said that I have seen a United B744 go around at SFO as too high and the trouble with SFO ATC they never tell you miles to run and you never know when going out say on the 140 Radial when they are going to turn you in for finals. US ATC is always frantic and how those without English as their first language get by sometimes amazes me.

[Tipsy Barossa]

noodle boy doing the landing!

NOODLE BOY? You you you.................