Cfit?
 

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?

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.

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.

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

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

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'.

Thread Creep Alert!
 

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?
:}

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

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

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:

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?

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......

EVA 777 instructed go-around by tower 28L SFO
 

Incident: EVA B773 at San Francisco on Jul 23rd 2013, descended below safe height

Almost happened again for rwy 28L?

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.

Something you've posted publicly old man.

Care to back up your inane comment?

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

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



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"

I didn't know your parents were Asian Pilotday.

The Don

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

KSFO-AM - FAA Places Restrictions on Foreign Pilots Landing at San Francisco [From ABC News]

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

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!

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.

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.

http://youtu.be/h3kREPMzMLk

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

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

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.

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