PPRuNe Forums

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 8th Jul 2013, 15:55   #861 (permalink)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 394
Four golds

Excellent post. Thanks for being so candid. That's the type of post that adds to the debate. A potential gotcha I'd never have thought of. That's the type of minute detail that the NTSB will look for.


You're describing a Chinese airline and this one was from Korea. Sorry I don't get the connection. If I follow your "logic" the culture in BA is the same as AF as LH etc etc.
BBK is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 15:58   #862 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: In the back of a bus
Posts: 748
Sorry, CC just reading in here now, noticed this
CNN is now reporting that at least one and possibly two door hatches malfunctioned and which caused the inflatable escape ramps to open inside the cabin.
Was pretty clear to me from the early pics that the L4 door was off when they stopped, not much you can do except get them to jump I suppose. It has been suggested elsewhere (not confirmed of course) that this may be where the 2 fatalities occurred if not via the hole in the pressure bulkhead- though I wonder about the latter since presumably the galley is fwd of that location?

As for luggage, it's rightly been pointed out that trying to stop it could potentially waste more time than it is worth. Of course as a pax I would actively discourage the people in front of me from doing so. I cannot recall the incident at present but during one evac an FA was qukes it oted as saying luggage was piling up at the exit as it was taken off the pax so they started lobbing it out of the door and away from the slide... however you then risk hurting those who have already left.

Time to re-look at cabin baggage limits methinks! A statement from one of the OZ214 pax mentioned luggage falling over the pax on impact. Thinking of some of the bags I see on a regular basis, does not make me like the odds in an impact. Time to email safety department again I think...

There's a photo doing the rounds of social media showing the FAs assisting pax on ground, one is clearly seen lying on the ground, any word on the condition of the crew? One news reporter made a comment that makes it seem he thinks the injured pax floated off by themselves and had nothing to do with FA J Kim carrying them out on her back! Tsk tsk media make me sick sometimes...

Edit: thanks for the update on the CC. Nice to see them getting some recognition, many of the media seem to be lagging in that department

Last edited by givemewings; 8th Jul 2013 at 16:02.
givemewings is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:00   #863 (permalink)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 80
Aviation is not a place for prejudiced viewpoints.
Yet the sweeping statements about the "media" all being idiots, that journalists are not to be trusted, that "bean counters" are only interested in saving costs, all continue here in abundance...
GobonaStick is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:00   #864 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,181
Originally Posted by SalNichols View Post
As an aerospace engineer and manager, I'm not sure what is scarier: automated systems that are so complex that no one understands their decision logic; automated systems that may not be completely reliable if modes selected are inappropriate for the flight regime...
As a software engineer (albeit not aero/realtime) whose degree course included several modules where civil FBW specification, design and testing were examined in detail*, I can tell you that your first point is invariably a misconception brought about by misunderstandings and stereotyping - in fact both automation/flight management tools and FBW systems were and are designed to be as transparent as possible, with pilot engineers having final sign-off on the latter. Of course mistakes are made and assumptions proven wrong - but that's true of any engineering discipline you care to name. As someone quite rightly said earlier, the technologies are flight *aids* and nothing more. Just as the wonderfully powerful CAD/design packages make the process of aero engineering far smoother, but don't allow a designer to ignore or forget the basic principles of aerodynamics, materials, loads etc.

Also, inappropriate modes for certain phases of flight long pre-date digital technology in the flight deck.

* - and as an aviation nerd, I couldn't help but continue to follow up and maintain an interest in the following years!

Originally Posted by IcePack View Post
I wonder if this will be part of the NTSB repot?
But then that would show the FAA & other authorities in a bad light, so proberbly not.
Hmm... In fact, the NTSB is one of the few big-name investigation agencies that pulls no punches when it comes to holding the regulator to account. Civil service agencies like our own AAIB tend to be more matter-of-fact.

@fourgolds - Most of the reports I've read so far indicate that his previous type was the B744.

@GobOnAStick - While even seasoned journalists are decrying the decline in standards of their profession in today's hyper-commercial world, I don't think I'd go as far as to tar all of them with the idiot brush. That said, due to the specialised nature of the technical side of aviation reporters do tend to make glaring errors more often than not.

Last edited by DozyWannabe; 8th Jul 2013 at 16:06.
DozyWannabe is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:05   #865 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Age: 65
Posts: 339

If you'd put it like that in the beginning it would have made a lot more sense and a lot more acceptable.

I think you'll find that a number of Asians in this thread have expressed dismay at the zeroing in on Asians by a small group of posters, not your post in particular.
DavidHoul52 is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:11   #866 (permalink)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: mexico
Posts: 161
Many Asian airlines have a steep cockpit gradient as a result of national culture but it doesnít end there. The Asian carriers I have worked for have many problems arising for social norms that have resulted in accidents such as:

Decision making based on fear of repercussion leading to hesitation to go round.
Passing sub standard crew in sim checks to avoid loss of face.
Total lack of curiosity resulting in no interest to learn beyond basic type training.
Unwillingness to rapidly adapt to change in a fluid situation.

Last edited by Zapatas Blood; 8th Jul 2013 at 16:44.
Zapatas Blood is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:12   #867 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: In the back of a bus
Posts: 748
Gob, that would be because so far, the majority of journalists/media/wiki experts have proven themselves to be so with yes, idiotic statements about aviation that could be rectified with a 60-sec Google search. Personally I said "sometimes" but when it comes to aviation it is actually most of the time when there is an accident/incident.
givemewings is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:16   #868 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: US
Posts: 19
1) When the French pilots put an Airbus in level flight into a stall and then flew it into the ocean, I don't recall anyone here making the general proclamation that "French pilots can't fly."

2) The PF on the Asiana flight was the junior pilot in type conversion training, and he was under the supervision of the trainer sitting on the right side, so here there is no issue of "Asian FO's not able to speak up against the captain." If the PF did anything stupid, there would be no hesitation by the trainer to speak up and do something about it.

It seems we have an issue here for basic airmanship, which have come up in the AF accident (European), the Colgan accident (American), and maybe now the Asiana accident. Some people here love to talk about crappy Asian pilots who can't stand to lose face. Is that really helpful? I don't think so.

To the people here who say, "there is no place for being PC in air safety," I ask, really, how is focusing on ethnicity helping air safety?
epc is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:19   #869 (permalink)
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 62
Today's Wall Street Journal states that there were 4 pilots in to cockpit at the time of the incident, the two flying, a 'relief' pilot, and a fourth they 'could not confirm was working'.

This reminds me of the C5 incident at McGuire AirForce base several years ago where there were multiple pilots in the cockpit and not one of them noticed that they shut down the wrong engine resulting in an inpact about a mile short of the runway.

Does everyone think that someone else is watching the ship and they just tune out?
PlatinumFlyer is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:20   #870 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 62
Posts: 652
I am guessing that the NTSB will find very little on the CVR until the last few seconds. It's a cultural thing...stunned mullets don't talk.

Last edited by VR-HFX; 8th Jul 2013 at 16:22.
VR-HFX is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:21   #871 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 202
If the pilot was converting from Airbus, and he had indeed held the throttles too tight preventing their motion, I have to ask why the engine parameters and airspeed were apparently skipped from his scan?

I also have a major safety recommendation for Boeing:

* If the autothrottle commands a power setting, and it detects the throttles have failed to move for more than 2 seconds, chime an alert STUCK THROTTLE

Just my 2 cents.

Last edited by ECAM_Actions; 8th Jul 2013 at 16:22.
ECAM_Actions is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:23   #872 (permalink)
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,603
I am guessing that the NTSB will find very little on the CVR until the last few seconds. It's a cultural thingy.
- I suspect the approach briefing will be of interest?
BOAC is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:25   #873 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Milwaukee WI
Age: 66
Posts: 35
Very sad indeed, poor girl survives being ejected from a ground spinning aircraft only to be run over by someone else not looking out the window.
I wonder if visibility might have been an issue; it's not hard to imagine one of the emergency vehicles driving into a smoke cloud and hitting someone who was unconscious.
bratschewurst is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:31   #874 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Posts: 297
Thumbs up Concur with 4 golds & BBK

Valuable post four golds & fully concur with yourself & BBK - it's so useful for details like that to be shared from real life experience, you can't beat experience nor buy it - experience has to be earned - very good to share it.
old-timer is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:36   #875 (permalink)
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Denver
Posts: 5

Just a few observations from a commercial pilot with many hours in the 777 and 737:

-There are similarities with the Lion Air crash and the SFO disaster. I think both accidents could have avoided with proper use of the VNAV (they are virtually identical on the 777 and 737).

-I've seen 777 and 737 crews screw up non-precision approaches because they never practice them. Remember the Guam accident? Have we learned nothing?

-VNAV (even on a base turn to a visual approach) is a great tool for a constant rate descent.

-At my airline, you are required to use all navigation aids, even in VFR conditions. Why would not you use VNAV as an aid for a stabilized approach?
777Yank is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:41   #876 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Age: 65
Posts: 339
I wonder if visibility might have been an issue; it's not hard to imagine one of the emergency vehicles driving into a smoke cloud and hitting someone who was unconscious.
The other girl didn't survive either?
DavidHoul52 is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:42   #877 (permalink)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 258
"When the French pilots put an Airbus in level flight into a stall and then flew it into the ocean, I don't recall anyone here making the general proclamation that "French pilots can't fly."

No, but AF had suffered some critical failures that have caught many a clever Airbus pilot out in the sim.

This 777 accident may well turn out to be a perfectly serviceable aircraft crashing on a CAVOK day.

Should we compare accident rates from western Europe and Asia? Anybody
AnQrKa is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:42   #878 (permalink)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 4

The NTSB Chair who is heading the 214 investigation and the official NTSB spokes person, has no expertise regarding aircraft, aviation, or investigations. She is a political appointee who was an intern for some US congressman, and then a paid employee. She lists her qualifications to head the National TRANSPOTATION SAFETY Board as having a drivers license. She says she is the the nationís most visionary and passionate safety leader. Who knew the job was so easy!


NTSB Chairman Deborah Hersman is recognized as one of the nation's most visionary and passionate safety leaders who advocates for safety across all modes of transportation. Among her many initiatives, Chairman Hersman has focused attention and actions on distracted driving, child passenger safety, and helping accident victims and their families. She emphasizes the NTSB's role as "the conscience and the compass of the transportation industry." Previously, Hersman was a senior advisor to the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation from 1999-2004 and served as Staff Director and Senior Legislative Aide to West Virginia Congressman Bob Wise from 1992-1999.

Chairman Hersman received B.A. degrees in Political Science and International Studies from Virginia Tech, and an M.S. in Conflict Analysis and Resolution from George Mason University. She holds a commercial driver's license (with passenger, school bus, and air brake endorsements) as well as a motorcycle endorsement. (she got the commercial license AFTER getting the job)
geoheath is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:44   #879 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Tuvalu
Posts: 10
Even more attention "must" be to non-fly'n pilot

With 43 hours of time more attention needs to be brought towards the non-flying pilot who MUST have been a Line Check Airman! Were the relief pilots sitting on the jumpseats (more eyes)?
MoJo WoJo is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2013, 16:44   #880 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 62
Posts: 652
777 Yank

Spot on.

Or just simply half the airspeed and add a zero...oops...what airspeed.

From the graphs, he missed the glideslope from above...forgiveable...but picked it up again from below and lost it for reasons he ...and all the others on the flightdeck couldn't work out??

I'm sorry but this is looking like all the spectators to this accident sat idly by and did nothing. That is what I find perplexing.
VR-HFX is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT. The time now is 20:06.

© 1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1