Asiana flight crash at San Francisco
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: What day is it?
Age: 17
Posts: 71
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by ORICHETTI:
if a BOEING 777 CREW can not land safely on a long rwy with VFR conditions, then we have a big problem...
if a BOEING 777 CREW can not land safely on a long rwy with VFR conditions, then we have a big problem...
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks PJ2
I agree with your point about the useful data.
All the relevant data and audio information will have been recorded before the separation of the tail.
Although if there are any questions about the subsequent evacuation, there will be no recording of what was said on the FD after the crash, other than what is on ATC tapes.
All the relevant data and audio information will have been recorded before the separation of the tail.
Although if there are any questions about the subsequent evacuation, there will be no recording of what was said on the FD after the crash, other than what is on ATC tapes.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Quote:
I wonder what the FMA said? I wonder if they had RAD ALT issues?
I wonder if they had a bloody window to look out of, and knew what to do with it!!
I know where my money is on this, time will tell...
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shaggy SD
In the BA case the approach to LHR is a Continuous Descent Approach at close to idle idle and clean from 8000ft or higher then at 4 miles out configure for landing drop gear and flap and then spool up the engines to be established on finals at 2 miles.
In this case there was no requirement for a clean CDA to 4 miles with idle engines then spool up the engines for landing configuration. So the only similarity is that both aircraft landed short. The requirement to spool up from idle to landing RPM was only in the LHR case. In this case the aircraft should have been stable in landing configuration at least 6 miles out.
Double engine failure on short final would account for this. Am I alone in finding the official cause of the BA 777 crash at Heathrow (ice in fuel causing both engines to fail at exactly the same moment in two seperate fuel systems) a tad unlikely?
After a working lifetime in software I know wher my money was for that one. Is this the inevitable repeat?
After a working lifetime in software I know wher my money was for that one. Is this the inevitable repeat?
In this case there was no requirement for a clean CDA to 4 miles with idle engines then spool up the engines for landing configuration. So the only similarity is that both aircraft landed short. The requirement to spool up from idle to landing RPM was only in the LHR case. In this case the aircraft should have been stable in landing configuration at least 6 miles out.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: norther hemisphere
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
approx position of the FDR/CVR:
FDRS - COMPONENT LOCATIONS - 1
EFFECTIVITY
---
A 777 MANUAL
Aft Equipment Center
The flight data recorder (FDR) is in the E7 aft
equipment rack. Access is through a ceiling panel that
is forward of the aft galley.
EFFECTIVITY
---
A 777 MANUAL
Aft Equipment Center
The flight data recorder (FDR) is in the E7 aft
equipment rack. Access is through a ceiling panel that
is forward of the aft galley.
Last edited by Marc_H; 6th Jul 2013 at 22:41.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: A hemisphere
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One possibility is a Erroneous Rad Alt problem like Turkish Airlines in AMS.
An Airspeed indicator and a big window is all you need!
Marc_H, thanks, you're may actually be right in pointing out the location of the DFDR/CVR on the B777. I was going from memory and knowledge of other types.
Regardless, the data for the approach-to-impact will be available.
Regardless, the data for the approach-to-impact will be available.
Last edited by PJ2; 6th Jul 2013 at 22:44.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Somwhere between 6 and 15 feet below ground level
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aviation Herald is reporting that there were NO fatalities.
Accident: Asiana B772 at San Francisco on Jul 6th 2013, touched down short of the runway, broke up and burst into flames
Emergency services reported all occupants have been accounted
for and are alive. Emergency services repeated ALL occupants have been accounted
for in response to media reports that two people have been killed and said,
these reports are untrue. A number of people were taken to hospitals with
injuries of varying degrees.
for and are alive. Emergency services repeated ALL occupants have been accounted
for in response to media reports that two people have been killed and said,
these reports are untrue. A number of people were taken to hospitals with
injuries of varying degrees.
Accident: Asiana B772 at San Francisco on Jul 6th 2013, touched down short of the runway, broke up and burst into flames
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HighSpeedAliminum:
Nothing wrong with A/T in SPD mode on finals on the 777.
It is SOP at various major 777 operators. The A/T is extremely responsive and perfectly capable of maintaining VREF+5 until touchdown under normal ops.
And yes, unlike other Boeing aircraft, where AutoPilot off usually means A/T off, this does not apply to the 777.
Nothing wrong with A/T in SPD mode on finals on the 777.
It is SOP at various major 777 operators. The A/T is extremely responsive and perfectly capable of maintaining VREF+5 until touchdown under normal ops.
And yes, unlike other Boeing aircraft, where AutoPilot off usually means A/T off, this does not apply to the 777.