Asiana flight crash at San Francisco
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Europe and Africa
Age: 31
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to this link
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...est.html?_r=1&
the plane must have left the runway quite soon? The whole runway is 3469m and it went off already before taxi way N which desn't even seem to be a quarter of the runway.
Isn't that an indication of a very low approach speed as well?
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...est.html?_r=1&
the plane must have left the runway quite soon? The whole runway is 3469m and it went off already before taxi way N which desn't even seem to be a quarter of the runway.
Isn't that an indication of a very low approach speed as well?
The Erroneous Rad Alt theory is not bull***
Yes a competent crew in good weather "should" not be caught out by this known problem BUT Turkish Airlines were in AMS.
Before you call BS do you even know what the Errouneous Rad Alt problem causes and how an unsuspecting crew could be caught out during the approach leading to a severe loss of IAS?
In fact good clear weather could have lulled the crew into a false sense of security and they may well not have noticed idle thrust until too late......
Yes a competent crew in good weather "should" not be caught out by this known problem BUT Turkish Airlines were in AMS.
Before you call BS do you even know what the Errouneous Rad Alt problem causes and how an unsuspecting crew could be caught out during the approach leading to a severe loss of IAS?
In fact good clear weather could have lulled the crew into a false sense of security and they may well not have noticed idle thrust until too late......
Aviator Extraordinaire
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 76
Posts: 2,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A bit steep, no?
But, we don't know as of yet if it was pilot error or something else, so I'll not speculate as to the cause.
Last edited by con-pilot; 6th Jul 2013 at 23:57.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: The Fragrant Harbour
Age: 49
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with nitpicker, if your not flying to stabilized criteria and coming in high, the crew may not realize that a RadAlt failure has commanded idle thrust, this is what it normally does at 25'ra, the crew may then arrest there descent but with no thrust it could cause this situation, just like Turkish in AMS. If the pilots are too reliant on spd mode from the a/t they may not even pick up the problem. Having spend equal time on airbus and 777's I always thought airbus's way of making the pilot reduce thrust the safer option, albeit they could have picked a better word than "retard"
Last edited by flyingkiwi; 6th Jul 2013 at 23:54.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From this photo of a un-dinged one, you can see how much compressed the rear part of the fuselage is. For the landing gear to be in the bay, impact must have taken place well up near the wing. It's a miracle that the airplane stayed mostly together. Well, it's good engineering.
Where is the L-side engine?? Could it have separated and rolled into the bay farther up?
http://images2.jetphotos.net/img/2/5...1282891745.jpg
Where is the L-side engine?? Could it have separated and rolled into the bay farther up?
http://images2.jetphotos.net/img/2/5...1282891745.jpg
Another possible scenario is that the crew selected LVL CHG to get the aircraft down and expected the aircraft to recover through the automatics. Its happened on a few occasions in 777s conducting NPAs (and a 737). With a better outcome obviously.
Last edited by Lookleft; 7th Jul 2013 at 00:08.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nitpicker330
Forgive me if I am wrong, but doesn't the U/S RAD ALT only reduce the thrust if the aircraft is coupled up to an ILS? In this case the G/S was U/S, and the crew were cleared for a visual approach.
Edit;
I'm talking about the 777 here. The Airbus might be different for all I know?
Forgive me if I am wrong, but doesn't the U/S RAD ALT only reduce the thrust if the aircraft is coupled up to an ILS? In this case the G/S was U/S, and the crew were cleared for a visual approach.
Edit;
I'm talking about the 777 here. The Airbus might be different for all I know?
Last edited by Airclues; 7th Jul 2013 at 00:06.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Colonies
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Typical scene post crash with pax evacuating with carry on luggage.
If any deaths attributable to a delay in evac, would like to think these morons can be taken to task and held accountable. Won't happen but would be good to name and shame!
If any deaths attributable to a delay in evac, would like to think these morons can be taken to task and held accountable. Won't happen but would be good to name and shame!
doesn't the U/S RAD ALT only reduce the thrust if the aircraft is coupled up to an ILS?
That said I'm still digging around in the manuals to find any dire warnings about the consequences of a single U/S rad alt on the 777 - are there any similarities between the 737 and 777 autothrottle logic or are comparisons with the AMS accident just a red herring??
Last edited by wiggy; 7th Jul 2013 at 00:23.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Seattle
Age: 63
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having been on many flights, sitting next to pax who can barely get up from a seat without assistance, I've often wondered who is responsible for these pax in the event of such an emergency.
One flight, from LHR to US, the guy next to me could barely use utensils to eat and used his diapers to relieve his bodily functions. (I know this because of odor) and yet he traveled alone. Sitting in an aisle seat, he would have been extremely difficult to crawl over, had there been an emergency evacuation, as he was a plump man.
Kids in car seats, senior citizens and the infirmed, will all become difficult in such evacuations and can impede those who are right next to them. Sadly, I suspect some of the fatalities will be the result of the above.
One flight, from LHR to US, the guy next to me could barely use utensils to eat and used his diapers to relieve his bodily functions. (I know this because of odor) and yet he traveled alone. Sitting in an aisle seat, he would have been extremely difficult to crawl over, had there been an emergency evacuation, as he was a plump man.
Kids in car seats, senior citizens and the infirmed, will all become difficult in such evacuations and can impede those who are right next to them. Sadly, I suspect some of the fatalities will be the result of the above.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St. Charles, Missouri, USA
Age: 76
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My recollection of the 777-200 is that it was a glider when light, this was exacerbated by relatively low maximum flap speeds. If you got behind on a slam dunk from ATC, the greatest risk to a stabilized approach was the inability to select final landing flaps due to flap overspeed issues even with thrust at idle, until later in the approach than I would have liked. My understanding of the ROK operators is that they are highly focused on all FOQA data and that crews are regularly challenged on any deviations. I saw more (with reasonable cause) speed brake useage on the 777 in a month than I previously had seen in 4 years on a 747-4.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 938
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just been watching Fox News - the lady on there announced a few minutes ago that the aircraft 'may have touched down at up to 1,400 feet per second'. I suspect she has not done too much flying in commercial airliners.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Downunder
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Irrespective as to whether it contributed to this accident in any way, it's outrageous that an airport the size of KSFO has no electronic or visual G/S.
Temporary VASIS or PAPIS can't have been that expensive until R/W works were complete.
Temporary VASIS or PAPIS can't have been that expensive until R/W works were complete.
Last edited by skol; 7th Jul 2013 at 00:23.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capi_Cafre' :
Most interesting. 40 years ago Joe Shackford was a friend and colleague in introducing a brand new engine to the US military.
The A/T will still go the idle in the flare if being used without GS on a normal landing.
Erroneous Rad Alt could have caused this.
Erroneous Rad Alt could have caused this.
Last edited by nitpicker330; 7th Jul 2013 at 00:28.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just been watching Fox News - the lady on there announced a few minutes ago that the aircraft 'may have touched down at up to 1,400 feet per second'. I suspect she has not done too much flying in commercial airliners.
BA 038 was either 1200' or 1500' FPM.
"May have touched down at ..." is still a possibility.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the event they lacked basic airmanship skills to compute a glide path, it would have been simple enough to dial in the GPS Rnav RNP approach for 28R to give then glide path info, since by all accounts the GS was OTS.