Below the GS at SFO again

[Coagie]

Let's see:

They were low, waved off, came back around, and landed safely.

Good you pointed that out. At least they did the right thing by going around. There may be to many pilots, who think they'll get demerits for going around. I say we shouldn't try to discourage "do-overs". This wouldn't have made news, if there wasn't an "Asian" association, so soon after the Asiana 214 incident. Why, "going around" may be a pilots only opportunity for repetitive practice, in the modern, bean counter run, airline!

[Dynasty Trash Hauler]

"it is incomprehensible that two qualified pilots allow a normal situation to deteriorate to this point."

I have flown for 4 different airlines in Asia and to me it is TOTALLY comprehensible that this has occurred again.

The training is not good and the adherence to any standard is non existent.

The only amazement I have is that some of these airlines manage to avoid crashing more often.

[Una Due Tfc]

We are supposed to be the safest industry in the world. From what I'm reading from you flyboys and flygirls, alot more training needs to be given on handflying, fair enough. But we need to cater for the weakest links too, and to have no ILS and no PAPIs for that length of time is unacceptable. More handflying training and tighter regulation on how long you can have the landing aids o/o/s are needed IMO. Surely they could have found a way of installing the new ILS without having to take the old one out? Or use 28L for departures only and 28R for arrivals until the new ILS is up and running?

[fireflybob]

But we need to cater for the weakest links too, and to have no ILS and no PAPIs for that length of time is unacceptable.

The issue of PAPIs was thoroughly aired on the Asiana thread. For the Asiana approach the PAPIs were serviceable.

Are you saying they the PAPIs were not serviceable for this approach?

[Coagie]

We are supposed to be the safest industry in the world. From what I'm reading from you flyboys and flygirls, alot more training needs to be given on handflying, fair enough. But we need to cater for the weakest links too, and to have no ILS and no PAPIs for that length of time is unacceptable. More handflying training and tighter regulation on how long you can have the landing aids o/o/s are needed IMO. Surely they could have found a way of installing the new ILS without having to take the old one out? Or use 28L for departures only and 28R for arrivals until the new ILS is up and running?

So say the people, who use automation as a crutch! Don't know if this idealized, best of both worlds, solution will ever be successful. It's likely what has been tried, or assumed to work before.

[Spoffo]

This happened around 9 PM local. If the PAPI was indeed O/S, this guy was essentially flying a black hole visual to the runway lights with some skylight above. Not the total piece of cake some of the comments here suggest.

[beamer]

Without getting too deep into the age-old Mil/Civ debate, Coagie actually makes some sound points.

Too few pilots have any real handling skills these days and that includes a great many training Captains. How many pilots have actually shut down engines on anything bigger than a light twin ? How many have any time in
practice or simulated asymmetric flight. How many have made approaches using restricted airfield lighting in either an aircraft of simulator ? How many take the opportunity to make a visual approach when the situation arises albeit with instrument back-up.........................etcetc

[Una Due Tfc]

Ah, If the PAPI's were in service for the AAR then I stand corrected, last time I dipped into that thread they were described as O/O/S.

But I stand by my point that you shouldn't be allowed take out your ILS for that amount of time without having to restrict use of that runway for arrivals, especially if there is a parrallel runway.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Originally Posted by md80fanatic

Sorry to say ... being 600 ft below GS 3.5nm out is far beyond visual approach incompetence, it's sheer absolute incompetence. No excuse at all for this.

Only if it wasn't intentional. Nothing technically wrong with a low flat approach provided it is managed correctly. Granted not that efficient though.

I take it the GS is still u/s though so how were they below it?

[stilton]

Many of the KAL crashes were at the hands of the 'Military trained pilots'


Having flown with plenty of them over the years my experience is they can be just as good or bad as their civilian trained counterparts.


Some of the ex fighter type's can be a real liability with their lack of crew skills.

[777AV8R]

incompetence

This whole thing reeks of total inexperience, lack of traing and poor airmanship. Good gosh, any experienced pilot flying this machine should be expected to manually input a visual centerline and fix for any runway. It is in the database. At 3 miles, the aircraft should be at 1000 feet. It doesn't stop there.

The flight director system has a 'Flight Path Vector' which is a function of the ADIRU. IF.....IF the crew were trained properly or just had interest in observing this aid during normal flight, they would know that keeping the vertical tail just slightly on the horizon, would provide a near 3 degree slope. The -200 and -300 FPV placement differ somewhat.

When I am training my candidates I make sure that those whom I teach, have a thorough understanding of how the system works.

As for black-hole syndrome, I disagree. There is enough peripheral lighting at KSFO and if the flight crew had properly set their systems to give decent situational awareness, things could have been different.

The problem will only continue to get worse as carriers grapple to find pilots to fill the hardware that is on order. Operators who rely on 'cadets' to fill seats can only expect the risk factor within their operations to increase. Yet, it is those carriers who invite well experienced and highly qualified personnel to interviews, only to tell them that they aren't wanted..no reasons given, in favor of taking some of the 250 hour wonders and turning them through the pilot mill.

Only time will tell

[Mr Optimistic]

Would there be any warnings/alarms on the flight deck descending through 600ft? Please tell me yes!

[cldrvr]

in favor of taking some of the 250 hour wonders and turning them through the pilot mill.

They are hired for their ability to pay, not for their ability to fly. There have been countless threads here on pprune highlighting the dangers of these 250 hour kids, but they get all swarmed by the wannabees and the training providers to lead to any form of meaningful discussion.

I have been going on about this for a long time, all we really need is a few smoking holes in the country side and we will see the same changes here in Europe and in Asia as the FAA has now gotten through.

You cannot make up for experience, no matter how much money you bring.

Our flight department has strict rules for positioning flights, we will not use any of these training airlines, and neither will the parent company with thousands of employees worldwide. I know of a few German multinationals that will not use them either for their employee flights. There are more and more companies in the Far East and on the sub continent with those restrictions now. I would like to see more people take that stand, but too many expect their 29 euro flight to the sun and don't care what cost get cut to give them that low cost flight.

[eaglespar]

A380 first cleared visual on 28L later ISL on 28R

At very beginning Pilot (PIC) seems to throw his hands in the air when given
a visual clearance on 28L but did something get edited out as they later
get ILS clearance on 28R, They still did a manual landing it appears
after auto thrust disable and auto pilot disable.

Critique please, it seemed very professional to me an SLF except for the
first exasperated keyboard slam.

A380 first landing at SFO
This is pretty interesting to watch.
The pilots sit away from everything, no yoke, etc. Captain pulls up a keyboard once in a while to enter info but the plane does most of the work.....
The humongous A380 makes its first landing at San Francisco airport. It seems extensively automated. The air traffic controller gives them heading, altitude and speed, and they dial it in. Pretty interesting.
For best results go "full screen" on your monitor. It will seem like you are in the cockpit.

Pilot's View: Airbus A380 approach and landing at San Francisco. [VIDEO]

[Contacttower]

I have been going on about this for a long time, all we really need is a few smoking holes in the country side and we will see the same changes here in Europe and in Asia as the FAA has now gotten through.

Well both easyJet and Ryanair have been doing it for almost 20 years now and I don't see them making too many smoking holes...

I always find this "cadet bashing" that occurs after pretty much every accident (regardless of whether cadets were involved or not) a bit bizarre.

Everyone was a 250 hour pilot once and speaking from a European perspective if you have 250hrs and have been through the integrated flight training system the chances are that you will be flying an A320 pretty soon after that. There does not seem to be an inherent problem with this from a safety point of view.

Outside of the USA the question of the experience is also rapidly changing. In most of the world it is no longer realistic to expect many new first officers to have significant flying experience before airline flying. Air forces are getting smaller and GA operations that low houred pilots might once have done have largely disappeared. It is also not always desirable for instructing to become a hour building process either because it often leads to poor instruction and the blind leading the blind so to speak.

One way or another airlines have to face up to the fact that more of their pilots will be low experience. This has to be dealt with by rigorous training and experience development within the airline environment. That is possibly where the Asian carriers are going wrong.

What also strikes me is that a lot of the pilots involved in these handling accidents, loss of control, CFIT etc are actually usually very experienced, they are not usually cadets. In fact I can't think of a major accident in which a 'cadet' was to blame. Incompetence among experienced crews seems much more common. Often probably experienced pilots who have become 'magenta line' sinners themselves after years of routine that rarely changes are the victim of sudden challenges which cause them to lose the plot.

Airline recurrent training is almost certainly not dealing with this issue well enough at the moment - this far more important than whether the pilot started out as a cadet or with a thousand hours GA or whatever five or ten years down the line.

[DozyWannabe]

@eaglespar:

I know this video. Look closely, and you'll see that it was the First Officer who was the PF for this approach - his hand is on the sidestick from start to finish. I don't think there's an edit - I suspect SFO approach control decided to switch them to an ILS on 28R of their own volition. The Captain as PNF was calling up the procedures for visual approach, then when the reassignment to ILS was given, he throws up his hands (though not aggressively) and puts the keyboard away.

[Cows getting bigger]

I have some difficulty with some of the xenophobia here. There seems to be a lot of criticism of Asian piloting skills and how they can't even handle a simple visual approach. At the same time, we appear to have an occurrence where a 100% American airline (and one can assume pilot) manages to stuff a 737 in nose first with the following discussion being remarkably 'light'.

Now, I'm not into a willy-wave about us and them. All I am saying that none of us are perfect and we should be learning each others' lessons.

[Chronic Snoozer]

But we need to cater for the weakest links too

Isn't that the problem with this industry that's apparently supposed

to be the safest...in the world

Raise the bar, don't lower it.

[olasek]

All I am saying that none of us are perfect

And who said anybody is perfect?
But there are some inescapable facts - Asia-Pacific airlines still fall short in the air safety compared to other continents, of course they are still much better than Africa or Russia but North America remains the safest place on Earth to fly, even safer than Europe. And since Korean's pilots training was in the spotlight years ago and for a good reason current comments should be no surprise...

[Cows getting bigger]

Not necessarily disagreeing. But it is equally true that North America could be safer. Stuffing the nose wheel through the front of an aircraft is the sort of thing you expect from the occasional PPL student in a 172. The lack of 'pilotage skill' is on a par with someone who can't manage the aircraft's energy properly at 2-3 miles.

Of course most of us are, at best, making educated guesses about a number of issues.

Yep USA may be safer, but it could do better. I've been in aviation long enough to know that 'good enough' isn't good enough.