NTSB update on Asiana 214
 

October 25, 2013

WASHINGTON - The National Transportation Safety Board is convening a 2-day investigative hearing to discuss the ongoing investigation into the crash of Asiana Airlines Flight 214 and to gather additional factual information. The hearing, which will be held December 10–11, 2013, at the NTSB’s Board Room and Conference Center in Washington, DC, will focus on pilot awareness in highly automated aircraft, emergency response, and cabin safety. Parties participating in the investigative hearing will be announced at a later time.

Below is an update of the ongoing investigation. This is a factual update only and no interviews are being conducted.

• The investigator-in-charge and investigators from the Operations and Human Performance Group traveled to Korea and met with officials from Asiana Airlines and the KARAIB. While in Korea, investigators conducted numerous interviews with Asiana management and training personnel, observed Asiana procedures in a simulator and an exemplar aircraft, and gathered further documentation on airline training and policies.

• NTSB investigators from the Maintenance Group also traveled to Korea and reviewed the records for the accident airplane, including the maintenance that had been performed on the evacuation slides.

• The Survival Factors Group conducted an examination of the evacuation slide/raft systems at the manufacturer’s facility in New Jersey and is planning future testing of the systems. The group also re-examined the wreckage to gather additional information about the fire propagation and structural damage. Following that examination, the wreckage was sectioned and moved to a secure storage facility.

• Investigators and party members met in Seattle to examine the recorded flight data and compare it to the expected airplane systems operation. The Systems Group is currently developing a test plan for the mode control panel and the Vehicle Performance Group is finalizing the event simulation match.

Well none of those four bullet points listed above, unfortunately, lists investigating if gung-ho fire truck drivers ran over and killed survivors from the accident, so I presume that's been airbrushed out.

exemplar is an odd choice of wording...


"While in Korea, the NTSB investigators interviewed Asiana personnel, observed company procedures in a simulator and a similar aircraft, gathered further documentation on airline training and policies, and reviewed records of the plane that crashed."

Exemplar...
 

pr eshemplow ..from the Korean word for emasculated management, fickle leadership etc.. :=

Standard NTSB speak, see 7:48 in one of Captain Sumwalt's briefings about the recent BHM A306 crash:

And just what exactly do you suppose this statement means? :rolleyes:

WHBM.....the "gung ho" fire truck driver couldnt see the victim as foam from another vehicle had covered her apparently....before you open your stupid trap and criticise people think about it and put yourself in their place....and anyway why would it be airbrushed out?? it's been all over the news...

exemplar
ɪgˈzɛmplə,ɛg-/
noun
1.
a person or thing serving as a typical example or appropriate model.

It' English....

+ 1.

WHBM, your remark is - IMHO - grossly unfair. Please remove it.

Fatal Road Accident
 

In defence of WHBM, they have a point. In the course of this tragedy people lost their lives, in a road accident, as a result of an air accident. It is, therefore, an intrinsic part of this investigation. It cannot be anything else. I would think that NTSB would delegate that part of the investigation to local Police but, the findings, would have to be included in the final report.

I do accept that the posters words could have been a tad more diplomatic

gung-ho
unthinkingly enthusiastic and eager, especially about taking part in fighting or warfare

A tad harsh to use about a rescue professional who was doing his job i.e. attempting to save lives.

"rescue professional who was doing his job i.e. attempting to save lives"
If the original video of the US rescue professionals at work was the best example they can do, I dont´t want to know how the unprofessionals do their job.

Is it right method to squirt the foam from the maximum distance? How did they manage to burn the hull as a whole? No wonder that the poor girl instead of the aircraft was covered with the foam.

Fire fighter job is really a complicate job. Misunderstanding or confusion is always possible during those moments. It is not surprise they have to constantly train to reach the best maximum performance.


Is it right method to squirt the foam from the maximum distance?


I suppose they did just in case the tanks with fuel were going to explode.

Since you obviously have no idea what the SOP is for dealing with such situations, it would be best if you left it to those who do to pass comment. The goal is not to save the aircraft, it is to save the passengers. Given the survival rate from this accident, that goal was achieved. That success is because they met their goal by protecting the exit paths. Period. They stayed back because it gave them a wider view of the scene and they could better react as a highly dynamic situation evolved.

The death of the young passenger is highly tragic and you can bet your last sheckle that the operator involved hasn't had a good night's sleep since that day. They'd rather have died on the scene than accidentally hit one of the victims. One may also wish to remember that in spite of lots of training, few airport firefighters ever get to respond to a real accident of this magnitude. There's no textbook case either. All of the planning and preparation is based on past experience and a best guess as to what they will face on the scene. This experience will be used to study current procedures and make changes for the future. Much like the work the NTSB is doing for the accident itself, which by the way is the real reason that young girl died in the first place.

The NTSB investigation of the Asiana 214 crash will of course include survivability factors and ARFF response. However, I would expect that the final report will be somewhat limited with respect to the ARFF response. Nor is the report likely to contradict the investigative findings of the San Mateo county coroner or district attorneys office. The main focus of the investigation will rightfully be centered on what led to the crash. After all, without the crash, none of the rest of it would be at issue. I would be very surprised if recommendations regarding fire department training and policy aren't included though.

The DA has stated that no charges are to be filed against anyone because their investigation revealed that there is no evidence that any criminal act was committed. The coroner has ruled the death of the girl run over to be accidental. The girl's parents are suing the city of San Fransisco. In a nutshell, the case of the girl's death will be contested in civil court.

BTW, the use of the word "he" in describing the gender of the driver of the ARFF vehicle in question appears to be in error. Among the multitude of news reports regarding this story, there is an article by the San Mateo County Times/San Jose Mercury News which summarizes the situation as local officials see it as of last week.

Latest update
 

Just as an aside, according to the LVRJ the driver of the emergency vehicle will not be charged.

Here is the article

Firefighter who ran over crash survivor won't be charged | Las Vegas Review-Journal

"But the plane’s pilots, as well as the airline, have raised the possibility that a key device that controls the Boeing 777’s speed may have malfunctioned."
Firefighter who ran over crash survivor won't be charged | Las Vegas Review-Journal

What was the device called? The pilot?

"Fire department personnel knew she was on the ground, yet they didn't carry her to safety, Tarricone said. Her injuries and her position on the ground show it was unlikely she was ejected from the plane, and her family believes another firefighter carried her off the jet and then left her on the ground, he said.

"We know that several firefighters saw her and knew she was there before she was covered with foam," Tarricone said. "They inexplicably abandoned her."


Very bad, charges were merited. Let's hope the family take a mountain of cash from the city of SF. The rule in the US is - being in uniform more or less guarantees the miscreant a free pass for any level of incompetence.

This appears to be pure speculation by the "ambulance chaser" acting for the family. I wonder where he gets his "information" from?

p.s. does than include the Asiana crew? :E

You attempt at a wind up is so full of crap it isn't funny.
Try telling that free pass BS to the two generals who just got relieved over Afghanistan. See the thread in Mil Aircrew.
other recent examples: See the cop who is charged with his dumbacity in the biker assault case.

If you don't know WTF you are talking about, which you do not, you are better off keeping your lying trap shut.