0
airtwardo

just now ~ 777 crash @ SFO

Recommended Posts

ChrisD


It is way to early to hang the "pilot's" as the media is doing!




Sorry Chris, I don't agree.

The bottom line is that the pilots are in command of the aircraft, not the gizmos, and if it wasn't mechanical failure, then they drove the plane into the ground.

Sure, all the instruments and auto stuff may have been misleading them, but we teach pilots to trust their eyes and not rely on dytters while swooping - same thing here... Those guys should have had the experience to know they were low and slow and taken abortive action sooner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>What he should have done was not throttle back up but simply land the thing and be
>done with it.

That would have actually made things worse. He got too low and too slow, which put him too far below the glideslope to be able to land on the runway. Adding power at that point will only help, although it was too little, too late to save the landing.

However, by moving the landing point a little closer to the runway, the little power he did add may have saved lives. Given that he clipped the edge of the seawall, being even ten feet lower may have made this a nonsurvivable crash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>On the other hand we are taught to trust our instruments again and again and again....

Actually IFR pilots receive extensive training in NOT trusting their instruments. Intentionally causing a failure in an instrument is a common training technique used during simulator training, and even private pilots receive training in how to identify a vacuum system failure vs. a static port failure vs. a pitot tube failure. (All have characteristic behaviors that you can identify.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[Quote]So to blame the pilot at this point is pure muckraking and diverting attention away from where it needs to go!

The attached photo shows a lot of what happened in this incident. Plane came in short. It was too long

Asiana airlines already released a statement that there wasn't anything wrong with the bird when she made a hard landing.

According to sources, the pilot requested a go around less than 2 seconds prior to impact. There is the suggestion that an increase in throttle was commanded 7 seconds before the impact.

Now, I don't know about the climb performance of the 777 with flaps, but it seems that increase in thrust and airspeed would take some time to execute a go around. Increase airspeed, raise flaps and climb away.

Interestingly - I checked out google maps of the runway. The threshhold has been moved back (check out the blackened area behind the threshhold). Seems like a pilot who never landed there before may actually be MORE comfortable. There's talk of Vref on this but Vref is set for 50 feet above the threshold. This aircraft wasn't there.

This is a straight up visual approach. Old school flying. After Air France there was a lot of talk about whether automation is causing problems with basic airmanship. I think it's all right to be asking these questions. Some dude in a 172 couldn't have dreamed of better conditions for a landing. Understandably it's far more complex in a 777, but without autoland and autothrust, isn't it something fairly fundamental?

I don't see how we don't point fingers at the drivers of the plane. Too low. Too slow. Too late. To paraphrase Quade: "behinf the curve."


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon

>On the other hand we are taught to trust our instruments again and again and again....

Actually IFR pilots receive extensive training in NOT trusting their instruments. Intentionally causing a failure in an instrument is a common training technique used during simulator training, and even private pilots receive training in how to identify a vacuum system failure vs. a static port failure vs. a pitot tube failure. (All have characteristic behaviors that you can identify.)



I guess it's time someone started posting the Approach and landing procedures from that aircraft...


There are many refrences to either pilot being required to "keep their head down." And please enlighten me as to how we are supposed to recognize static port failure while watching a LCD display?

That point is worth mentioning again for those of you missing what I'm trying to point out:

REQUIRED TO KEEP HEAD IN COCKPIT.

Such is the total and complete faith in our modern airliners instruments and procedures....
But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>And please enlighten me as to how we are supposed to recognize static port failure
>while watching a LCD display?

Two methods:

1) fixed airspeed indicator; gradually decreases as you descend (you'd expect it to increase if you started a descent with no power change)

2) (more likely) a flag that says "AIRSP INOP" or similar

>REQUIRED TO KEEP HEAD IN COCKPIT.

Given that it is the pilot's responsibility to see and avoid when flying in VMC I tend to doubt that pilots for any airline are not allowed to look outside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

REQUIRED TO KEEP HEAD IN COCKPIT.



Which does not work when flying a VFR approach. The ILS was inop, so there were hand flying it.

It is pretty clear that the pilot tried to fly a stabilized approach and simply slowed too much. I'd be interested in seeing what the past aircraft he was flying's approach speed was.

When they realized they were low, they tried to add power. But since a jet takes a second or two to spool up - It was not soon enough. Then they did the last thing the could and tried to pull up to slow the decent as much as possible.... It worked. If they had maintained the same profile, they would of most likely slammed into the sea wall with more than just the tail.

There is no doubt that the pilots made a mistake.

Quote

And please enlighten me as to how we are supposed to recognize static port failure while watching a LCD display?



Same way you do it with steam gauges... You cross check other instruments. Also most large planes have secondary static ports.. You could switch to those to see what happens. In some planes the pilot and the co-pilot have separate static ports. So you could check your instruments with the other pilots.

So there are ways to check.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lawrocket

I don't see how we don't point fingers at the drivers of the plane. Too low. Too slow. Too late. To paraphrase Quade: "behinf the curve."



While the pilots were metaphorically "behind the curve" in situational awareness, I was talking about them being literally "on the back side of the power curve." That's a point beyond which an increase in Angle of Attack requires increasingly more thrust in order to maintain level flight.

Regardless of the aircraft involved, the way you fly a stabilized approach is to set pitch, power, landing gear and flaps at certain known points and fine tune from there. A deviation of plus or minus say, 5 knots, is a big sign something is wrong and needs immediate correction.

The same sort of constant checking should happen with altitudes as it does with airspeeds. Pitch plus power equals performance. Certain configurations should result in certain amounts of climb or descent rate. Any deviation is a sign something is wrong and needs to be corrected.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lawrocket

[Url]http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAR214/history/20130706/0730Z/RKSI/KSFO/tracklog[/url]

Just look at those last few airspeed indications...



98 mph...it's not a 182. :|

Been awhile since Capt. Mom flew a 777, but she said it should be closer to 160 if memory serves.










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron

Quote

REQUIRED TO KEEP HEAD IN COCKPIT.



Which does not work when flying a VFR approach. The ILS was inop, so there were hand flying it.

It is pretty clear that the pilot tried to fly a stabilized approach and simply slowed too much. I'd be interested in seeing what the past aircraft he was flying's approach speed was.

When they realized they were low, they tried to add power. But since a jet takes a second or two to spool up - It was not soon enough. Then they did the last thing the could and tried to pull up to slow the decent as much as possible.... It worked. If they had maintained the same profile, they would of most likely slammed into the sea wall with more than just the tail.

There is no doubt that the pilots made a mistake.

***And please enlighten me as to how we are supposed to recognize static port failure while watching a LCD display?



Same way you do it with steam gauges... You cross check other instruments. Also most large planes have secondary static ports.. You could switch to those to see what happens. In some planes the pilot and the co-pilot have separate static ports. So you could check your instruments with the other pilots.

So there are ways to check.

What part of "required to keep head in cockpit" do you not understand???

What part of there are no other instruments do you not understand?
C
But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

What part of "required to keep head in cockpit" do you not understand???



What part of "The plane was flying too slow" do you not understand? If he was looking in he had TWO airspeed indicators he could of looked at.

And what part of "VFR" do you not understand? And even flying VFR you are supposed to look at the airspeed to make sure you don't stall.

There is no reason what so ever that the pilot should of allowed the plane to get that slow.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.airlinesafety.com/faq/777DataFailure.htm

Same: http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~cmh7p/ietss07-777-4web.pdf



Here is a typical example of the type of information regarding incidents on the internet, not quite accurate but close enough to do the job.

For all of you really stupid people out there, you can not "hand fly" a large jet!

Read the article so that you can get the briefest amount of information to process to get an inkling of the large number of systems that can fail that the pilot can do nothing about before you all start makin the kind of back seat, ill informed, judgments that you are doing!

I chose that particular piece of internet dribble because of the authors reference to sim. training.

It has gone unnoticed, by most, that actual hours was advanced by the NTSB in order to make some sort of public comment, or better said some kind of slander to make their point,... sim time is more important in this regard.

It has not escaped the actual pilot community what the NTSB has leaked as to what they haven't leaked.

There may in fact be pilot error, but until you start to understand the other factors and complexities of how and why including reading the PM for this aircraft your comparisons to your 152, your lack of current procedures and confusion regarding flying in general your not doing anyone any good.

If you don't understand what I mean when I say a Vref for 20% of flaps in an approach configuration is about 124KTS at the weight that a trans-oceanic flight typically should be at when it arrives here, then basically fuck off!

The aircraft didn't stall, the aircraft hit the ground...be precise here folks...it makes a difference...

C

Talk about bad driving: ""One of the deceased did have injuries consistent with those of having been run over by a vehicle," fire department spokeswoman Mindy Talmadge said." :S

Survive an airline crash only to be run over by the fireman?
But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

For all of you really stupid people out there, you can not "hand fly" a large jet!



Huh... I know people who do it all the time. 747-400's big enough?

Quote

If you don't understand what I mean when I say a Vref for 20% of flaps in an approach configuration is about 124KTS at the weight that a trans-oceanic flight typically should be at when it arrives here, then basically fuck off!



Seeing that the plane stalled, it seems you should tell the pilots of this plane of your knowledge.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

For all of you really stupid people out there, you can not "hand fly" a large jet!




Oh really? :o

My wife, who has 33,000 hours in large jets 'hand flys' them all the time...

Yes...she flys the controls manually for all takeoffs and landings that are VFR.

She must be stupid I guess...:ph34r:










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand precisely what you're saying.

I, however, disagree with your assessment of pilots not maintaining the ultimate responsibility in flying the aircraft. It's basically the one thing they absolutely have to do; monitor and make sure the aircraft doesn't fly itself into trouble.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
airtwardo

Quote

For all of you really stupid people out there, you can not "hand fly" a large jet!




Oh really? :o

My wife, who has 33,000 hours in large jets 'hand flys' them all the time...

Yes...she flys the controls manually for all takeoffs and landings that are VFR.

She must be stupid I guess...:ph34r:


That's not what I meant and you know it...[:/]
C
But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quade

I understand precisely what you're saying.

I, however, disagree with your assessment of pilots not maintaining the ultimate responsibility in flying the aircraft. It's basically the one thing they absolutely have to do; monitor and make sure the aircraft doesn't fly itself into trouble.



That's WHY they are there...not just to feed the monkey.

IF for example the right seater puts in a wrong number into the flight computer...it WILL fly the way programed & the effect may not be noticeable until approach, even though the input error occurred hours prior.










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is a very interesting piece on those facets.

We've seen it here in the US with military flight training.
There are multiple incidents where pilots in formation have followed the lead pilot and follow him only. That mindset has proven to be fatal.
The guy in charge ain't always right. There has to be fair input allowed from everyone in those front seats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>What part of "required to keep head in cockpit" do you not understand?

If you think that the pilots were "required to keep their heads inside the cockpit" while flying VMC - you are wrong.

>For all of you really stupid people out there, you can not "hand fly" a large jet!

Yes, you can, and it's done all the time. Ask any airline pilot.

> to get an inkling of the large number of systems that can fail that the pilot can do
>nothing about before you all start makin the kind of back seat, ill informed, judgments
>that you are doing!

Lots of systems can fail. The pilot is still required to fly the airplane. That's his job.

Let me know if you want examples.

>If you don't understand what I mean when I say a Vref for 20% of flaps in an approach
>configuration is about 124KTS at the weight that a trans-oceanic flight . . .

. . . and he was at ~100kts per the aircraft tracking app that Law posted. Think that's an indication that he was staring at the airspeed indicator too much?

As a suggestion, find a real pilot and talk to them. DZ's are generally chock full of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrisD

***

Quote

For all of you really stupid people out there, you can not "hand fly" a large jet!




Oh really? :o

My wife, who has 33,000 hours in large jets 'hand flys' them all the time...

Yes...she flys the controls manually for all takeoffs and landings that are VFR.

She must be stupid I guess...:ph34r:


That's not what I meant and you know it...[:/]
C

Sorry...thought you meant what you said~ :S










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0