The One Spa

Asiana airplane crashs in San Fransisco

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
It is now being said that the pilot in command during the landing was transitioning to the 777 and had under 60 hours of 777 flight-time.


Obviously for whatever reason they didn't react until far to late to being well below target speed and below the glide slope.
 

abv

Member
Aug 19, 2002
501
2
18
It is now being said that the pilot in command during the landing was transitioning to the 777 and had under 60 hours of 777 flight-time.
43 hours on type for the pilot flying.
 

Cobra Enorme

Pussy tamer
Aug 13, 2009
1,177
20
38
passengers should be told of this. No fucking way I want to be in a plane where the pilot is landing for the first time. fuck that.
 

GameBoy27

Well-known member
Nov 23, 2004
12,654
2,535
113
passengers should be told of this. No fucking way I want to be in a plane where the pilot is landing for the first time. fuck that.
He wasn't landing a plane for the first time, he has over 10,000 hours. It was his first time landing at that airport. However, he did only have less than 60 hours of flight-time in the 777.
 

abv

Member
Aug 19, 2002
501
2
18
passengers should be told of this. No fucking way I want to be in a plane where the pilot is landing for the first time. fuck that.
You don't ever want to read the book "Blind Trust"
Granted it highlights troubles during a different period of US aviation.
 

nottyboi

Well-known member
May 14, 2008
22,447
1,331
113
He wasn't landing a plane for the first time, he has over 10,000 hours. It was his first time landing at that airport. However, he did only have less than 60 hours of flight-time in the 777.
Does that include simulator hours? The training pilot screwed up big time. He should 100% have been watching everything during approach. To intervene 7 sec from crash is wayyyyy to late, even if he had initiated TOGA power I doubt the crash could have been averted at 7sec. I would if PAPI was functioning correctly as well. Very puzzling crash this one. I suspect the pilot was transitioning from a smaller plane and was not used to the less responsive 777.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
^The pilot in command was transitioning from 747's. It was the Instructor Pilot's first flight as an Instructor Pilot.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,422
4,813
113
SF has peculiar instrumentation, with two close parallel runways.
 

fmahovalich

Active member
Aug 21, 2009
7,255
14
38
There is still one NAGGING QUESTION.

If you listen to the voice recordings, long before they touched down, there is a call for emergency personnel, and the pilot is told that all emergency personnel is head out. ALL PERSONNEL.

WHY?

We need to wait for answers. Perhaps something mechanical was happening on the plane that cause the stall? Perhaps they hit birds? (Remember the Husdon river)? Perhaps a stabilizer was seized and there was a loss of control.

Thats the only question I have.....why call for all emergency ahead of time.
 

nottyboi

Well-known member
May 14, 2008
22,447
1,331
113
There is still one NAGGING QUESTION.

If you listen to the voice recordings, long before they touched down, there is a call for emergency personnel, and the pilot is told that all emergency personnel is head out. ALL PERSONNEL.

WHY?

We need to wait for answers. Perhaps something mechanical was happening on the plane that cause the stall? Perhaps they hit birds? (Remember the Husdon river)? Perhaps a stabilizer was seized and there was a loss of control.

Thats the only question I have.....why call for all emergency ahead of time.

I don't think that happened...the pilots were still talking to the tower after the crash....
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
There is still one NAGGING QUESTION.

If you listen to the voice recordings, long before they touched down, there is a call for emergency personnel, and the pilot is told that all emergency personnel is head out. ALL PERSONNEL.
That was after the crash.
 

FAST

Banned
Mar 12, 2004
10,069
1
0
Auto throttles

Heard a recent tid bit that the crew set the air speed to the required amount, but apparently the system didn't respond correctly, allowing the planes air speed to fall below the min., thus, increasing the sink rate, and then the crash.
I would think that would be fairly easy to confirm.

FAST
 

nottyboi

Well-known member
May 14, 2008
22,447
1,331
113
Heard a recent tid bit that the crew set the air speed to the required amount, but apparently the system didn't respond correctly, allowing the planes air speed to fall below the min., thus, increasing the sink rate, and then the crash.
I would think that would be fairly easy to confirm.

FAST
Yeah I read that, could have been an altimeter problem like the Turkish airlines 737...I expect they have similar systems.
 

abv

Member
Aug 19, 2002
501
2
18
Chance that the Auto Throtle was set (or they thought it was set) however it may not have been in the mode that they thought it was.
Doesn't excuse the crew from going below 500' with an unstable approach & not going around.
 

Anynym

Just a bit to the right
Dec 28, 2005
2,961
6
38
Chance that the Auto Throtle was set (or they thought it was set) however it may not have been in the mode that they thought it was.
Doesn't excuse the crew from going below 500' with an unstable approach & not going around.
There are a few questions which are currently unanswered:
- air speed was too low, but the pilots apparently believed that the auto throttle was managing airspeed while it seems it was not. It is unclear why.
- the pilot flying the plane apparently was "blinded" momentarily while at about 500 feet. What effect did this have?
- what effect does the SFO configuration have - that the runway is several feet above the approach (which is over water)?
- what role did the junior pilot's lack of experience in landing a 777 at SFO play in the result?
- what role did the flight instructor's lack of experience in that role play in the result?
 

777flyer

New member
Feb 13, 2010
28
0
1
Once again, while I am very hesitant to lay the blame squarely on any of the pilots, the comments by the NTSB chair continue to point at lack of situational awareness by any of the flight crew....

Regardless of the number of hours the flying pilot had on the 777, regardless of the number of hours the instructor pilot had instructing others on the 777, regardless of the condition of the runway and inability to use the ILS, the fact is, the pilots were not aware of the air speed as they were approaching the runway.

The fact they 'thought the auto throttle was set' in itself is disturbing, and even if through some 'malfunction' the AT did disengage 'accidentally', BASIC IFR SKILLS TELL YOU TO CONSTANTLY scan your primary instruments.....

Such a rudimentary and basic scan technique, which all IFR pilots are taught early on in training, would have uncovered that the plane was in fact slowing down, and simple corrective action (i.e., advance the throttle) would have corrected the situation....

Forgive me for being harsh, but in all honesty, no matter how this is finally reported or where the blame ultimately lies, the reality is, the pilots failed to fly the plane.....period.
 
Toronto Escorts