Korean 777 Down in SFO

Re: 777 down SFO

Silvaire said:
Don't know anything about this accident but I think CAT3 is done periodically for certification purposes regardless of the weather so it's not out of the question.
Click to expand...

Kinda tough to do that when the ILS is OOC.

06/005 (A1056/13) - NAV ILS RWY 28L GP U/S. 01 JUN 14:00 2013 UNTIL 22 AUG 23:59 2013. CREATED: 01 JUN 13:40 2013
 
Last edited:
nddons said:
Since it looks like the debris begins on the right side of the chevrons, wouldn't you think the right engine is in the drink, and the left one is the one that came to rest next to the right side of the fuselage?
Click to expand...

An eyewitness in a turboprop on a taxiway who was a pilot witnessed the left engine break off. He said it slid into the safe area between the runways. I don't know if that's the engine that ended up next to the plane or not.
 
Re: 777 down SFO

Aeric said:
Condolences to the families of those who passed (2) and those injured. I just got back from Livermore for lunch with a friend, When we were climbing out from PAO on the way to LVK, I looked out to the left and pointed out a smoke plume to the northwest to my passenger. Found out what it was when we got to the restaurant. Very sad.:sad:
Click to expand...

I passed through Class B a few hours later. Obvious wreckage off 27L, no smoke anymore.

It's really weird passing through Class B with no one else in the airspace. But NorCal kept me offshore at 3500, so no closeup views.

The accident was far worse than the hard landing I had assumed.
 
N521MA said:
No argument, it is too early to judge. However, based on all info available seems like a very probable cause, unless there were technical issues with the 777. Considering there was no distress call, seems like a tired pilot, long way from South Korea, misjudged his glide path onto the runway or version 2. a bit more twisted where his airspeed got away from him and he stalled the plane causing him to sink and smash main gear against the sea wall.

Just glad most are alive, including the captain, which will tell us all about ;)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...

Just heard from a witness (CNN TV) who was on that flight that confirmed that pilot throttled the engines just before they touched the ground, which again kind of proves the theory that he was too low or stalled.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HDtalled
 
I think I know where Tom's comment about "if it was a mechanic we'd fry him but a pilot, never" in another thread (paraphrased) comes from. :)

Anyway. That's PoA...

Here's a link to the very busy Tower controller. Sounds to me like VOX got activated in the 777 cockpit in the crash...

Jams up the frequency a few times and the (dazed) crew isn't talking to the controller but the controller thinks they are. Toward the end it is picking up a conversation that I can't quite make out.

The poor VFR call up guy, jammed (not meaning to) the freq right as the controller is repeating "go around, go around" to everyone.

Since this is likely a LiveATC recording from somewhere off-airport it makes it sound like the VFR wins the "double" but I bet it sounded different in the Skywest cockpit right behind the 777.

Not a fun sight out the front window watching the guy in front of you ball it up, I suspect.

http://soberbuildengineer-com.s3.amazonaws.com/AAR214-KSFO-Crash.mp3

Very fast response by the Rescue folks. I haven't timed it yet but the entire recording is just over 2 minutes.
 
"There was no immediate indication of what caused the crash, but an FBI special agent said there was no indication it was a terrorist act." from The SF Chronicle.

That will start the conspiracy kooks off immediately.:rolleyes:

Cheers
 
Last edited:
In the other thread I posted my two impressions of the audio of the Tower.

The poor VFR call up got caught calling at an "inopportune" time for sure. Ha.

The VOX appears to have been activated in the 777 during the crash. The transmissions later sound like a conversation in the cockpit, not directed at the controller. I can't quite make out what they're saying though.

The LiveATC recording is almost certainly from off-field, so the mix of the VFR call up and the controller repeating "go around, go around" probably came across as mostly the controller to the trailing Skywest.
 
N521MA said:
Just heard from a witness (CNN TV) who was on that flight that confirmed that pilot throttled the engines just before they touched the ground, which again kind of proves the theory that he was too low or stalled.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HDtalled
Click to expand...

Unless the witness was a pilot and was standing close to the approach end, I'd take that report with a grain of salt. Eyewitnesses come up with a lot of things that just didn't happen.

Reporter: "Did the airplane throttle up prior to the crash."

Eyewitness: "Uh, yeah, that's what it did.."

I believe reporters have a talent for identifying the dumbest person around and sticking the microphone and camera in that person's face...
 
X3 Skier said:
"There was no immediate indication of what caused the crash, but an FBI special agent said there was no indication it was a terrorist act." from The SF Chronicle.

That will start the conspiracy kooks off immediately.:rolleyes:

Cheers
Click to expand...

I heard that too. I'm annoyed that we play into terrorist's hands by raising the terrorism issue every time something happens.
 
Well CNN has certainly managed to mangle their interpretation of the ATC clips...

Air traffic control audio -- between the airport's tower and Flight 214 crew members -- suggested that those on the ground knew there was some sort of problem, promising that "emergency vehicles are responding."
"We have everyone on their way," the air traffic controller said, according to LiveATC.net, a website that provides air traffic control audio.
Click to expand...

I believe the "problem" was that the aircraft was in pieces on the runway :dunno:
 
Reports are that the SF Fire Department is claiming ~60 people unaccounted for. They would have had to transport everyone from the scene, so short of someone making an inaccurate count, I'm not sure how people are unaccounted for, unless they are still in the plane. :(

Edit: looks like they are revising their numbers and there are not 60 people unaccounted for. Seems it was an erroneous head count. Amazing how there's so much confusion about how many people they moved from the scene (not criticizing them at all, just find it interesting).
 
Last edited:
Re: 777 down SFO

For what it's worth, this is what a passenger on the flight has said, as reported by reuters

Survivor Benjamin Levy told local a local NBC station by phone that he believed the plane had been coming in too low.

"I know the airport pretty well, so I realized the guy was a bit too low, too fast, and somehow he was not going to hit the runway on time, so he was too low ... he put some gas and tried to go up again," he said.

"But it was too late, so we hit the runway pretty bad, and then we started going up in the air again, and then landed again, pretty hard," Levy said.
Click to expand...
 
airheadpenguin said:
Rather than excoriating people for sharing their opinion that it was pilot error, we should EDUCATE members on the other plausible causes for this kind of accident on a visual approach.
Click to expand...
There is nothing to educate with. All we know at this point is the airplane came up way short which is a very unusual thing. All I will suggest at this point is that the pilot was probably not aiming/planning to touch down there.

I am sure we will have some more details soon enough.
 
kyleb said:
I believe reporters have a talent for identifying the dumbest person around and sticking the microphone and camera in that person's face...
Click to expand...

Is that why reporters always have the mic and camera? :D
 
I make no claims about this guy and his comment, but it was posted in a professional pilot forum and I thought it interesting in reference to the ILS being out of service at SFO. Simply for what it's worth:

"I flew for these guys for several years. Whilst the facts are not known and it could be anything at this stage, I will say that the majority of the Korean Pilots were lost without the G/S. Also, most of them had[have] a tendency to push forward and undershoot the Glide Slope in the last couple hundred feet in order to have a lower angle in the hope of the "smooth landing". These guys were obsessed with the smooth landing. Word got around about me, and when they flew with me they knew never to undershoot when I was next to them.

I am saddened by this news, although not surprised based on my personal experience."
 
Capt.Crash'n'Burn said:
An eyewitness in a turboprop on a taxiway who was a pilot witnessed the left engine break off. He said it slid into the safe area between the runways. I don't know if that's the engine that ended up next to the plane or not.
Click to expand...

I was parked just outside the boundary 100ft from that same turboprop. But in a SUV :(
 
Re: 777 down SFO

Capt.Crash'n'Burn said:
Can you find anywhere in my post where I said with 100% certianty that this was the cause??
Click to expand...

I never anything about 100%. You said "likely" pilot error. So again, keyboard captain, what's your evidence and experience to make such a judgment?

There was a news report that emergency services were in place before the landing, which means an in-flight emergency was communicated. The fire trucks were there instantly. Why else would they have gotten there so fast?
 
Last edited:
Re: 777 down SFO

RoscoeT said:
There was a news report that emergency services were in place before the landing, which means an in-flight emergency was communicated. The fire trucks were there instantly. Why else would they have gotten there so fast?
Click to expand...

My problem with this is that when you listen to the atc feed there is no mention of problems. Aircraft behind the 777 were cleared to land as well which would never happen behind an emergency.
 
N521MA said:
Just heard from a witness (CNN TV) who was on that flight that confirmed that pilot throttled the engines just before they touched the ground, which again kind of proves the theory that he was too low or stalled.
Click to expand...

This was posted on another site... Speed vs distance and altitude vs distance for the Asiana 777 compared to two other 777s that arrived earlier the same day. Appears illustrative of a stabilized vs unstabilized approach.

speed.jpg

altitude.jpg
 
Re: 777 down SFO

RoscoeT said:
There was a news report that emergency services were in place before the landing, which means an in-flight emergency was communicated. The fire trucks were there instantly. Why else would they have gotten there so fast?
Click to expand...

There are so many inconsistencies in the reporting. There was no prior indication that there was a problem, according to the ATC tape that was played. And as I recall, the firehouse at SFO is pretty close to where that accident occurred.
 
I'm with Douglas on this and I'm type rated in the 777, what the heck is in the roof that would burn hot enough to melt aluminum ? The interior fabrics are rated not to support a fire so what was hot enough to get them burning ? The center fuel tank would have been empty because that's what you burn off first. I realize they hit the sea wall and busted off the tail but I just don't get what would make the roof/cabin burn like that. Maybe it was some kind of super hot bleed air from a dissenegrating engine ?
 
I'm guessing the scrape going off frame to the left is the "missing" engine seen above
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top