Posted on 07/06/2013 12:02:24 PM PDT by FreedomPoster
XHogPilot - thank you for your real time, detailed and analytical posts on the current runway conditions and the process of landing the aircraft. I am amazed at some the people who frequent this site and share this level of expertise. You have my gratitude for your continued service. I am also amazed at even understanding a HINT of what I takes to become a pilot of any jet aircraft.
Whenever I could, I always took a moment to thank those in the cockpit when deplaning any commercial flight.
p.s. - I’d be more than fly with you at the controls anytime. Thank you.
Oh, they most certainly do.
This channel has a LOT of videos of the crash - some are news reports.
https://www.youtube.com/user/johndark899/feed
johndark899
1:26 Minutes
Close Up) Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 Crashes On Landing At San Francisco Airport July 6 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M42WusJKHC0
This is Raw video - not a news report - 2:33 minutes
RAW VIDEO of Boeing 777 Crash Site at SFO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IAXetkiwN0
“landing and take-off, are always the most dangerous”
Not really. Take off is not that bad. It is the landings that are dangerous.
for take off, the plane has been checked and prepped. There should be no ice on the wings and if conditions are too bad, the flight can be cancelled or delayed. The pilot is fresh. All you do is set the flaps and make sure you get to a certain speed before lift off. You or I could almost do it.
For landing, the pilot may be tired, you have less control over the conditions, there is passenger and airline pressure not to divert to another airport if conditions are bad, you may have ice on the wings, you can delay the landing a bit but only until your fuel runs out, and you don’t just set the flaps, reduce speed and put her down, you actually have to hit a target area.
Has anyone seen where the other engine is?
Yes.
Just as a matter of curiosity why would two big holes be burned in the top of the fuselage ? Seems that’s where carry-on luggage would be secured in the overheads.
He worked for Boeing, on the production line. . .what part of the line and what components?
“deliver the plane,”
He actually delivered the jet? Meaning he handed the jet over to the customer? A production-line guy did that?
“work on Air Force One,”
He was enlisted in the Air Force, with the 89th out of Andrews? When? We probably know a lot of the same people then. Seriously.
“and fly them”
He flew jets like the 777? If he flew at Boeing he was a former military test pilot when he was hired and took new, upgraded or modified jets up.
Let me understand: He was a crew chief on AF1, he also worked the production-line in Kent, WA, and was a Boeing Program Manager that signed over the jet to the customer, and he flew jets like the 777.
Point is, there are many aspect of aviation, from engineering design, production, flight test, delivery, etc., that are part of this world. Few are aware of all aspects.
I am pretty sure that the port side engine wound up ahead of the plane and in the grass off on the RIGHT side of the runway. You can see a photo of it in the picture at http://tinyurl.com/l6loouz
and you can see the trail that the engine left as it skidded down the runway and off to the side in the wonderful hi-res picture at
http://tinyurl.com/m7ra86w
Thanks. That was the only picture I saw of the left engine, even after reporters were on TV asking the same question with no answer.
Yeah, the flightaware data shows anything but a ‘normal’ approach when compared to the same flight on previous days. This flight seems to have trouble all the way in. Very unlike the previous days data for the same approach by the same flight.
Though all the interviews say the passengers did not sense anything wrong until the end. But this approach was erratic early on. The flight crew and tower must have known that and worked on it during the approach - or maybe not until it was too late.
I did this landing over 20 times in 2008 usually sitting in the emergency row over the wings on 737s. Long, steady decent with 3 or so flap adjustments on the way in. Hardly ever any noticable speed adjustments once lined up and no noise abatement type adjustments. Just long and steady. The flap motor(s) on a 737 must be right under the seats. It is very noticeable during final in those seats.
To shed the extra altitude would he have had to leave the flaps up or less than normally deployed and cut speed? If so, it seems he may have not gotten them back down and kept cutting speed as well.
At the 600’ point he was basically at what appears to be good speed and position. But he was dropping at 1,300 ft/min at that point and continued to lose speed after that.
I know that on the 737s the flaps crank out slowly and getting them extended takes a few seconds. Going from no flaps to full would seem to take around 30 seconds or more. Not at all instant or quick.
Just some thoughts from a layman.
Obviously there was a fire started during the landing with engines ripped off and fuel lines exposed and leaking. It would seem that the interior fire started out small since the passengers were able to evacuate but probably spread along the top in the contained cabin - just like a house fire will burn ceilings first before expanding to the floor.
It seems more effect than cause of any type.
As posted above this approach was troubled well before impact. Though the passengers were unaware of issues until at or near impact this whole approach seems to have been bad. It does not appear that any sudden or catastrophic event (i.e. explosive or on onboard fire) was the cause.
SFO emergency crews seemed to have done well in dousing the flames quickly also. Hats off to them.
I've read online (take that with a grain of salt) that Korean airliner pilots are overly-reliant on instrument landing systems and may not have experience to do "seat of the pants" manual landing of an airliner. As such, if the flight crew was not experienced, that explains what (from passengers on the plane who saw on window seats) the plane made an unusually steep final approach to the runway and when the pilots realized the error and tried to compensate by applying engine power, the plane hit the end of the runway at a higher than normal angle of attack (AOA).
One thing that bothers me is whether the flight crew had access to a three-axis (latitude, longitude, and altitude) commercial-airplane quality GPS receiver. If they did, they could have at least programmed in a straight-in autoland sequence based on GPS data, which should keep the plane on the proper glide slope and put it in on the right landing spot on the runway within circa 20 feet accuracy. If the landing was done completely manually, then (in my opinion!) we may have to seriously look at pilot error as the cause of the hard landing.
Wow. Yer kewel. I could totally believe your 85k knots theory.
I use to work in the building across from the Crown Plaza, in Suriname.
Working on the 8th floor we spent our days watching take off and landing.
We had bets as to what service the pilot flew in based on their approach and landing. Perforce or Navy.
Personally didn’t think it made a difference as approach is a fairly rigid practice but, it was fun to watch.
Any guess why the cabin was destroyed by fire?
The wings and under body didn’t burn at all.
I was thinking a wing separated a bit, spilling fuel and a spark, due to the nature of crash, ignited fuel????
As a retired ABE (catapults and arresting gear type), I've seen thousands of arrested landings on a aircraft carrier.
The process is a bit different since they're trying to snag a wire, but if the pilot isn't with in the parameters they'd get a wave off.
At what point should/would the tower or pilot have realized that he was in trouble? (Hopefully not too late)
Is there a point where a wave off would/should have been advised?
How's that work in civil aviation ?
Don’t know if this might be helpful...
‘Emergency Vehicles Are Responding’: Listen to Air-Traffic Controllers React to S.F. Crash Landing
on the tapes I could hear the controller notify Asiana 214 that emergency crews were responding. The pilot must have communicated some sort of problem to the tower. It is at around 1:52 on the following link
http://wandr.me/Audio/AAR214-KSFO-Crash.mp3
The first post I saw here on the crash was deleted by a moderator, not sure why...a few minutes later it was posted again by someone else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.