Simviation Forums

I just saw this pop up on the MS/NBC news

A Boeing 777 operated by Asiana Airlines crashed while landing at San Francisco International Airport on Saturday, according to the Federal Aviation Administration.

The airplane was coming in from Seoul, South Korea and apparently crashed sometime after touching down on Runway 28.

No more info other than what's here for now. Anyone else see or hear anything?

'Frisco news coming in...>>>

http://news.kron4.com/news/boeing-777-crashes-at-sfo/

BBC News...>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23214513


Paul.

Very impressive................

Trooper

Sunday's news...>>>>

http://news.kron4.com/news/

A right-old mess!

..2 dead...and quite a lot of injuries...

A strange position in relation to Runway 28L. the main active runway for heavies? (Crash scene; between 28L and 28R).

Quote:
"You can track this flight on flightaware dot com. The data shows the aircraft on final into SFO at 200 feet only making 85 knots. The normal approach speed for a Boeing 777-200 is about 150 knots, touchdown speed is about 140 knots. It appears this aircraft was in a stall 200 feet off the ground just seconds from landing. A passenger described the engines going to max power just before impact. From what is available it appears the aircraft stalled on final will have to wait for NTSB to determine the cause".
End quote.

Paul.

Airfield layout...>>> http://uk.flightaware.com/resources/air ... RT+DIAGRAM

Fozzer wrote:Sunday's news...>>>>

http://news.kron4.com/news/

A right-old mess!

..2 dead...and quite a lot of injuries...

A strange position in relation to Runway 28L. the main active runway for heavies? (Crash scene; between 28L and 28R).

Quote:
"You can track this flight on flightaware dot com. The data shows the aircraft on final into SFO at 200 feet only making 85 knots. The normal approach speed for a Boeing 777-200 is about 150 knots, touchdown speed is about 140 knots. It appears this aircraft was in a stall 200 feet off the ground just seconds from landing. A passenger described the engines going to max power just before impact. From what is available it appears the aircraft stalled on final will have to wait for NTSB to determine the cause".
End quote.

Paul.

Airfield layout...>>> http://uk.flightaware.com/resources/air ... RT+DIAGRAM

I would not take Flightaware as gospel. They often "calculate" missing data from what has just been recorded to finish off a missing data line.....

Matt

I heard that the tail and an engine struck the seawall before the runway and broke off before she crash-landed...

More news...>>>

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23216587

Paul.

Video of the approach and crash. Whats crazy is the thing nearly did do a cartwheel... so some of those witnesses werent making that up.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/07/us/plane- ... ?hpt=hp_t1

They are now saying that the voice recorder indicates that the pilot called for a go-around just before impact.

Yeah..........
Sadly, things are looking like gross pilot error may be the cause as the engines evidently were performing normally
How can the pilots of a commercial airliner not be aware of its landing and stall speeds?

Keep It Simple wrote:Yeah..........
Sadly, things are looking like gross pilot error may be the cause as the engines evidently were performing normally
How can the pilots of a commercial airliner not be aware of its landing and stall speeds?

Well news keeps coming out. It appears as if the pilot was on his first flight in a 777. That being said, he was not new as he previously flew 747s and such. So I would think that perhaps he was flying the approach as if he was in a 747? I believe the approach speed in a 747 is slower than that in a T7.

gtirob01 wrote:

Keep It Simple wrote:Yeah..........
Sadly, things are looking like gross pilot error may be the cause as the engines evidently were performing normally
How can the pilots of a commercial airliner not be aware of its landing and stall speeds?

Well news keeps coming out. It appears as if the pilot was on his first flight in a 777. That being said, he was not new as he previously flew 747s and such. So I would think that perhaps he was flying the approach as if he was in a 747? I believe the approach speed in a 747 is slower than that in a T7.

Makes you wonder what the Captain was doing whilst a newly qualified First Officer was making his first revenue approach....??

Matt

yes this is the thing it would of been imposs to recover from a stall at that lower hight taking into fact that they were at only 200 feet, there was no chance in hell to recover from that really.

Makes you wonder what the Captain was doing whilst a newly qualified First Officer was making his first revenue approach....??

Matt

Actually, according to latest reports, the experienced 777 pilot was the official first officer and the inexperienced pilot was on sort of an unofficial check ride to SFO

The more we find out the worse it seems.

The "Captain" allegedly had 43 hours on type, so it wasn't his first flight on type. The Training Captain was allegedly non flying, and acting as Co-pilot had several thousand hours on type, although if the initial reports were correct, may have less overall experience.

Also reported was the ILS was on maintenance, so it appears to have been a visual approach, which in a large aircraft over the sea can fairly challenging, particularly if their is any relief in the terrain approaching the runway, and you've done nothing but auto-ILSs for months. Depending on the airlines SOPs, this may have been a well practiced scenario, or not. Either way, it appears they've got it wrong somehow. A miscalculation perhaps, maybe an incorrect configuration for the approach.

I´m trying to explain myself how it is possible to stall on approach knowing the minimal speeds and flap positions required..............and how is it possible to allow the plane to fly not having the ILS operative...........

Trooper