A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco International

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore

Post Reply
bizjets101
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2105
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 7:44 pm

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by bizjets101 »

Sad to see such a serious thread digress to childish name calling and immaturity.

Back to the topic, here is Sully's take on this accident; Click Here.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
complexintentions
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2183
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:49 pm
Location: of my pants is unknown.

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by complexintentions »

bananskins,

You seem like an angry little man. Sorry about that. "Time in the industry?" *sigh* Unlike you, I've actually flown the same aircraft type as in the accident, and if it'll cheer you up, into LOS as well, many times. Before we got our RNAV approaches, half the time the ILS would become a visual when the transmitter dropped off the air. So what?

Get over yourself, chief. You aren't aren't that special and you aren't the only one with some time in the industry that visits these forums. Why not try to add something of value to the discussion, rather than some aggressive, albeit amusing, dick-waving?

I would suggest you watch the video in the link to see how an aviation professional like Sullenberg conducts himself: articulate, clear, and calm.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
FenderManDan
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 490
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:40 am
Location: Toilet, Onterible

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by FenderManDan »

Speaking of our own rules. What do you do when your skipper is screwing up, you see it and this applies?
CARs

602.05 (1) Every passenger on board an aircraft shall comply with instructions given by any crew member respecting the safety of the aircraft or of persons on board the aircraft.

(2) Every crew member on board an aircraft shall, during flight time, comply with the instructions of the pilot-in-command or of any person whom the pilot-in-command has authorized to act on behalf of the pilot-in-command.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Nark
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2967
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 6:59 pm
Location: LA

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by Nark »

Strega wrote:I dont know why people here are defending these boneheads...

They couldnt fly a visual approach!--- They CRASHED!!!

fatigue, new airport bla bla bla.. it doesnt matter.... They COULD NOT fly the aircraft! PERIOD!!!

THE END..
You are missing the point. WHY did they crash on a visual?
Culture?
SOP's?
ATC vector?
Etc...
---------- ADS -----------
 
Flying Nutcracker
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 469
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 3:14 pm

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by Flying Nutcracker »

That's an interesting concept... 2 guys, one with 12k+, the other almost 10k total time, knew how to fly an airplane until Saturday morning. Then, all of a sudden they didn't anymore...

Begs the question... "Why?"...
---------- ADS -----------
 
pdw
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1619
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:51 am
Location: right base 24 CYSN

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by pdw »

Something occurred shortly before the accident ... that they weren't expecting, approximately at "500 feet" / "134kts".

From 1400 feet to 200 feet they lost 58knots of airspeed (AS) while only losing about 26kts of groundspeed (GS).

By 500 feet the AS started to get slower than GS, by 200 feet was about 10kts below ... in clear/stable air ... with a minor crosswind/headwind of 6kts-only shown them on the ATIS.
---------- ADS -----------
 
CID
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3544
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:43 am
Location: Canada

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by CID »

From AvHerald:
On Jul 9th 2013 the NTSB reported in their third press conference based on pilot interviews, that at 500 feet AGL the PAPIs were showing three red one white and the pilot began to pull back on the yoke to reduce rate of descent assuming the autothrottles would maintain the speed set to 137 knots. A lateral deviation developed taking the attention of the crew. Descending through 200 feet all PAPIs were red and the speed had decayed into the red/black marked range, the crew realised the autothrottles were not maintaining the target speed, at that point the autothrottles started to move the levers forward. There were three pilots in the cockpit, the captain under supervision was pilot flying, the training captain was pilot monitoring, the relief first officer was occupying the observer seat, the relief captain was in the cabin at the time of the landing. The autothrottle switches were found in the armed position post accident, it is not yet clear in what mode the autothrottles were and whether autothrottles were engaged or not. Two flight attendants in the aft cabin were ejected from the aircraft during the accident sequence and were later found up and aside of the runway with injuries. At least one of the escape slides inflated inside the cabin.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Gino Under
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 833
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:06 pm

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by Gino Under »

The pilot in command of Asiana Airlines Flight 214, the Boeing 777-200ER that crashed on landing at San Francisco International Airport (SFO) July 6, told investigators that he assumed the aircraft’s auto-throttles were engaged and maintaining a speed of 137 knots as the 777 came in for a landing. The aircraft’s speed dropped to just 103 knots at the time of impact.

The commanding pilot was one of three pilots in the cockpit at the time of the crash, sitting in the right seat. He was serving as an instructor for the pilot flying the aircraft, sitting in the left seat, who was in the midst of training on the 777 after serving for eight years as an Airbus A320 captain for Asiana.

“At about 500 feet, [the commanding pilot] realized they were low,” US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) chairman Deborah Hersman said at a Tuesday news conference in San Francisco. “He told the [flying] pilot to pull back.”

The commanding pilot told NTSB he realized a go-around was necessary and noted the flying pilot had already pushed the throttles forward. But it was too late; the aircraft’s main landing gear was the first to impact SFO’s sea wall as the 777 came down short of runway 28L, Hersman said. The tail section then hit the sea wall. The aircraft “went into a 360 degree spin,” she added.


Air Transport World
---------- ADS -----------
 
Donald
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2368
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:34 am
Location: Canada

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by Donald »

CAMI

Confirm
Activate
Monitor
Intervene
---------- ADS -----------
 
boeingboy
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1507
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:57 pm
Location: West coast

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by boeingboy »

Pilot monitoring was not doing his job - and neither were the other 2. Crew screwed up - simple.

3 pilots in the cockpit and not one of them monitored the instruments. Another case of the airplane flying the crew, instead of the other way around.
---------- ADS -----------
 
bananaskins767
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 11:33 pm

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by bananaskins767 »

OK OK......I'm outgunned here girls. Sorry to have stirred up some shit amongst a few of you here.

I'm not even a little angry about a anything and was actually laughing during my first posting on this flying f**kup and more than a little amused while I further wound you up Complex. You'll get there eventually so just hang in there and keep learning!

However I won't take back my comments re visual approaches. XSbank....I generally keep the autopilot engaged until it's simply easier to fly manually and I didn't bust any company regulations on that particular approach but it's a good question just the same. As usual, your posting here is sensible and worth reading.

As to my comments on Korean and Pakistani pilots I admit to stretching the race/cultural issue to the point of excessive generalization, which is unforgiveable in itself, and unfair to those pilots, but it is sadly often the case.

Complex, you're wrong on your race/cultural understanding but as I said, hang in there and try to keep on learning.

OK I'm cutting into my pre-flight rest time so I must say goodnight.....

@#$! I hate Ramadan!!!.....Look it up Complex.

hahahahaha
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by Colonel Sanders »

From a former UAL check captain.

After I retired from UAL as a Standards Captain on the –400, I got a job as a simulator instructor working for Alteon (a Boeing subsidiary) at Asiana. When I first got there, I was shocked and surprised by the lack of basic piloting skills shown by most of the pilots. It is not a normal situation with normal progression from new hire, right seat, left seat taking a decade or two. One big difference is that ex-Military pilots are given super-seniority and progress to the left seat much faster. Compared to the US, they also upgrade fairly rapidly because of the phenomenal growth by all Asian air carriers. By the way, after about six months at Asiana, I was moved over to KAL and found them to be identical. The only difference was the color of the uniforms and airplanes. I worked in Korea for 5 long years and although I found most of the people to be very pleasant, it’s a minefield of a work environment ... for them and for us expats.

One of the first things I learned was that the pilots kept a web-site and reported on every training session. I don’t think this was officially sanctioned by the company, but after one or two simulator periods, a database was building on me (and everyone else) that told them exactly how I ran the sessions, what to expect on checks, and what to look out for. For example; I used to open an aft cargo door at 100 knots to get them to initiate an RTO and I would brief them on it during the briefing. This was on the B-737 NG and many of the captains were coming off the 777 or B744 and they were used to the Master Caution System being inhibited at 80 kts. Well, for the first few days after I started that, EVERYONE rejected the takeoff. Then, all of a sudden they all “got it” and continued the takeoff (in accordance with their manuals). The word had gotten out. I figured it was an overall PLUS for the training program.

We expat instructors were forced upon them after the amount of fatal accidents (most of the them totally avoidable) over a decade began to be noticed by the outside world. They were basically given an ultimatum by the FAA, Transport Canada, and the EU to totally rebuild and rethink their training program or face being banned from the skies all over the world. They hired Boeing and Airbus to staff the training centers. KAL has one center and Asiana has another. When I was there (2003-2008) we had about 60 expats conducting training KAL and about 40 at Asiana. Most instructors were from the USA, Canada, Australia, or New Zealand with a few stuffed in from Europe and Asia. Boeing also operated training centers in Singapore and China so they did hire some instructors from there.

This solution has only been partially successful but still faces ingrained resistance from the Koreans. I lost track of the number of highly qualified instructors I worked with who were fired because they tried to enforce “normal” standards of performance. By normal standards, I would include being able to master basic tasks like successfully shoot a visual approach with 10 kt crosswind and the weather CAVOK. I am not kidding when I tell you that requiring them to shoot a visual approach struck fear in their hearts ... with good reason. Like this Asiana crew, it didnt’ compute that you needed to be a 1000’ AGL at 3 miles and your sink rate should be 600-800 Ft/Min. But, after 5 years, they finally nailed me. I still had to sign my name to their training and sometimes if I just couldn’t pass someone on a check, I had no choice but to fail them. I usually busted about 3-5 crews a year and the resistance against me built. I finally failed an extremely incompetent crew and it turned out he was the a high-ranking captain who was the Chief Line Check pilot on the fleet I was teaching on. I found out on my next monthly trip home that KAL was not going to renew my Visa. The crew I failed was given another check and continued a fly while talking about how unfair Captain Brown was.

Any of you Boeing glass-cockpit guys will know what I mean when I describe these events. I gave them a VOR approach with an 15 mile arc from the IAF. By the way, KAL dictated the profiles for all sessions and we just administered them. He requested two turns in holding at the IAF to get set up for the approach. When he finally got his nerve up, he requested “Radar Vectors” to final. He could have just said he was ready for the approach and I would have cleared him to the IAF and then “Cleared for the approach” and he could have selected “Exit Hold” and been on his way. He was already in LNAV/VNAV PATH. So, I gave him vectors to final with a 30 degree intercept. Of course, he failed to “Extend the FAF” and he couldn’t understand why it would not intercept the LNAV magenta line when he punched LNAV and VNAV. He made three approaches and missed approaches before he figured out that his active waypoint was “Hold at XYZ.” Every time he punched LNAV, it would try to go back to the IAF ... just like it was supposed to do. Since it was a check, I was not allowed (by their own rules) to offer him any help. That was just one of about half dozen major errors I documented in his UNSAT paperwork. He also failed to put in ANY aileron on takeoff with a 30-knot direct crosswind (again, the weather was dictated by KAL).

This Asiana SFO accident makes me sick and while I am surprised there are not more, I expect that there will be many more of the same type accidents in the future unless some drastic steps are taken. They are already required to hire a certain percentage of expats to try to ingrain more flying expertise in them, but more likely, they will eventually be fired too. One of the best trainees I ever had was a Korean/American (he grew up and went to school in the USA) who flew C-141’s in the USAF. When he got out, he moved back to Korea and got hired by KAL. I met him when I gave him some training and a check on the B-737 and of course, he breezed through the training. I give him annual PCs for a few years and he was always a good pilot. Then, he got involved with trying to start a pilots union and when they tired to enforce some sort of duty rigs on international flights, he was fired after being arrested and JAILED!

The Koreans are very very bright and smart so I was puzzled by their inability to fly an airplane well. They would show up on Day 1 of training (an hour before the scheduled briefing time, in a 3-piece suit, and shined shoes) with the entire contents of the FCOM and Flight Manual totally memorized. But, putting that information to actual use was many times impossible. Crosswind landings are also an unsolvable puzzle for most of them. I never did figure it out completely, but I think I did uncover a few clues. Here is my best guess. First off, their educational system emphasizes ROTE memorization from the first day of school as little kids. As you know, that is the lowest form of learning and they act like robots. They are also taught to NEVER challenge authority and in spite of the flight training heavily emphasizing CRM/CLR, it still exists either on the surface or very subtly. You just can’t change 3000 years of culture.

The other thing that I think plays an important role is the fact that there is virtually NO civil aircraft flying in Korea. It’s actually illegal to own a Cessna-152 and just go learn to fly. Ultra-lights and Powered Hang Gliders are Ok. I guess they don’t trust the people to not start WW III by flying 35 miles north of Inchon into North Korea. But, they don’t get the kids who grew up flying (and thinking for themselves) and hanging around airports. They do recruit some kids from college and send then to the US or Australia and get them their tickets. Generally, I had better experience with them than with the ex-Military pilots. This was a surprise to me as I spent years as a Naval Aviator flying fighters after getting my private in light airplanes. I would get experienced F-4, F-5, F-15, and F-16 pilots who were actually terrible pilots if they had to hand fly the airplane. What a shock!

Finally, I’ll get off my box and talk about the total flight hours they claim. I do accept that there are a few talented and free-thinking pilots that I met and trained in Korea. Some are still in contact and I consider them friends. They were a joy! But, they were few and far between and certainly not the norm.

Actually, this is a worldwide problem involving automation and the auto-flight concept. Take one of these new first officers that got his ratings in the US or Australia and came to KAL or Asiana with 225 flight hours. After takeoff, in accordance with their SOP, he calls for the autopilot to be engaged at 250’ after takeoff. How much actual flight time is that? Hardly one minute. Then he might fly for hours on the autopilot and finally disengage it (MAYBE?) below 800’ after the gear was down, flaps extended and on airspeed (autothrottle). Then he might bring it in to land. Again, how much real “flight time” or real experience did he get. Minutes! Of course, on the 777 or 747, it’s the same only they get more inflated logbooks.

So, when I hear that a 10,000 hour Korean captain was vectored in for a 17-mile final and cleared for a visual approach in CAVOK weather, it raises the hair on the back of my neck.

Tom
---------- ADS -----------
 
Flying Nutcracker
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 469
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 3:14 pm

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by Flying Nutcracker »

That was probably the most insightful read I have seen in a long time, Colonel!

Not surprised, just reinforces the assumptions!
---------- ADS -----------
 
CID
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3544
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:43 am
Location: Canada

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by CID »

To bananaskins767 and Colonel Sanders,

What exactly is the point of your posts? They address the flying proficiency of certain groups by their culture and that is just wrong. What exactly makes you think it's alright to do that on this forum?

It doesn't take much to debunk the BS you are both trying to sell. For example, let's look at Colgan Air flight 3407. Both pilots were "white" Americans blessed to operate a 400 series Dash 8 but somehow they failed to learn about the stall protection system and couldn't even recognize a stick pusher event. Another couple of good old boys in the US attempted a takeoff of Comair Flight 5191 on the wrong runway (CRJ) and killed everyone on board but the copilot. What does that UAL captain think of the commuter airline system in the USÉ

Commuter airlines in the US seem to suffer an inordinate amount of accidents and fatalities.

Then there's the Air Taxi group in the US and Canada. In Alaska just last week, the American born owner of a small airline managed to crash his DHC-3 on take off and killed 9 passengers and himself. That's 8 more than the Asiana crash. Already this year Alaska has seen several crashes of Air Taxi operators. In Canada one of the most dangerous things you can do for travel statistically is fly on an a float aircraft operated on the west coast.

The Air Taxi segment in Canada (as far as I know) isn`t operated by any particular cultural group.

The most serious airliner crash on Canadian territory was operated by Swissair. Not really a "pilot error" accident but the airplane was designed, modified and maintained in a western country.

Just last week in Canada we had the anniversary of one of the most devastating crashes in Canada. Air Canada flight 621 crashed after a series of pilot mistakes. This was back in the era before CRM and other advancements in technology and training but somehow you don`t see people blaming the accident on the flight crew`s culture or country of origin. I don`t know where the pilots on that accident aircraft were born but based on their names, I have a feeling they were very western and very white.

In my opinion, the posts above that jabber on about race should be removed. They are unprofessional, provocative and just plain wrong. Let`s concentrate on the facts and keep the speculation away from ridiculous racial profiling.
---------- ADS -----------
 
white_knuckle_flyer
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 175
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:43 am

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by white_knuckle_flyer »

The different ways in which certain cultures communicate and interact with each other is well documented, and these differences do not stop at the cockpit door. Malcolm Gladwell's book "Outliers" has an interesting chapter on how South Korean airlines dealt with an abysmal safety record, one of the solutions being the requirement that pilots learned and spoke English. The intent being that it would hopefully remove much of the connotations and/or mitigated speech that is endemic to certain cultures and their languages.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by Cat Driver »

Great idea lets sanitize this discussion and not mention different cultures, after all Canada is a multicultural country.

Looking back on all the different countries I worked in all cultures are the same, especially Saudia Arabia where they really embrace multiculturalizm.

And they have all those really modern advanced social gatherings, like public beheadings at the Mosques.
---------- ADS -----------
 
CpnCrunch
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4011
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by CpnCrunch »

CID wrote:To bananaskins767 and Colonel Sanders,

What exactly is the point of your posts? They address the flying proficiency of certain groups by their culture and that is just wrong. What exactly makes you think it's alright to do that on this forum?
So are you saying that what the UAL check captain is saying is factually incorrect in some way? What he is basically saying is that the entire airline industry in South Korea is institutionally incompetent and negligent. Sure there are incompetent pilots in North America, but I think they are the exception rather than the norm.
---------- ADS -----------
 
xsbank
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5655
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 4:00 pm
Location: "The Coast"

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by xsbank »

CID, give your politically correct head a shake. How many hours of advanced flight training have you given? The fact of the matter is taking a kid out of college and giving him the basic training for a license, making him learn aviation English, making him sit in the right seat of a jet for 10 years without touching the controls, you get somebody who can program an FMS with 4 fingers yet has no clue how to fly. That just happens to be the Asian model, the Chinese, Korean, Taiwanese, Indonesians I taught, some with translators; it was very common for us to stop their training at the SIC level because they could just never get To the type rating level. How likely are you to get a good complex-aircraft captain out of a trainee with 6 hours on a Seneca?

There is a shortage of pilots worldwide, old guys like me are retiring, general aviation is being strangled and some countries there is precisely none. Add to that the starting wages in countries like Canada are so pathetic, good candidates are bailing rather than live like Red Lake burger-flippers for 15 years. So you pay peanuts you get monkeys.

Soon they will allow one pilot to fly 777s so they can cut the pay even more and fly 2 jets at the same time. Wait for it.

CID, you need to get out more.
---------- ADS -----------
 
fish4life
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2405
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:32 am

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by fish4life »

I'm not saying air taxi has to be dangerous but inherently it is a more challenging and dangerous work environment as there is next to no automation and your not going from ILS to ILS, if a Navajo had the automation and performance of a 777 and only flew to really well equipped airports I bet the accident rate would plumet but that isn't the case. In some ways thankfully the air taxi business is a challenging environment with very little automation as I'm convinced that having that back ground knowledge of "flying up north" is the reason why the majors in the US and Canada have such great safety records since the pilots come with lots of experience. If Korea had reserves with metros and king airs to fly to the accident rate at the majors would probably go down to
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Nark
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2967
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 6:59 pm
Location: LA

Re: A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco Internati

Post by Nark »

It's funny how some are quick to blame the incompetences of Colgan and Comair, because they are regionals.
Yet don't mention American Airlines in Little Rock.
Or how Southwest over ran in MDW and killed a kid in a car.
Or lord knows the amount of time USless Airways has crashed in LGA.

We are all armchairing this accident, mainly because it started 1500' above the ground. And it all could have been prevented.

All the signs point towards a cultural flaw.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”