Apologies to anyone that takes offence to this rather tasteless, although quite clever prank. Unusual that the NTSB intern confirmed the names without checking.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
777 Crash and Fire at SFO
Collapse
X
-
Hack Pranking
Originally posted by orangehuggy View PostApologies to anyone that takes offence to this rather tasteless, although quite clever prank. Unusual that the NTSB intern confirmed the names without checking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfhfxNIMJjA
Comment
-
Originally posted by jpmagero View Posthttp://www.ntsb.gov/news/2013/130712.html
I wonder if that means they (the TV station) gave the names, asked for confirmation and he confirmed? Or if they asked for the names and he provided those?
You'd have to be pretty dense to run with those names regardless of who "confirmed" them.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leftseat86 View PostI'm also baffled at how this (joke pilot names) happened and these people were so stupid that no one noticed before they went on the air.
I think they need more training.Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LH-B744 View PostAnd I have a question for 747 instructor BoeingBobby, how many of your landings are handmade? 100%, or less?
.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Black Ram View Post
...I don't know that much about ITS...
...He was unfriendly, cynical, fear-mongering, and some people were taking him seriously...
...he contributed to some of the discussions with 100% pure BS...
Boing Bobby- my apologies to you for my flaming. I have to admit that the posts that aggravated you also aggravated me. There is a point where folks start spewing total BS or over-the-top things that they really don't know much about (or aren't really relevant)...and over the years of being on a forum, I've realized that there are many times when I spewed BS, got flamed and deserved to get flamed. But I learned, and try (with limited success) to post smarter. But yeah, I have my dark side in that I get a good chuckle and try to stir crap occasionally too.Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WE View PostIt was not 100% pure BS (hint, absolute statements are almost always wrong). Oh yeah, he stirred the pot, and could be brutal- but often times the brutality was deserved (see footnote Boeing Bobby). And if folks take everything on an obscure aviation forum infested with photographers and parlour talkers overly seriously, they need a reality pill.
Boing Bobby- my apologies to you for my flaming. I have to admit that the posts that aggravated you also aggravated me. There is a point where folks start spewing total BS or over-the-top things that they really don't know much about (or aren't really relevant)...and over the years of being on a forum, I've realized that there are many times when I spewed BS, got flamed and deserved to get flamed. But I learned, and try (with limited success) to post smarter. But yeah, I have my dark side in that I get a good chuckle and try to stir crap occasionally too.
BB
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WE View PostWow, sounds like a classic Swiss cheese alignment of miss steps...these sorts of things can cause planes to crash!
I think they need more training.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Evan View PostThe more I learn about this accident, the more I think we need a new class of cheese analogy. Is there a cheese with more holes than Swiss? Havrati? I think what we have here is a case of the Havrati lining up with the Gruyere.
Comment
-
Originally posted by guamainiac View PostPlease don't smack me too hard for this one, but if they, for lack of power while the engines spooled up, would they have had a pigs prayer, even the slightest chance, that if they went gear up, they may have cleaned it up enough to stretch the glide that few extra yards and cleared the seawall?
I know there is no true "correct" action one can take when you are that far behind the airplane and belly in gear up has it's problems too but it does sound like it may have been a bit better than no gear and no tail and that final slam dunk into the tarmac.
Comment
-
Originally posted by James Bond View PostNBC: SFPD Confirm Asiana Airlines 16 Year Old Crash Victim Was Struck By Responding SFFD Fire Apparatus while she was covered by firefighting foam. Unknown if it played a role in her death.
Talmadge also confirmed that an Associated Press photograph of a body under a yellow tarp near the burned-out jet was Ye Meng Yuan.
The photo, taken from above, shows firefighters looking down at the tarp, and there are truck track marks leading up to it.
Police said the teenager was covered in foam that rescuers had sprayed on the burning wreckage. When the truck moved while battling the flames, rescuers discovered her body, Esparza said.
“The driver may not have seen the young lady in the blanket of foam,” said Ken Willette of the National Firefighter Protection Agency, which sets national standards for training airfield firefighters. “These could be factors contributing to this tragic event.”
He said fire trucks that responded to the Asiana crash would have started shooting foam while approaching the fuselage from 80 or 100 feet away. The foam was sprayed from a canon on the top of the truck across the ground to clear a safe path for evacuees. That was supposed to create a layer of foam on the ground that is several inches high before the truck gets to the plane.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Schwartz View PostOne other big problem with this is that they would already have to assume they were going to crash to even consider doing that. Since they only missed by a matter of feet, I think one has to assume they thought they might just squeek in up until the very end.The "keep my tail out of trouble" disclaimer: Though I work in the airline industry, anything I post on here is my own speculation or opinion. Nothing I post is to be construed as "official" information from any air carrier or any other entity.
Comment
-
I agree with Patrick Smith in that a crash with nearly everyone surviving is closer to good news than bad news. I don't know how many times a plane comes in to land in an unorthodox manner, but it must number in the hundreds. And then there are the thousands upon thousands of near-perfect landings. I'm sure this kind of crash gives those people with fear of flying bad dreams.
What I question is this. I think he's trying a bit too hard here:
It is imperative to remember that Saturday's accident was the first multiple-fatality crash involving a major airline in North America since November 2001.
Comment
-
Hi
I've been reading this discussion, and found it very interesting. I'm not an expert on flying or piloting. I've always followed more the human factor I guess of performance including what I guess is called CRM. When I first heard about it, I assumed it hit the sea wall being SFO that came to mind.
I used to fly Asiana a few times and knew some American-based flight attendants. I'd had always had good experiences with them though being at Gimpo airport was always an experience.
I could almost see a cockpit experience not much different than KLM in Tenerife i in terms of crew resource management.
And I read somewhere that AA 191 was an absolute disgrace and I 100% agree with that. The biggest impression that crash left on me when I was growing up was going to a funeral with nothing left to bury b/c that crash really left nothing and then you follow the process and it's really so stupid. To this day, that one still bothers me. It never had to happen and it should never have happened. It's great that there was an investigative process however.
Comment
Comment