Hey Gabriel, your PM is full...
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
777 Crash and Fire at SFO
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Leftseat86 View PostSo the two people described by the UAL 744 F/O who were stumbling around on the tarmac 1,000 ft or so behind the final resting place of the fuselage, the ones who were ejected from the airplane, were likely the two flight attendants in the aft crew seats...what an ordeal!
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...,7205529.story
The Washington, D.C.-based Flight Safety Foundation, which advocates for airline safety, said in a recent published report that 97% of the time, pilots do not abort a flight from an unstable approach. The reasons they most often cite are their experience and competency to recover.
Comment
-
Continuing an unstabilized approach is a causal factor in 40 % of all approach-and-landing accidents.
In 75% of the off-runway touchdown, tail strike or runway excursion/overrun accidents, the major cause was an unstable approach.
Source: Airbus
Comment
-
It would be an interesting exercise to look at all the approaches into SFO, or any airfield with similar requirments to shoot a manual approach to see how many could be categorized as 'stable'.
If there is a trend relating to Asian carriers or any other group, then this would be a good place to actually start dealing with the issue further.
BA's QAR procedure where pilots performances are reviewed based on actual flight data would surely produce interesting results based on Tom's article.
Comment
-
From all the info provided so far, I would say the captain was a stubborn fool, but not necessarily an incompetent pilot technically. If you look at the graphs at http://flyingprofessors.net/what-hap...-flight-214-2/, it looks like he realized he was way above the glide slope about 4-5 nm out, having turned on to final about 15nm out(see .kml on same site). Assuming the PAPI was working, and the sun shining almost right at it, this may be when he saw it and realized he needed to get down. The graphs appear to show that he then slowed and began a rapid descent, presumably by cutting the engines to idle. At that time he was traveling over 300 ft/second. You could say he finally "landed" about 1000 ft. short. This means if he had just waited another 4 seconds to do what he did a few miles out, he might have made it, so his guesstimate was pretty close. Like I say, he was a fool not to bring back some power let alone do a go around as soon as he saw the lights going red while over a mile out(where he dropped below the path of the UAL plane), and his apparent failure to admit he misjudged cost a lot of people dearly. How much of this was face saving I don't know, but I sure don't buy the pilots excuses about the A/T and airspeed.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dispatch Dog View PostI'm interested by the comment in the NTSB relaease that the pilot lost sight of the runway because of the high AoA.
The pilot who said he lost sight of the runway was the Relief Pilot on the augmented crew who was sitting back in the jumpseat and would have a different viewpoint.Last edited by Vnav; 2013-07-10, 15:56.Parlour Talker Extraordinaire
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheKiecker View PostLooking at the pics on AV Herald.... Why or what is the extra dark area of pavement that has been added between the Google Earth pic and the start of the runway as it exists now ? Could that have fooled the pilot into thinking the runway started there ?
As a pilot, we're aiming for a point farther down the runway--the two large white panels you can see about 1000 feet down the runway are the aim point, so no, the displaced threshold shouldn't have had any effect on where he was looking during the accident. I've landed on the 28's at SFO MANY times over the last several years and to show you how much attention we pay to the end of the runway, I can honestly say I didn't even realize the displaced threshold was there until you mentioned it. I'm sure I saw it during the approach, but never paid that much attention to it since it's so short.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
-
Originally posted by Leftseat86 View PostSo the two people described by the UAL 744 F/O who were stumbling around on the tarmac 1,000 ft or so behind the final resting place of the fuselage, the ones who were ejected from the airplane, were likely the two flight attendants in the aft crew seats...what an ordeal!
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...,7205529.story
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dispatch Dog View PostAh! That makes sense. Thanks
No one commented on my Q earlier in the thread re: pilot repercussions, if any, after an incident like this, so the entire issue may be moot in any event.
Comment
-
Originally posted by obmot View PostWould a jump-seat relief pilot have any 'responsibility' per se, or for all intents and purposes will he have no repercussions (career, etc.) if this is in fact found to be pilot error (by the left seat/right seat guys)..
Even if it's just a pilot from another airline riding my jumpseat I always brief them to speak up if they see me doing something stupid (which is pretty much every leg I fly )and that's a pretty standard brief throughout the industry.Parlour Talker Extraordinaire
Comment
-
Originally posted by snydersnapshots View PostAs Gabriel said, that is a displaced threshold and you're supposed to touch down beyond it. That one is relatively short, but at some airports, Newark for example, they can be quite long.
As a pilot, we're aiming for a point farther down the runway--the two large white panels you can see about 1000 feet down the runway are the aim point, so no, the displaced threshold shouldn't have had any effect on where he was looking during the accident. I've landed on the 28's at SFO MANY times over the last several years and to show you how much attention we pay to the end of the runway, I can honestly say I didn't even realize the displaced threshold was there until you mentioned it. I'm sure I saw it during the approach, but never paid that much attention to it since it's so short.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WE View PostTwo things.
1) "The power gradient/reluctance to speak up" has been evident in crashes with pilots of other cultures (Tenerife comes to mind as a biggie! THE NUMBER ONE LEAD Air France pilot and poster boy starts his takeoff, FO hints and hints that the runway may not be clear)
Comment
-
Originally posted by flyerforfun View PostWas KLM, not Air France at this time, and the Captain was Dutch, not French.
I have never been able to reconcile the man I met with his actions of that day in 1977.
Comment
Comment