Thread: Crash of flight 214

Tweet

If any of you guys have any questions about what they are saying in regards to this crash--------------I'll do my best to answer them

Jerry

Maintenance(lack of)?? Pilot error?? Have seen the pix,Jerry,and parts of the report,,but I don't really know what happened..
All I know is it's lucky in one way,that only two died,,but unlucky that it happened at all.. Pretty sad for the families of the two dead students..

Someone made a booboo.
It's being reported here that the pilot was a trainee and that one of those killed may have been hit on the ground by another vehicle, not sure if those are true or not, it's just what I've read.

First, I guess that for any of you that don't already know, I was one of the earlest number of pilots rated on the B777 and retired off that aircraft in late 1997---------

The paralell approachs to SFO ruways 28l and 28r can only be done under visual conditions as they are too close together---instrument paralell approaches the runways will be one mile apart---SFO is only a couple hundrd feet---In SFO on a visual approach you have to keep the other aircraft in sight for separation and it is quite typical that when the lead aircraft starts slowing down that the following aircraft has to make some space by slowing earlier---this creats difficulty for getting lower while slowing airspeed----

On the B777 (and other GLASS cockpit aircraft) with the systems they have, many pilots have turned into passengers and are so far behind the aircraft that they -----------------

In this particular incident, I believe that the auto throttles were turned off or they would have advanced to keep the minimun speed(137kts) in this case----

There is an opticle ollusion at SFO arriving over the water (can't explain it) and if you remember, a Japan Air(I think) landed in the water several years ago--

The news people are doing a lot of talking about terms that they don't understand(I heard one gal say that these pilots had 10,000 miles experience(this trip was probably that long)) when she should of said hours------Lots of the pilots for the Asian airlines are expatriots from other countries and sometimes don't speak the same langauge!!!!!!!!!!!altho the langauge world wide for aviation is english.

I also heard that one of the dead might have been run over by an emergency vehicle and I think thats a better explanation than they fell out of the aircraft when the tail broke off---

I don't have any idea how that fire could have started in that area altho The overhead(above the cabin ceiling is open) and the fire could of spread easily, but I would have expected a fire would be around the engines and wings fuel tanks---------


More will come to light but as you can tell, the CEO is already blaming pilot error even before he left Korea---they always try to blame something other than the airline or equipment/facilties(inop equipment)

While all loss of life is sad, after looking at the wreckage I was really surprised to hear that this accident had two casualties (one perhaps caused by accdient on the ground). The burned fuselage looked like many more could have died.



Another accident just happened in Alaska and it was a de Havilland DHC3 air taxi and all 10 people onboard died ANCHORAGE, Alaska: All 10 killed in Soldotna, Alaska, air taxi crash | State News | ADN.com

A pilot friend of mine, flew C130s in the Air Force, related a landing training exercise he was going through, he was near touchdown when the plane started to stall. Although he had had ample instructions on what to do in a stall he pulled up on the wheel,(stick?), to bring the nose up. The trainer immediately pushed the wheel down and brought the speed up for a close call but safe landing. My friend had to change his shorts but learned a good lesson. Because this planes' tail hit first I suspect the pilot was trying to bring it out of a stall by raising the nose. It was below the safe landing speed to retain appropriate lift and was maybe in a stall? Just asking.

Jack.

The details provided on the news coverage have been very good, IMO. They clearly stated that there was a stall warning "shake" of the yokes a few seconds before impact. In the minute before impact the pilot got several warnings, including one to abort and go around for another approach.

I think that he was pulling up to go around--he didn't have enouh altitude to push the nose down to pick up speed------------I have watched the video on CNN dozens of times----------

This was a case of a first time instructor/check pilot working with a more jumior captain doing a visual approach that might be probably the 2 or 3 most difficult in the world to do----------(and a lot of that is because at SFO the 28 L & R runways are so close together plus the traffic into/out of Oakland is in the same general area over the bay---

In this case, I would bet that no matter what mode the flight guidance system was configurated, the auto throttles were turned off because the auto throttles would of brought the engines up to maintain the targeted airspeed for the approach-------

Both these guys had lots of time on the air bus which is so fully automated that a pilot almost can't do anything but lock the cockpit door------

It's really tragic that even with three supposedly qualified pilots in the cockpit, not a one of them realized what was happening and made the proper responses to the audible alarms ........... it makes you wonder about the training some of these foreign airlines provide

Jerry gotta ask. If he woulda grabbed a handful of throttle has that thing got enough throttle response and thrust too have saved it ? Seems that's a lot of airplane to get back up to flying speed.

And I read in the news today that the airline is going to sue a American TV channel because they named the four so called pilots with some very funny clever names. Heck I would be more concerned with how the world will be looking at the Asian airline company's and their training now before worrying about suing a TV Channel for making fun of them. I believe their training is a hogwash of just been able to remember the instruction book before actual time in hands on flying. Another point I read also and which is alarming is the new aircraft the pilot basically sits doing nothing apart from take off and landing as the planes do most of the hard work now in automatic pilot. So someone saying they have 1000 hours air time doesn't mean 1000 hours hands on flying time. I would be interested in Jerry's take on this thanks also.

I'll be back on here tonight with some more info and some answers to your questions

Jerry

I don't know exactly how slow they got, however I think it could of been flown-----would of been touchy with all the drag of full flaps and gear down, but if they had retracked the gear as they started there go around and adding thrust, aT LEAST the gear wouldn't of hit the sea wall and tore off the tail-------

If the auto throttles had been on they would have maintained the 137 kts tat was the approach speed(bug would of been set on the air speed indicator for the approach and landing--evidently the auto throttles weren't on--------

The visual approaches to SFO are doubly complicated because the runways are so close together and aircraft for 28 l # 28r approach at an angle to each other and it is quite common that a smaller slower aircraft approaching 28r will over shoot there intercept angle and fly into the approach path of the heavier(and faster approach speed) aircraft using 28l---

If you would like a better understanding of the shared airspace in the bay area, google map the bay area, including where the Golden Gate bridge is (they fly over that on visual entries to the area) SFO airport, OAKLAND airport and San Jose airport----all the traffic from these three airports and arriving, desending, approaching the landing runways while all the departing flights are taking off, climbing to departure altitudes
and it really takes more precision to desend slow down and land 1000 ft from the end of a runway 200 feet wide than it is to take off, and climb out toward a 30,000 + altitude and airways that take you world wide on this planet thats 25000 mile round-----------

Pilot's View of Airbus A380 approach and landing at San Francisco - YouTube

if this works its a visual approach to 28l at SFO but not a B777--at least you get idea-------

Crikey!
That was awesome!
Had me sitting on the edge of my seat and I didn't realise it.

And you flew those things all around the world, sometimes landing in the dark on unknown fields!

Mr Clayton sir; I salute you!

That's sure as hell different from driving a truck!