• Join FlightAware (Why Join?)
  • Login
  • US Flag 
06:42AM EDT


 

Airport Tracker/Info


-or-


 

Squawks & HeadlinesNew Camera Phone Video Shows Asiana Flight 214 Crash

Back to Squawk list

New Camera Phone Video Shows Asiana Flight 214 Crash

Submitted
Recently released public video shows the Boeing 777's approach and subsequent crash at San Francisco Int'l (www.cnn.com) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


avalon280
mark seabrook 17
The Pilots in that UA B744 will of seen everything real close, NTSB will be getting their opinions for sure.
pdixonj
pdixonj 4
I'm pretty sure everyone on that B744 is just happy to be alive and uninjured. Had #214 veered to left any earlier, it could've been catastrophic for both flights.
avalon280
mark seabrook 6
Yep if that had of happened it would of been deaths on a scale of the Tenerife airport disaster
yr2012
matt jensen 1
I was at Tenerife when that disaster happened. Don't ever want to view another one.

I saw several different animations, but the most telling was the distant cell phone video. It appears to me, that the landing gear would have impacted the wall first, tearing off the tail. Pilot error - he was too low and too slow.
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 0
Uh.... cell phone video? ;-)
yr2012
matt jensen 1
Yeah Ken, that's what the video article sez. Look at the headline on this thread again.
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 0
Ahhh, you mean the cell phone video of 214. I thought you were referring to a Tenerife video.

Then again, I don't think there was much chance of getting a video of your hand at arm's length on that day.
yr2012
matt jensen 1
No, there wasn't. I was on the fire crew that day.
james801
James Farnsworth 1
Capt, FO & FE all need now underwear lol I would
oowmmr
oowmmr 8
Ya knew somebody was out there filming just for fun. What's incredible is the toughness of the 777. It slams down and doesn't explode, hail Boeing.
billday2
William Day 8
Just seems impossible for a professional pilot to stall a 777 on landing. Every pilot knows when they are too high or too steep. Unreal and tragic... Less time on the computers and more time actually flying...
james801
James Farnsworth 2
yep hands on time... And Good CRM
spatr
spatr 0
Personally, I would like to know if the autothrottles were engaged. The NTSB stated that all the way down the thrust was at idle. If Vapp was set at 137kts, the autothrottles would try to maintain that speed.
If the pilots disengaged them (for any reason) and then expected to arrest their descent without adding power manually they would have descended through the glide path while bleeding off speed. I have watched pilots who rely on automation make this very mistake. Pilots arent used to manually flying the plane and operating the throttles.
It sounds like everything was working mechanically so unfortuantely for the crew the focus will be on them. There's a reason why the stabilized approach criteria is being on speed, sink rate, AND engines spooled.
james801
James Farnsworth 0
No i would bet the AT's was off. It was a VFR App and if the AT's was on in 4,000+ hrs as a FO and now Capt on the 777 i have never seen the AT's let the speed drop more then 5 or so KTS from the set speed.
spatr
spatr 1
Thanks that's what I thought.
COYOTEHUNTER
COYOTEHUNTER 4
If the TV report of an initial approach speed of 137 knots is correct, it would seem to me to be a little on the slow side. Now, if the reported 1400 feet per minute rate of decent is correct,and it takes a while to stop sinking, even after a "Go Around" decision is made... As for the UA pilot possibly calling the aircraft go around, most of us pilots can recognize a decent profile that is abnormal, our instinct would be to call out and draw the attention to our fellow pilot. Enough said...
remymerm
remy mermelstein 4
The fact that the VASI and ILS systems were down probably has a play into it, but then again, every pilot should know how to land a plane, no matter if it is a Cessna or an A380 manually without the aid of lights and radio's. At SFO it is not hard to see if you are too low or high, and you should have a pretty good idea if you see the water coming up that close. The Pilots could have also looked at their ND screen and seen the moving line that predicts where you will reach your final alt, which was most likely dialed into the FMC or MCP. In the end I bet that the crash will be ruled Pilots error, for probably not seeing the situation that was quite clear to alot of other people.
rkstaggers
Randall Staggers 2
The NTSB stated at their briefing " speed was WELL BELOW 137 knots.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I heard that remark for the best part of a week. If "they" knew the speed was "well below the target speed" (137k" then they knew what the aircraft's speed was. Why not say so. Why keep it secret from second guessers like us.

She may know her aircraft stuff but with communication skills like she demonstrated, she should run for congress.
james801
James Farnsworth 2
She has to report facts not what she or we think.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I say again, if she knew they were well below the "target speed" she knew what speed they were going from the black boxes.
james801
James Farnsworth 1
The NTSB will not give info even from the FDR that has not been confirmed. Say the FDR says the speed was 110Kts 30 seconds before impact must be check to what is shown on the QAR or radar at that same time. The FDR’s time stamp may be +/- 30 seconds from the CVR or QAR. Like when she said the pilot was hit by a light she said that was what he said and there was nothing on the CVR of the flash. If you go read a report on an older crash you will see how they adjust the different sets of data to a time line since any one set of data can be no good.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Thanks. I'm beginning to understand it better.
Derg
Roland Dent -3
Debbie Hersman knows her aviation stuff. She was born at Edwards AFB in 1970. Very competent professional person.
siriusloon
siriusloon 7
And I was born in a hospital. I guess that should make me a competent professional medical doctor.
Derg
Roland Dent 1
Now your logic is straying in the domain of the FAA and Ms Hersman was born to lead that outfit. The staff would have her tomorrow.
AONeal79
AONeal79 1
This may be my favorite FA comment of all time.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
ha ha ha
So may be 80-90% people of world are doctors in disguise !
Wow!
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 0
Not a bad looking chick too!!!
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 2
*never finished my though

And even that discussion could end with "Since you'll be hitting the glidepath at 600, and changing the plane's configurations including attitude, rate of descent...

SO BE SURE TO KEEP AN EYE ON ALTITUDE AND AIRSPEED IN THAT LAST MINUTE OF FLIGHT AFTER YOU MAKE LAST MINUTE CHANGES TO THE ATITUDE OF THE PLANE AND THE RATE OF DESCENT. YOU DON'T WANT TO GET BEHIND ON POWER OR ALTITUDE THAT CLOSE TO THE GROUND. EVERYTHING ELSE WE CAN LATER OVER A FEW LOCAL AMERICAN MICROBREWS."
twincessna
william koehler 2
Power was at idle and the nose was high. He was chasing it like a student pilot.
Kolinh
Kolin Henderson 5
There is also an ATC recording where you hear the South Korean pilot call for a go around at 500 ft.
dbaker
Daniel Baker 8
I think you might be mistaken, the go-around calls were from SFO Tower (ATC) to other aircraft.
james801
James Farnsworth 2
dee9bee
dee9bee 5
I hear the "go around" call but I'm wondering if it may have come from the UA 747 holding short of the runway.
AV8RON6
AV8RON6 3
I believe that was ATC making that call since it was after the impact according to the tape.
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 1
It was a careless whisper
rkstaggers
Randall Staggers 1
That comment came from the cockpit voice recording according to NTSB briefing. I don't believe that it is recorded anywhere on radio traffic.
smoki
smoki 1
No way a go around call was made at 500ft. by the Korean pilot At that shallow approach angle that would been about 2 miles out.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
He was throttling up to do just that when he hit the sea wall.
pete480
pete480 4
Oh my god.
KW10001
Kylan Walters 3
BatonOps
Erik Schmidt 3
Kolinh
Kolin Henderson 3
Read also the descent rate was way high and if so why not initiate missed approach at that time? Crazy this day in age that unless there is catastrophic instrumentation or mechanical failure that any pilot flying that calibre of airplane should make a mistake like that, anywhere.
rallypoint
Arnold Fishman 2
Did anyone else read this story from another passenger on a prop plane landing on parallel runway encountered significant turbulence right before the 777 crash:

http://www.ferndaleenterprise.com/category/blog/
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 2
I bet station managers were repeating that third name numerous times after reality set in. LOL

Whoever said journalists are educated?
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 2
To you folks at KTVU, I want to thank you for that reporting! I needed a good laugh something awful.

This afternoon, a vendor screwed up a critical order and shipped it slow but worse, early this morning I lost my second of three sisters.

So, your awesome reporting made me laugh my ass off when I didn't think it was possible. Thank you!

I'm gonna relish this story. I bet y'all were calling out that third name repeatedly after reality struck. ;-)

Oh, and they aren't racist... they're just from pilots making good use of words from a name structure from another land and relating them to flying. If you saw some of the really bazaar names I see on orders to my business, you'd crack up too!
gelrod2354
Mike Elrod 1
I fly DASH8's into local airport often and people used to only riding jets tend to freak at normal low level turbulence. I have also been is some real crappy weather in tripple 7's. Anything capable of disrupting its approach would be major weather event.
ray2go
Raymond Wong 2
Called go-around 1.5sec before impact. If the descending momentum is so high, how could he make his decision that late? Oh my god.
boughbw
Brian Bough -2
One hopes fatigue... one fears other possible impairments (see: alcohol). The plane is so far out of kilter (sorry for the technical jargon) on landing that pretty much everyone who sees the video and even passengers on the plane realize something is amiss before the pilots do.
ilkleymoor
ilkleymoor 1
One thing none of you have mentioned is the white streak coming off the aircraft before it hits the breakwater. It looks like the exhaust from a jet ski. Did that B777 actually get wet before the collision?
egad
James Hodges 1
Incredible, but maybe not , the lack of hand flying skills in pilots of highly automated transport aircraft has been discussed some lately. Perhaps an hour or two of bump and goes in a C172 should be required every year, in addition to more of the same in a complex stimulator (sic). Dr. Jim. 40+ years as a GA CFI.
adphillips
Andy Phillips 1
Amazing how over 300 people survived this accident!
Dan9
Dan Waldie 1
That must have been a sight from UA B744.
Fireballz
Eugene Waters 1
From the video it looks like the planes engins were blowing up rooster tails
long before it hit the wall.
aegbers
Aaron Egbers 1
I'd like to know how a type rated pilot with 10000 some odd hours lets any airplane fall 20 knots below vref ever, especially calm winds. Even more amazing is two people watching it happen. I don't care if he or she has 1 actual hour in a 777. Hit the coals. No excuse here.
jiggsb
JIGGS BON 1
So many opinions from unqualified people. I love it! A flight attendant of 38 years who flies weekly on 777's, whats the big deal? It was bound to happen sooner or later. It was good it happened, we learn from accidents and how in the future to prevent them. The 777 is a sturdy piece of machinery. It proved that. we need to learn how to make people sturdier for "just in cases" like this. I always felt we should encapsulate passengers during takeoff and landing in sturdy, fireproof, uncrushable capsules that surround their seats. If something happens, they wont be burnt and if they are ejected from the plane or seat area they would roll around the cabin or on the ground. Later when convenient, say a couple days to a week, we can then open the capsule with a can opener or something and get them out. Time for another bottle of Zinfandel before heading to work.
Brucer2
Bruce Rayner 1
Based on NBC news Monday nite, and this video, plus the Flight Aware speed log, I see something maybe interesting, but not mentioned: The left engine fell off early on, the right one was going full bore after it spooled up from idle, finally lifting the wing high, spinning the plane to the left. (Evidence: NTSB statement - #2 engine showed hi speed rotational damage when it ended up next to the fuselage. #1, sitting back on the runway showed no rotational damage (slow rpm)). That explains why the plane didn't slow down as it slid down the runway without a tail. Analyzing and counting the video frames as it passes the adjacent stopped plane, it appears to be still moving about 120mph as the right wing catches air, engine under power. Why else wouldn't it slow down on that long run? It was only going that fast when the tail separated and the black box stopped recording. I think the captain just froze after jamming full power before hitting the seawall. The other three pilots were crapping their pants. Sully, where were you when we needed you? Just my opinion.
rswguyinmo
doug bell 1
sheka
mark tufts 1
i would say pilot error and from what i heard on the news it sounded like pilot error
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Can there be a way for the guys at FA to it possible to check or align the blogs on time scale like newest first and so on?
gelrod2354
Mike Elrod 1
Not being a commercial pilot I don't know squat. Have to wonder if most of this guys hours were in Airbus was the reverse of the Air France disaster at play here? Believe the computer all the way into the ground or totally rely on the computer to keep you out of the ground.
gadjodilo
cedric f 1
managing a full evacuation before it gets on fire was a miracle. Take a look at how the cabin ends up after impacton the NTSB twitter pics. It is really frightning.

https://twitter.com/NTSB/status/354002637240270848/photo/1
https://twitter.com/NTSB/status/354002389096886272/photo/1
Av8nut
Michael Fuquay 1
So the ILS was out for 28L. I'm no 777 pilot, but couldn't he have tuned in the ILS for 28R for glide slope purposes as an additional gauge?
pilot62
Scott Campbell 1
You know a lot of arm chair coaching- myself included , but this accident
makes no sense - even with no ILS CAN'T u see the touhdown zone
from the cockpit - all of these pilots are screwed - but nowhere
near as much as the family of those killed and all of the injured.
erumpeltin
edward rumpeltin 1
Look at the airspeed graph on the flight tracker, look how slow the plane got. 123, 109 and 85 KTS are the last 3 entries. I think i heard a pilot interview say the approach speed is 135 for the 777.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AAR214/history/20130706/0730Z/RKSI/KSFO/tracklog
dtw757
mike SUT 1
I'm waiting for the NTSB to start talking about Approach Controls part in this.On numerous occasions I have been given an early turn to base while still high resulting in a boards out, gear down, thrust idle dive to capture the Glide slope or PAPI lts. In a 737 it might doable but in the A330 I just told them I needed a couple of more miles on downwind, (the heck with those "richies" in the houses below) so that I could be in a stabilized approach at 1000 feet per my companies Flight Ops Manual. I wonder if this didn't play a part, setting them up for disaster although the ultimate responsibility belongs to the Captain.
jpcooper
Peter Cooper 1
Just for my information..Does Debbie Hersman have any flying qualifications, apart from being born at Edwards A F B. ?
euronorb
euronorb 1
How about some of those passengers ignoring official safety procedures and collecting their carry-on items before evacuating the aircraft ?
james801
James Farnsworth 1
New press conf in 5 min from the ntsb.
Dl8698
David Loh 1
Just out of curiosity, not intending to blame anyone, but do the controllers in airport control towers observe every aircraft on approach? Did they notice that the plane was too low for the distance it was from touch down? And, is there any radar that monitors aircraft on approach that also shows height and airspeed? I once visited the control tower at our airport (it is a major international airport, hundreds of big jet traffic a day) and I remember seeing a controller watching an aircraft on approach through binoculars. I didn't ask but I think he was making sure the gears were down.
pilot62
Scott Campbell 1
Uh yea -DROP THE NOSE !
bepardue
Bill Pardue 1
Go around was for another flight. If you listen to the ATC transmissions no go around was requested from Asian 214 Heavy. They may have discussed that as an option in the flight deck and thus it is on the black box.
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 3
They were likely hand-flying and not coupled so no computer involved in the approach. As one person who does fly the 777 pointed out, the autothrottle would not let them go more than negative five knots. The computer anticipates an decrease and responds to it where as the human tends to respond to the final result.

Since he had so much time flying the 747 I wonder if he was working off mental numbers recalled as opposed to computing Vref off weight and configuration. I don't have the exact set of numbers but from the bit I've dug up the 747 is going to be slower than the 777 for a similar weight and configuration.

The pilot flying was the captain though he was new to the 777. He did have several thousand hours on the 747 and had supposedly flown into SFO numerous times.

Many people question why the lesser experienced 777 pilot was the captain. Korea has a tradition where the most senior pilot is recognized and placed as such.

There was an accident years ago where the captain was prior Korean military and had gained substantial status. He was given captain status though he had next to no experience in commercial airliners. The first officer did not challenge his senior though he had substantial experience and certainly more in type than the captain. I wish I could recall that specific accident but it's not coming to me.

Later, Korea supposedly changed their training so CRM was more involved and ranking had more to do with experience than age and other status. It's possible that attitude in the cockpit hasn't been entirely overcome.

When the CVR transcripts are released, it will be interesting to see how the FO addressed the CA with regard to instruction and corrections. The only thing missing will be voice inflections that substantially characterize how those change were given. It was clear with my students they knew the difference between a gentle reminder and a strong suggestion to make the change before I would call, "My airplane!"
AONeal79
AONeal79 2
You're thinking of Korean Air 801.

More info here (PDF) http://tinyurl.com/md88bhy
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 2
A lot of "guys" scoff at the suggestion, but I'm reminded by an old friend who drove B25s that, an airplane is an airplane. The errors committed in AF 447 4 years ago and this latest foul up by experienced airplane drivers are scarily similar. I don't know this guy's background or where he learned to fly, but somewhere along the line he forgot some basics and no one noticed. I grew up on needle/ball and airspeed and this guy started there, I'm sure. Auto throttles, auto pilots and computers take our eye off the ball. We all need to remind ourselves we are still flying not taking a ride.
james801
James Farnsworth 1
Keep in mind that the back of the AC that had the most G's when it hit.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Ahhhhhahahahahah!
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Pure speculation here, my bet is they were talking about and critiquing the pilot and not paying attention. It's the only scenario that makes sense. Something had to have grabbed all their attention and conversation fits.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
" so that I could be in a stabilized approach at 1000 feet per my companies Flight Ops Manual."

It seems they were made significant changes to their approach at 600ft, likely changing from a descent of 400ft per nm to 300ft and trying to follow the glidepath for the last minute (600 ft over 2 miles). Unfortunately their approach became unstable after that point, as the engines were under manual control so only spinning at idle speed, and unable to compensate at that power level for the change in attitude.

Ironically they may have done better had they started at 2400 at DUYET instead of 2200 (glidepath lines up with a position of 1800ft). They might've continued descending at 400ft per nm all yhd way to touchdown on the runway and never noticed their engines were idled, the auto-throttles not controlling speed, and would've only stalked out at at touchdown, when pulling up their nose to land.

They would've descended at closer to 4 degrees, rather than the prescribed 3, but wouldn't have crashed short.
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 1
They should have had the GPS approach loaded so they had accurate vertical guidance for that runway. My understanding is both runway ILS were OTS but I don't have anything solid on that.
Continental72
Fletcher Reister 1
When I first heard the story, I wondered about speed since they mentioned too low/too slow, so I checked the tracking history and saw those last 3 reported speeds and altitudes and I knew it was definitely too slow.
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 1
She is not certificated but did solo when younger.

Here's a piece on her with a personal interview:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/The-Interview-with-NTSB-Chairman-Deborah-Hersman-215127031.html
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Matters not what, if anything, was distracting them from actually flying the plane on the last minute of flight before the plane touched ground in a smooth or not do smooth manner. There is plenty of time to critique the pilot's skills once thR plane is safely on the ground. Even a tutorial and explanation of flying the 777 for Dummies (for thR benefit of the pilot of was new to type could also wait till after touching down.

No matter how valuable the discussion, if it didn't happen at cruise altitude, it can wait until they're back on the ground. The only interjections acceptable during final is remember to keep an eye on altitude and speed. Even discussions of plotting a descent should've happened earlier when they were at 2200 passing DUYET. And even that discussion could end with since you'll be hitting the glidepath at 600, and changing the plane's configurations including attitude, rate of descent
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Matters not what, if anything, was distracting them from actually flying the plane on the last minute of flight before the plane touched ground in a smooth or not do smooth manner. There is plenty of time to critique the pilot's skills once thR plane is safely on the ground. Even a tutorial and explanation of flying the 777 for Dummies (for thR benefit of the pilot of was new to type could also wait till after touching down.

No matter how valuable the discussion, if it didn't happen at cruise altitude, it can wait until they're back on the ground. The only interjections acceptable during final is remember to keep an eye on altitude and speed. Even discussions of plotting a descent should've happened earlier when they were at 2200 passing DUYET. And even that discussion could end with since you'll be hitting the glidepath at 600, and changing the plane's configurations including attitude, rate of descent, be sure to keep an eye on your altitude and airspeed.

Let me make it clearer. No one's life on that aircraft is worth putting at risk because of a distracting conversation on final approach, no matter the inherent value of the discussion otherwise.

Would you be willing to trade your life for an enlightening distracting discussion that may be of dome value to the new pilot in the future. I wouldn't. Most would agree.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Are y'all looking for a cause or a justification?
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
*never finished my though

And even that discussion could end with "Since you'll be hitting the glidepath at 600, and changing the plane's configurations including attitude, rate of descent...

SO BE SURE TO KEEP AN EYE ON ALTITUDE AND AIRSPEED IN THAT LAST MINUTE OF FLIGHT AFTER YOU MAKE LAST MINUTE CHANGES TO THE ATTITUDE OF THE PLANE AND THE RATE OF DESCENT. YOU DON'T WANT TO GET BEHIND ON POWER OR ALTITUDE THAT CLOSE TO THE GROUND. EVERYTHING ELSE WE CAN DISCUSS LATER OVER A FEW LOCAL AMERICAN MICROBREWS. NEW GUY PAYS."
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
I think the cause. So it seems from last lines.
I am open 2 correction. As always.
erumpeltin
edward rumpeltin 1
credit to the Plane and crew... Thats why I always say "if it's not Boeing, I'm not going..."
tbpera
Tom Pera 1
pilots just blew a manual landing... all this automation scares me... Sully wouldn't have crashed this way..he's an old "flyer", not a computer operator.... just watched (again) the auto approach flown by Lufhansa 380 with the captain sitting there with his hands on his lap... .. no ILS. no VASI? no DME? just regular visual approach landing and these guys weren't up for it....
RRKen
Kenneth Schmidt 1
So that includes Embraers, Bombariers, Beech, Gulfstream, SAABs, and Learjets?

It comes off sounding as if you were some sort of shill, and not seeking factual evidence of this incident.

And unless I missed the sixth briefing from NTSB with some form of shocking revelation, it appears from facts gathered thus far that the crew was the cause. And for that you are extending some form of congratulations to the crew?
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
That also means no acceptance of invitation to board any private AC , A-380 to Honda to all propeller kind! Eh?
james801
James Farnsworth 1
Any pilot that flys the 777 should have been able to make this a safe landing.
jrbeejay
John Beech 1
And that is a real stupid statement that only a non aviation buff would make.
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 2
Well, he has a point even though he's likely completely naive as to why.

It's widely believed that had Air France 447 been a Boeing bird the problem might have been recognized much sooner and the flight saved.

For those who don't understand, the AirBus with it's side-mounted yokes (or side sticks) are by wire and the two sticks move independently of each other.

On a Boeing, both yokes move in unison. The FO cannot move their yoke without the CA seeing his move (Certain former Northwest pilots excepted).

On 447, the FO was holding the plane in a stall while the PNF had no indication of the PF's control input.
jrbeejay
John Beech 2
That is pure supposition and from my experience on the airbus flight deck both pilots can see what the other is doing.From a strength point of view, take a look at the AF A340 overun down a small ravine where all survived with the aircraft basically intact until after the fire destuction.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 2
It was pretty well documented in the AF 447 investigation that the FO's stick was being held full back and no one knew it. There are a lot of similarities in these two incidents and it fall back on pilot training and auto something or other from what I've heard through NTSB. There's a looong way to go in this investigation. I'm not impressed with the communication from NTSB so far.
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 2
Supposition, yes. But I did say "widely believed". It was likely a dark flight deck. I believe this to be reasonable hypothesis.

They were also likely overly dependent on automation thinking the computer would not let them stall. But when both airspeed indications are gone, the computer switches to direct law for pitch. The same happens on that bird if both radar altimeters are lost. The result was likely a deep stall while they continued to ignore warnings.


I initially heard about this theory in 2010 from a former US Air check airman who had picked several new 319-321s from AirBus. Until that accident he wasn't much for gouges but that accident brought him around.

Known pitch and power setting could have saved a few flights. Aero Peru 603 has been a frequent example to students.
WDB57
Patrice Venne 1
No, it's reality and confirm by many pilots. Sullenberger (The Miracle on the Hudson)flying Airbus confirmed it in a TV interview (search YouTube). You should read the Report from the French authority. My neighbor, retired Lufthansa 744 pilot told me the same thing, there is no way in this world that such situation could have happened on a Boeing even with French pilots on the flight deck. Former chief pilot at Lufthansa, in a TV interview (you might find it on YouTube)explained very well the shortcomings of the Airbus pilot interface. I don't know what is your experience in flying Airbus but I would say I certainly give more credibility to real pilots. As far as I recall the AF A340 accident at Pearson Airport, the First Officer overshot the runway in a botched approach (weather was very bad)combine to torrential rain on the runway . . . Should have been a go around (see Transport Canada Report).

It's not just the sticks per say, the software managing the sticks will average the input of both controls . . . No power feed back on the stick. And no, you can't see the stick if you're flying the A/C; the Airbus is visually demanding and creates a narrow tunnel vision; you can't rely on your other senses, like feeling the stick, feeling the throttles. That could explain why three pilots never connected the aural sensor STALL which went on 96 times to their situation.

BTW the way the STALL warning is coded in the software is a feat in itself; if you're under a certain threshold (speed or/and AOA) the warning goes OFF, if you gain speed and exceed the threshold the warning goes ON. In a highly stressed situation, it is easy for the brain to associate the wrong combination: stick down warning ON, stick up warning OFF. The right code will have to let the warning ON all the time till the minimum speed or AOA is back . . .

When the autopilot goes off, the FD cue stays on the left upside of the PFD, you have to manually turn the FD off (procedure in a case of lost speed pitot). The crew did not do that and probably led the PF to follow the FD which was obviously a very wrong idea.

Like for the sticks, the throttles are not mechanically mounted; you have no idea how the power is set; you need a visual on the PFD.

Like Ken pointed out when the AP goes off it changes the laws; you fly alternate law which has its very different set of conditions, you are way out of standard law, and the software is not keeping the A/C within the flight envelope.

Do you start to get the picture? Bonin pulling the stick not thinking of the flight envelope mode, watching the FD cue in the upper left corner, hearing STALL when he moves the stick down, the STALL warning OFF when held the stick up.

The BEA is highly critical of the pilots, not very much of Air France management, and down right lousy when it comes to Airbus but hey we're in Euroland where you can create anything out of thin air . . . France owns AF, owns Airbus and the BEA investigation was paid by Air France . . . The President of the BEA travels for free and in First class on all Air France flights.
jrbeejay
John Beech 2
Never seen such a load of crud written on a site, christ this site is getting worse than you tube and airliners.net. Remember the B777 is also fbw with very similar laws to the airbus. There three pilots could not see what was going on with ordinary trust levers and 2 joysticks.
This whole thread started from a jerk statement by someone on the theme if it aint boing i'm not going and has turned into a straight airbus bashing thread from a bunch of guys who probably do not know the what an airplane is. I am out of here, I did 45 years on mainly US built aircraft and I liked them all, especially the DC10 and the L1011, but I also liked the Airbus and others I have worked on and do not make jerk statements like the above from RRKen
RRKen
Kenneth Schmidt 1
John, you miss the point of my comment. When folks say "Boeing or not going", I take it that all other aircraft are substandard or defficient, which is far from the truth. It certainly was not blindly bashing other types of aircraft.

Unlike the chap to whom I replied directly, the type of aircraft matters little so long as it gets me from point A to point B safely and in some measure of comfort.
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 1
Yup, if SuperSully said it that by Jehovah, that's it!!!
siriusloon
siriusloon -1
Therefore it was a pilot who doesn't fly the 777 who crashed this one? As you are obviously a 777 training captain with many thousands of hours on type (who else would be qualified to pass the judgement you did?), perhaps you could explain why there are no circumstances whatsoever that could have prevented a safe landing?
james801
James Farnsworth 1
Well that is kind of what is being said by the airline and NTSB since the flying pilot had less than 50 hrs in the 777. But he was a high time pilot and has flown the 747. So I as a Capt with time in the 676, 777 & others can’t see why with the FACTS that have been reported by the NTSB and Airline that this should have been a very easy App & Landing for the crew. I don’t pass judgment I make my comments based off of facts that are known and always have on this and other post on FA.
As to (perhaps you could explain why there are no circumstances whatsoever that could have prevented a safe landing?) There are but none of them have been shown in this case by the NTSB, Airline or the video of the crash. All facts at this point show the crew was at fault. All pilots have made mistakes and most of us got away with it and this crew did not. I don’t think any pilot gets in the cockpit and says well I am going to push my luck today just to see if I can. The pilots will have to live with the fact they lost passengers and I can tell you I have flown with a pilot that was in a major crash that was not pilot error and it haunted him each day.
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 1
The only thing that prevented that landing from being successful, was common sense!!!
kwojcik
kwojcik -6
....... this was a boeing plane you idiot.
pdixonj
pdixonj 6
I think you misunderstood. I think he was commenting on how well the plane's cabin held up in the impact and how the crew was able to get everyone off before the fire broke out.
Mark1616
Mark Zagar 2
Would an Airbus allow the pilots to (try) flying it 30kts below Vref? A-floor press
rwf1001
Robert Fleming 1
unbelieveable---that is some SCARY footage!!!!
andriy17
Andriy Tsyupka 1
777 is a very strong bird, thank God it stayed in one piece.
ptmalm
Pete Martinez 1
From the few reports I've seen, I'll give kudos to the flight attendants who seemed to do a remarkable job and surely saved lives that day...
andriy17
Andriy Tsyupka 1
777 is a very strong bird, thank God it stayed in one piece.
james801
James Farnsworth 1
How much did CNN pay for that Video ???
NF2G
David Stark 1
Probably nothing. Note the words "Courtesy Fred Hayes" in the corner of the screen. If they had paid him for it, then they would not have needed to place a credit notice of that kind.
dmtoniolo
Danilo Toniolo 0
oh my god
pr0ject
El Kabong -3
Big Gay Al filmed this?
NF2G
David Stark 1
Two erroneous South Park references in a single sentence. Congratulations.

Isaac Hayes (not Fred) voiced Chef (not Big Gay Al) on South Park.
avalon280
mark seabrook -7
If your flying outside of the US, make sure your aircraft has British or Aussie Pilots......... Look at the stats.......Just Saying..........
siriusloon
siriusloon 3
You racist prick.
KW10001
Kylan Walters 0
Cool story
james801
James Farnsworth 0
You are spot on on that...
mlstove
Michael Stover 0
I absolutely love flying on the B777 which makes this all the more frustrating to understand how much thrust each engine has and this happens? But it is truly incredible what this plane endured and so many lived! I can't imagine what the pilots and passengers on the tarmac where going through watching all of this unfold in front of them.
alfredus
tim champion 0
This is a mind boggler. The pilot was being "supervised". What were they doing? Texting their girlfriends? Even an 8 year old kid in the plane told his mom they were too slow and low. The runway had active VASI-PAPI indicator showing the correct angle of approach as 2.85 degrees. This guy would have see all RED lights! (Maybe he was too low to see the lights at all?) The radar track shows they were WAY below target speeds, maybe he came in too high, chopped the throttles to idle, froze at the controls. Evidently there is a crew request for a Go Around in the cockpit 15 seconds before impact, what was this guy up to? He isn't fit to wash dishes let alone fly an airliner? Wonder if he had iny simulator training?
calender
Thomas Walker 0
There was another incident from the same aircraft within a few minutes of the SFO one, the other was at 19:48 UTC at Athens International Airport.Boeing 777 200ER
Kenya Airways flight KQ117 Forced Emergency Landing, fire suppression system alarm was triggered, no injuries were reported. This is five minutes before the SFO incident.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 0
A very good opportune VDO !
To my humble understanding, the aircraft made a tail landing, may be due to mistake of adjustments OR due to other and sudden environmental changes and reasons. The 'BB' has been found so facts will be known for sure.
Let us pray for the dead . RIP !
RECOR10
RECOR10 0
Why am I certain that there is a TON more video going to be out there? I would have to think that airports would just record every flight just for this scenario. If we see all the video from Boston for instance, other than proximity to other busineses there has got to be more video.
rebelx4xchrist
Paul Smith 1
Don't judge before the facts come out.
siriusloon
siriusloon 1
The same aircraft was at Athens withing a few minutes of crashing at San Francisco? How is it possible that Fox News hasn't reported that remarkable fact. Is it a conspiracy to suppress this new high-speed transportation method?
siriusloon
siriusloon -1
It's really unfortunate that with so many experts on here already having solved this accident that none of them have offered their talents to the NTSB. Think how much more quickly they could do their work if some of the know-it-alls on here got off their couches and worked for the NTSB instead.

Armed only with speculation, supposition, and an imagination, people on here are making pronouncements and accusations about sink rate, the pilots' flying hours, a stall, whether the auto-throttles were on or off, even if the pilots were drinking, without having any actual knowledge or facts about these things at all. Yet they're still ready -- eager would be a better word -- to decide what happened and lay blame anyway.
99NY
99NY -1
To me at least, this accident has shades of the BA 777 stall-induced crash at EGLL and the UAL Flight 232 crash at Souix City all rolled into one. Still though, its clear as day that the plane was too low during the approach and the last second pullback on the yokes for the TO/GA only stood the plane up and stalled it.
siriusloon
siriusloon 4
Yes, all three incidents involved airliners. Skilled deduction, Sherlock. The BA incident was due to a problem caused by fuel that had cold-soaked and the UAL incident involved severely damaged flight controls. The Asiana one involved neither, not even "shades" of them.
tbpera
Tom Pera 1
siriusloon.... loon? yes!
mpradel
Marcus Pradel 1
Water in the Fuel. coverup
james801
James Farnsworth 1
Yep BA 38 and UAL 232 the pilots was the reason life was saved.
james801
James Farnsworth 2
As for me I don’t want to work for the Fed’s in anyway. The NTSB and there parties do have way more knowledge then any of us on FA I am sure and that’s why I get the facts from them. I am not going off speculation on anything I have said and it seems you are talking about my post for the most part. 1st The FDR and CVR has shown the power was at flight idle for the approach if the AT’s was on there would have been a call by the AT’s add power when the IAS drop 3 KTS below the set speed. 2nd The FDR & CVR per the NTSB are in sink as to time if the AT’s was on the power would have increased before the crew called for a go around, but the FDR shows the power was applied after the call for a go around and the engines responded normally to that. And as to the airplane I can give a firsthand account of how it fly’s and the systems with the time I have spent flying them. As to the pilots drinking I think that’s BS for anyone to say they was unless the piss test comes back + for something. But you seen to be missing the fact we do have actual knowledge and facts from the NTSB and Airline.
Derg
Roland Dent 2
Nah...you mean fuel icing. Diff engine. On the other hand the BA was filled up out in the far east...big problems with biofuels icing. Cannot see mechanical failure here at all.
james801
James Farnsworth 2
As a Capt on the 777 with 4,000+ hrs in the 777 is a rock star airplane. The crew seems to have had a very big problem. The 777 is a very safe AC with NO on going MX problems.
distar97
Dennis Harper 1
Speaking of drinking, back in the late 60's when I was primary flight training at LGA, I thought my instructor was joking when he said at least one pilot in the line in front of us for takeoff had a drink just before the flight. As a teen student, I'd hang around parked jets and talk to pilots. A few times I got a whiff but there was no obvious impairment. There was a good buddy attitude that shielded guys. It just wasn't taken as seriously as it is today. In fact the joke was drinking was actually a performance enhancement. For the record, I believe the new societal norms (and laws)make it a career killer to show up with the slightest hint of intoxication.
AONeal79
AONeal79 1
Probably thought it cartwheeled. Neither plane (Asiana nor UA232) did.
AONeal79
AONeal79 2
... and before someone else tries to call me out on the 232 assertion:

"And the airplane slammed on the ground, and we did not hit
and cartwheel, like all the news says. We hit and slid on the ground,
on the left main gear and the right wing stub."

- Capt. Al Haynes, UA 232
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 1
There was one video I saw (I cannot recall the source) where the fuselage did come up quite a bit after the initial impact and rolled left maybe thirty degrees before settling back down and sliding to a stop. I can see where that might have come across as a cartwheel from some angles.
siriusloon
siriusloon 1
Please quoye examples of biofuel icing problems in normal, everyday airline use. While you're at it, quote examples of biofuels being used in normal everyday airline operations.
Derg
Roland Dent 1
The problem lies in the storage and transport of fuels of mixed tenure. Inherently bio fuel contains water and mineral fuel does not, mineral kerosene separates from water. You can try this at home. Simple test. Now then there is one airline that trialled biofuel and that was Ethihad. I have no idea how that trial progressed but you should be able to trace that online. Considerable effort was expended by the engine makes and parts subcontractors and chemical additive companies to take the water out of bio made kerosene. The costs were too high and the risk to great. In military operations seral variants of hydrocarbons have been used to make the logistics wrk but they have not taken the step to incorporate the biomass made fractions. JP8 is mineral as are all the other grades used. Military applications tend to set the standards.
distar97
Dennis Harper 1
I read that when AF1 is due to visit certain overseas locations, advance teams do extensive tests on potential ground refueling sources, then put seals on the tanks. I think they keep security in place to be sure no one tampers with it.Yes I know AF1 is capable of air2air refueling but safety protocol is to refuel on the ground first.
99NY
99NY 0
Well specifically I was referring to A) The BA 777 bellyflopping on approach and B) The awful sight of an airliner cartwheeling across the runway.
AONeal79
AONeal79 0
How on earth are people still using the hideously incorrect "cartwheel" term?!
pilot62
Scott Campbell 1
Nothing even close to united 232
DSmithOps
David Smith 0
I'm thinking CRM issue.. I remember an Asian airline had an accident years ago, where the FO and/or crew did not speak up and provide input to the captain. The old mentality that the captain is the captain and don't you dare speak up or contradict him.
siriusloon
siriusloon 1
And yet the ATC recordings show both pilots speaking. That "old mentality" didn't only apply to Asian airlines, it was a big problem at most of them.

But at least you've solved this one with impeccable logic: Asian airline + you remember another accident involving an Asian airline and a CRM problem = CRM problem this time, too.
fpk2
fernando kosop -5
HOW COULD THE "CAPTAIN" OF ASIANA 214 ALLOW THE "PIC" TO LET THE AIRCRAFT GET SO LOW AND SLOW??? THE IMAGES ARE SELF EXPLANNING, MY GOD!!! WERE BOTH PILOTS "SLEEPING"?? OR "ON CRACK"?? THAT WAS THE MOST RIDICULOUS (BESIDES TRAGICLE) ACCIDENT I HAVE EVER SEEN AS A PILOT AND EVEN AS A "CIVILIAN"...ANYONE WOULD NOTICE HOW LOW AND SLOW THE 777 WAS. I HEARD THE PIC WAS "PERFORMING" HIS FIRST LANDING!!! IS THAT TRUE?? IF IT WAS...GEE;;;;IT WAS HIS LAST. ASIANA BETTER KICK "BOTH" OUT, TEAR UP THEIR LICENSES AND PROSECUTE BOTH JACK ASSES. DO YOU ALL AGREE WITH ME?? FERNANDO/BRASIL
KennyFlys
Ken Lane 5
I would answer your questions but I'm convinced my instructor status would be unable to properly address your obviously superior stand and strongly stated questions and concerns.

Perhaps had you not used all caps to state your question and comments I might feel more capable of addressing your concerns.
james801
James Farnsworth 3
I done it for ya :-) He just wants to be an ass.
AONeal79
AONeal79 3
I'm sorry, but "TRAGICLE"?!?!?
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 4
It's what happens when your popsicle melts...
james801
James Farnsworth 2
I don’t see how this happened with two high time pilots as the FP and NFP but the NTSB will learn how it happened and help to fix it. We know they were not sleeping and drug test will be done. You say you are a pilot and if you have not yet had a case of O Shit you will and you will remember it and it will make you a better pilot. All pilots have had bad thing happen most just got lucky and got out of it. It was his first landing at SFO in the 777 he had been to SFO in the 747 a bunch of times. All pilots are new to an airplane at some point and after Sim training you go and fly with a very high time Capt for a few weeks or hours and have a safety pilot to back both pilots up.
I would never want to see any pilot get charged with a crime for a crash. We need crews to be 100% open and forthcoming with what happened to keep from having the same crash happen again. And in some past crashes that pilot’s where put in jail we got little to no improvements to safety from their crash.
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 1
The Captain and PIC are the same person...
james801
James Farnsworth 2
More like Capt FO and safety pilot all melt. I do feel bad for them but they all was hight time pilots in 737,747,320,340 & 777 about 30K hrs Total time for all 3 pilots. Big Boo Boo. Sounds like they need to go back and get some more stick time and less Auto xyz time. I see it all the time in the 777 & 767 non old school guys cant do it without the auto junk. I like the AP but i also like to have the power in my right hand ya know.
fpk2
fernando kosop -6
ALL "NTSB" WILL HAVE TO DO IS WATCH THAT PHONE VIDEO FROM CNN TO DETERMINE HOW UNPROFESSIONAL WERE THE PILOTS OF ASIANA 214. POOR "CRM"...LOUSY TRAINNING...AND A TOTAL LACK OF COCKPIT COORDINATION..TO SAY THE LEAST. FERNANDO/BRASIL
fpk2
fernando kosop -6
THE WHOLE ASIANA FLEET SHOULD BE GROUNDED DUE TO "LACK OF PILOT TRAINNING".....ANDTHE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS SHOULD BE FIRED.LOOKS LIKE THE "THREE STOOGES" WERE FLYING THE 777. BUT THE THREE STOOGES NEVER EVER "KILLED "ANYBODY....THE ASIANA CREW DID. SHAME ON THEM AND SHAME ON ASIANA MANAGEMENT. FERNANDO/BRASIL
james801
James Farnsworth 2
The NTSB will look at the video but it will not tell them anything about how the CRM was in that flight. Nor will it tell them if the pilots training was bad or good. But I will say I don’t think you could have asked for a better day or airport to train a pilot that’s new to the type airplane. No winds and VFR and a 2 mile long runway.
NF2G
David Stark 2
And people accuse NORTH Americans of being judgmental and biased...
james801
James Farnsworth 1
Fernando,
I don’t mind rebutting you post since they are way off track, and you seem to be a very un informed person or pilot. I will take it one post at a time. To this one,
Asiana has been a safe airline even more so if you compare their record to other airlines in that part of the world.
Dan9
Dan Waldie -1
How can professional pilots get in a situation like this. Unbelievable for this to happen with four pilots aboard. Hope they never fly again!!