• Join FlightAware (Why Join?)
  • Login
  • US Flag 
03:21AM EDT


 

Airport Tracker/Info


-or-


 

Squawks & HeadlinesAsiana pilots raise 777 auto-throttle malfunction issue in the San Francisco crash

Back to Squawk list

Asiana pilots raise 777 auto-throttle malfunction issue in the San Francisco crash

Submitted
Pilots of the Asiana Airlines Boeing 777-200ER jet that crashed while trying to land in San Francisco are offering an account that differs from the preliminary findings of U.S. investigators, people familiar with the investigation said. The pilots have told the National Transportation Safety Board that an in-flight malfunction of an automated speed-control system was a major factor in the fatal accident on July 6, these people said. (airguideonline.com) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


preacher1
preacher1 34
I call BS and CYA. It wouldn't matter if the whole dang thing blew up and out of the panel, piloting 101 is to monitor ALTITUDE and AIRSPEED. They either had a massive brain fart or culture played a big part in all of it. Blind lead the blind and the all go in the ditch.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 11
The only auto-throttle malfunction was the pushing of the wrong button, which could more accurately be called pilot malfunction.

All contractors who've ever worked with Korean pilots, say that they memorized all their manuals on the first day. I wouldn't be convinced that a professional pilot would not be familiar with the FD modes on their primary aircraft type. Flying a commercial passenger airliner on a revenue flight is not a hobby.

I tend to agree that either fatigue after a 10-hour flight or CRM were at issue. But I can't imagine that any pilot, no matter the cultural norms, would allow a plane to crash when it is clear that it is exiting its' flight envelope.

My best guess is the new guy (with 33 hours) mixed up his modes. (Years on the A320 will do that to you, even after years on the 747.) And the instructor/ monitoring pilot had a brain fart/ was extremely fatigued, and was slow to respond to a quickly deteriorating situation.
james801
James Farnsworth 3
A bunch have just never said a word in the past. I cant see not saveing your own life if you could.
bbabis
Bill Babis 9
Yes preacher, that is the bottom line. It has been very obvious from the start. The only thing I will add is; If they are trying to use a maintenance history of autothrottle problems in their defense, wouldn't that have called for even more vigilance in their use on the approach if you even decided to use them at all? Every captain should be familiar with the squawks on their aircraft and command accordingly.
preacher1
preacher1 8
I would think so. Like I said, BS and CYA. Blame game to save loss of face and status.
snowboss
Sandy Sandmire 2
AMEN, preacher!
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
So, Failure to monitor "attitude" plays some parts too?
preacher1
preacher1 1
I have ran it into the ground, but when you are Senior in that culture, you are unquestioned. . The trainer, PNF, should have carried the 4 bars of authority in that cockpit but by virtue of being junior, status wise, did not exercise it. I cannot believe that 2 would have missed all that
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I don't think youve run it into the ground. Many still don't understand what you're talking about. It was a retorical question meant to be a little sarcastic and a play on attitude.:-) I have been beating the same horse since the opening article about the "crunch".
I'm not sure it's a fixable problem since the culture goes back thousands of years. Respect for elders is seldom compatable with innovation since the elders don't, as a rule, keep up with new ideas and technology. I for one, survive on the trailing edge and not interested in keeping up.
SootBox
SootBox 3
If they try to use history of AT problems as a defense then they have no defense for not watching it closely enough to avoid this. To say something has a problem and then ignore it as if it was working is pretty divergent.
stevemondral
steve mondral 1
Also raises the question that if there were such problems why wasn't Boeing ever contacted or informed of the issues?
avihais
Martin Haisman 5
Reminds me of Korean Air Cargo Flight 8509 where culture (Refusal to address a senior officer)may of played a big part of it. Love the "brain fart"
sparkie624
sparkie624 5
I call this excuse "Pass The Buck" and "Lieing Through Their Teeth"
Moviela
Ric Wernicke 3
Note to Sparkie, the verb for not telling the truth is:

Lie
Lies
Lied
Lying

The pilots on OZ 214 are liars.
joelwiley
joel wiley -1
Picky picky, he fixes airplanes not conjugations. RE the pilots, lie or lay?
tcburnett
Thomas Burnett 2
And those aren't conjugations.
tcburnett
Thomas Burnett 1
Lie and lay are now both recognized as acceptable for describing an assumption of the supine position.
Lye and glycerine make soap. 33 hour captains and sleepy chief pilots crash airplanes. They are lying.
jsamford
jsamford 4
The gramatical rule is that you can lie or you can get laid. You can't lay down and you can't get lied.
btweston
btweston -1
Yes. Asian culture is well known for its aversion to numbers. Thank you for today's illuminating sociology lesson...
preacher1
preacher1 1
You're welcome.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 5
Damn plane crashed itself!!
joelwiley
joel wiley 5
Going to be an interesting thread, just following.
JENNYJET
Wires, Pulleys, cables, humans and extensive training of real honest to goodness aeronautics with flight hours = Safe flying. Computers, fly-by-wire, two sleepy pilots and complacency = me going by boat!
bleonetti
Bruce Leonetti 4
Trust me, it's cultural! Not being racist. I have a Korean girlfriend. A wonderful person. She admits that to say, "I am sorry and made a mistake" is not a popular expression. She landed her car on the lawn tractor in the garage a few weeks ago! Has no idea who did it! Machines have minds of there own. I fly a Beech Bonanza. Some times it makes bad cross wind landings!
sparkie624
sparkie624 3
Culture sounds like excuse for lieing.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 3
Trying to save face may be cultural.

But trying to pass the blame is all about passing the liability and payouts to someone else. In the case of blaming the auto-throttles is all about trying to get Boeing's bank accounts to cover the payouts to the injured and families of dead, at least in part.

That they can save face and not seem like their pilots are incompetent and dangerous is a welcome benefit. You know, so that paying passengers don't stop flying their airline causing them to have to close up shop.

I might not rule out flying them, just from the accident. Afterall that's just one incident. Any pilot can have a bad day at any time.

But if they push this autothritrle nonsense, refuse to take responsibility, and don't aggressively try to fix the problems that led to this incident, there's no way that anyone should ever consider flying them. It's no worth the risk.
preacher1
preacher1 2
You have no idea of what we speak until you have been there or otherwise experienced it. As a "ROUND EYE", you just cannot imagine it. It has been there for ever how many thousand years and is ingrained into them from childhood. Most of the Oriental countries are that way, notably Japan, hence the kamikaze pilots and hari kari, or however you spell it
sparkie624
sparkie624 3
In Other words they are trained to tell the untruth to save face... Culture or not.. The Untruth is still the UnTruth...
preacher1
preacher1 3
Saving face and/or personal status is paramount in that culture. Call it what you want.
btweston
btweston 0
We're saying "Asian" now...
preacher1
preacher1 2
'scuse the heck out of me
jwmson
jwmson 7
Obviously a short circuit between the seat and the controls called the pilot. Why the hell was someone trying to use the autopilot for a visual approach? Can they not fly an airplane without automation? This is among the many reasons I will only fly US & UK flag carriers along with Lufthansa, Qantas, and maybe Cathay Pacific.
n111ma
n111ma 7
Forget about this lame auto-throttle malfunction excuse! I contend that "had the most basic flying skills been used in that cockpit..this totally avoidable incident never would've happened". Whether landing a J-3 Cub on a grass strip or a 777 on a 10k long runway, no pilot should ever come up short, as long as the motor(s) are turning. Southwest just fired the Capt of the 737 nosewheel incident at LGA.... This Asiana Capt should be banished to the rice paddies.
sparkie624
sparkie624 8
How can it be a malfunction when it was working as advertised...
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 3
ThanX john williamson, for using the lingo that a spectator like me can understand. Like an untrained criminal the pilots(and other partners in crime) are trying to find a scapegoat which is not there !
Cactus732
Cactus732 3
I agree, if the auto throttle malfunctions it has plenty of fail safe mechanisms to disconnect it. I think they were just so reliant on their automation that they didn't use their private pilot 101 knowledge.
sparkie624
sparkie624 3
It did not fail, when they turned off the A/P the book says it disconnects... Op Ck Normal. Crew Failed.. this excuse they are trying to use is BS to try and safe face.
Cactus732
Cactus732 7
Oh I know, I agree with that. I was just saying even if it did fail they would have been able to disconnect and fly it manually.
sparkie624
sparkie624 2
Very true... Bottom line, they made one basic mistake, and that was... "Fly The Plane" which is a first basic skill that is required in any a/c and is (or should) be) drilled into any new pilot from Day ONE!
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I believe it is drilled on day one through the first couple of hundred hours or so, but then pushed back and away as the number of engines increase. Practicing stalls and punching holes in the sky aren't practiced nor even considered in big iron.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
You can't fly manually if you've never been taught. If you're taught to guide an airplane rather than fly it and the guidance is maladjusted you have exhausted your procedures. Adjusting to a pivot driven AS indicator is not in your option set. That doesn't make it right, it's only one explanation.
tduggan2010
Tim Duggan -1
"...the book says it disconnects"?? Where? What 'book'??

Merely disconnecting the A/P in any Boeing DOES NOT disconnect the A/T. "Mode Change" is not the same as "disconnect".

Read this link to "Flashcard" training questions (commonly used by pilots for review and during preparation for Oral Exams):
http://quizlet.com/20070116/new
preacher1
preacher1 2
I believe this is just terminology difference of armed and active. When there is no AP link, even if ARMED, the AT's have no place to go.
tduggan2010
Tim Duggan 2
The A/Ts don't really need an A/P link, they receive commands from the Mode Control Panel (MCP) and FMC programming. Computer logic changes, yes, when A/P is engaged versus not engaged. But minor, and in specific circumstances.

And yes, the "FLCH Trap" is (likely) specific to the situation with Asiana 214. If FLCH is the AFDS engaged mode in a descent (A/P Off), and no altitude is set for "capture", then the A/Ts will remain in 'HOLD' or 'IDLE' unless another Pitch Mode is engaged.

This is the crux of the Pilot Error, and is easily eliminated (the Error) with proper scanning techniques and Situational Awareness.
preacher1
preacher1 3
Seems to me, and I'm flying on some memory here, that if they are linked up and ARMED in flight, as they should be, that when the AP is kicked off then they revert to that ACTIVE mode and have to be RE-Armed for manual use. Now, each bird is a little different but that is how our 767 is set up. I'm not sure about the 777 as I'm not typed on it but have been told it's similar and I think this is what Sparkie is referring to.
preacher1
preacher1 1
The reason I said flying on memory is that I don't use the dang things until I get on top and that's where the AP came in. I'm from the old school I guess and was never restricted by a 121 bean counter and I just always subscribed to the fact that there was a full throttle position there and that it was meant to use to get off the ground ASAP. I always hand flew coming in so they weren't a factor. CRJ that I have been mostly in lately doesn't have them per se, so not a factor anyway.
preacher1
preacher1 3
Just in the For What it's Worth dept. I did take our 767 today for a short hop from FSM to DAL and back and specifically looked at these things. As the AP got kicked off preparing for a hand flown descent VFR, the AT's did return to ACTIVE mode, and while we didn't use them they would have had to go to ARMED to work. They are 2 separate systems as has been said here but MODE selection is everything. As I said earlier, I don't use the dang things unless we get in a CAT situation of some kind but it still don't matter, I had speed and altimeter all the way down and it wasn't a bit of problem to find on the panel. Like I said above, this is all BS and CYA.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Thanks for verifying what experienced pilots have been saying all along.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Ditto Preach. I do believe anything "auto" as relates to flying the plane is there to assist the pilot not take his/her place. Going to Big D is pretty much up and down from FSM. You probably didn't have time to eat your shrimp cocktail. Lol
preacher1
preacher1 1
Wasn't no shrimp cocktail but I did manage a cup of coffee and a cookie. I think AA has it scheduled at 1 hr and 2 minutes, gate to gate in an ERJ below RVSM going into DFW, generally about 260. Let's just say I beat that by a few minutes.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Yeah, a 76 will beat an ERJ, especially in your hands.

They way you fly the 75, you'd be even faster in that plane.
preacher1
preacher1 1
I personally wish they'd have kept a 75. I can appreciate the extra room in the cabin and the cockpit for hat matter but those 75's are racehorse.
dtw757
mike SUT 2
Preacher...where did you get that info. The AP and the AT are two totally independent systems.

You never take off with the AP engaged, yet you have AT for take off thrust, climb power settings etc. We "hand fly" the aircraft down final when we want and can still use the AT system to maintain speed (without any AP armed or engaged). These boys just forgot to fly the aircraft. Rule #1: Speed is life. They are grasping for straws here....nobody had any kind of a scan going and as a result, they crashed. The blame goes to the pilots, not the AT system.
preacher1
preacher1 2
I agree but I think the biggest difference here is terminology. ACTIVE and ARMED. I don't use them half the time but I think the biggest thing here is, as you say, just forgetting to fly the AC. Regardless of the mode, the just forgot, or never knew, basic airmanship....FLY THE PLANE and they are looking for someplace to lay blame to prevent a loss of face. You are correct that in the proper mode, they would have maintained.
preacher1
preacher1 1
well, no place to go until set
preacher1
preacher1 1
In addition, there is that FLCH trap that is or at least should be well known throughout any Boeing product and has been noted in this column before
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
There were multiple commands input into A/T settings in a short period before the crash.

That may be indicative of indecision, or uncertainty of correct setting, or disagreement between the pilots. None of these options will excuse the incompetent dropping of a commercial airliner out of the sky filled with passengers, resulting in death, dismemberment, and permanent damage to the passengers, and omolwte loss of plane. Total dereliction of duty to fly the da-- plane.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Route to paddy fields
via jail !
Indefinitely , for many crop seasons.
projectabove35000feet
PATFTF PATFTF 3
One word: BS.
totall
Richard Howell 3
All BS, but maybe Airbus is behind this excuse . . .. lol
avihais
Martin Haisman 3
Another attempt to avoid total negligence in the actions (Inactions) of the four push button junkies.
captoats
John Oc 1
Thing is if they were in a 330 or 340, this probably wouldnt have happened. Autothrust would have gone to TOGA once the speed decayed into the alpha floor range. That should be enough to get your attention. You can mis manage the Airbus in a open descent mode similar to the Boeing FLCH trap mentioned here, but as long as the autothrust is not inoperative, you have a nicely designed system ready to save your butt in case your head happens to be occupying that space at the time. Way to go Airbus!
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 2
I reject the notion that Airbus automation can make commercial aviation crash free. Any airliner can and does encounter anomalous situations. A pilot must be prepared to handle these situations. There is no excuse for a pilot to not know how to fly and/or to not maintain situational awareness.

Recently a UPS flight, an Airbus A300-600F, flew into the ground under full automation, and didn't save the pilots onboard. Four years ago, an Air France flight, an A330, being flown over the Atlantic at cruise level under full automation, had the autopilot kick off after hitting turbulence, and the pilots flew the plane into the water in a handful of minutes undefeated manual control, and the Airbus technology didn't help these pilot nor the hundreds of passengers avoid death. So under automation control or not, Aurbys planes crash and kill people and can't be counted on to save your ass.

As always we still require pilots to sit in the pointy end. They should know what they're doing and they should save us, when the plane can't or doesn't (which does happen).

It's silly to argue any one automation feature makes one or another manufacturer superior, as all manufacturers over time tend to incorporate features to make their planes safer. But the feature I most want up front is a competent pilot because automation isn't fullproof, not yet.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I remember early on in the "Space Program" when the power that be decided to replace monkeys with men the men had to fight for a window to look out of and controls to over ride the automation. Seems like yesterday but it was awhile ago and before some here were around to experience. We seem to be revisiting the same old arguments and procedures. We've revisited all this in books, movies, (War Games)in life itself. We won't settle any of this until we as society, require a large degree of personal responsibility and self reliance. If town's a couple of miles away and there isn't any transportation you're going to have to walk a half hour.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Your last 2 sentences says it all. I can remember walking a few blocks to school in all kinds of weather. Now, in most places, if you are over a quarter mile off the highway or route, school district is forced to come pick you up. Had a lawsuit here last year, driver just wanted to make a combined neighborhood pickup on a corner. These folks didn't want their kid walking 3 houses down. Forced the district to make a stop for their kid in front of the house.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Same mentality at the Walmart according to a report I read today. The store decided to honor EBT, WIC and other food benefit cards while the system was down on Saturday. The store shelves were completely cleaned out of groceries. But, when the lights came back on and the systems came back on line over loaded carts were left where they stood because the card holders knew they couldn't be covered by the balance left. I have no problem helping with support but I do with providing a hammock. 'Responsibility is the prime requisite to freedom.'
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
I call it "forced charity ". Most of us have no problem giving but the abuse and forever benefits go against my grain. We have created a whole new class of Americans. Look at what government care has done for the American Indian.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Some time back, one of the states tried to start a WORKFARE program for those on welfare that were able to work. Basically do nothing jobs and almost immediately he drew the ire of local do gooders for them being demeaning. The governor said "Look, you got a generation or 2 of people that don't even know what it's like to get out of bed and come to work at a certain hour. Let's just concentrate on that before we fuss about the type of job".
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I remember "work fare" and the liberal reaction to it. Pretty much the same as the reaction to insisting that recipients be drug free in order to qualify. It all seems to come back to personal responsibility, doesn't it?
preacher1
preacher1 1
yeah it do
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Well, we've solved that world problem. What's next? We're on a roll! :-)
preacher1
preacher1 1
I don't know how to undo it but all my life I heard" I want things better for my kids than I had it". I heard that from my Granddad and my Dad and I said the same thing to mine but methinks we came too far and that is what has cause the death of common sense and Personal Responsibility. Above my house a few miles is a mountain overlook. Natural rock and beautiful scenery, at least it was. High, steep bluff with warning signs in the parking area. There is now a 5' high chain link fence running along that bluff edge so somebody don't fall off. Kinda like suing a ladder mfg for your dumb butt falling off the top step that is clearly marked not to go there. The madness has to stop somewhere.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Well we've tried it with money and that doesn't seem to work. To use your ladder example, a ladder costs considerably more, something like 5x more because of the insurance that has to be in place by the manufacturer. A plastic collection of 7 or 8 steps and supports shouldn't cost in excess of $100. We're right back to personal responsibility. Blaming someone else because of clumsiness should never have been allowed. I read 50 year old of a winch that failed and a judge allowed a suit to be filed because modern day OSHA guards were not in place. Goofy!
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
In consideration for the thread and overregulating the obvious, how about an FAA mandated sign in the cockpit.
"WARNING
PILOT EXPECTED TO BE ABLE TO FLY THE PLANE:
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 2
Asiana and the pilots are screwed, as they didn't meet even this basic qualification. Sign probabl should've been in Korean.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Rice Paddy now or later?
preacher1
preacher1 1
Wasn't it Lycoming that got sued here while back because of an old engine that was way overdue for everything just quit and the plane crashed. They not only got sued but they LOST.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
You can put the blame for a couple generations of people that won't work squarely on the government. The fix is simple-- hunger. Lol
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
It pretty much says that in the manual. You could put it in neon and I doubt it would make a difference. One of the funniest things ever on utube is the goofball taking a lesson in a helicopter ( his own). The instructor goes into the FBO leaving student and copter (running) with instructions not to touch anything. Student thinks he can fly it solo. The ensuing gyrations and crash are hilarious.
preacher1
preacher1 1
This problem must have been around for awhile though. Seems to me that even back in biblical times it talk about somebody not working being worse than an infidel or something to that effect. LOL, I guess it's a human type thing
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Did common sense diminish proportionately to the increase in education?
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
When distributing computer applications on disc, I would include a file "RYFM.1ST" file along with the manual.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
... of lawyers.
The idea that if anything happens, somebody can be blamed.
It doesn't matter who as long as it's someone with money and slower lawyers than 'me'- I'll take my third from anyone.
preacher1
preacher1 1
There may be something to that
preacher1
preacher1 1
Actually, the exact quote is
"1 Timothy 5:8
But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel."
But it basically means the same thing thou because somebody else is providing
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
It works on wild animals too. Give em easy food everyday and they quit hunting.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Looks like they had a handle on behavior even back then. L
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
You don't call yourself Preacher1 for nothing. :-)
I remember hearing a story back in the 50s, of a burglar tripping over a milk bottle while coming out of the house he just robbed who sued and won. I can't compete wit stories from the days of Timothy.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Well, it got to bugging me about the whole thing so I dug it up, but I will say this little computer program makes things easy found at time.You ain't that old. I'm outa here
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I wish you were right. I could use a few more years, but then youth is no guarantee. I'll bet I'm closer to your age than tyou think I am. But, I'm glad I write young. :-)
preacher1
preacher1 1
I'll be 64 end of November
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
You look great for 64. I'll be 67 in March.
preacher1
preacher1 1
I figure I'll hang up my spurs next spring.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I don't share your currency but I imagine it takes a toll and there are lots of things that compete for your time. I have enjoyed reading your posts even before you used the Preacher 1 moniker, although I don't remember what it used to be any longer.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear friend preacher1, I read(Rule) some where, pilots get their 'spurs' for life, with no possibility of rusting due to good rust proof material !
Medicals are only to keep the 'spurs' dust free !
Please do correct me if needed.
preacher1
preacher1 1
That may be but as I told Mark, that back porch and creekbank is calling. LOL
preacher1
preacher1 1
I retired in 09, just before the rule change and we left it in place. I got active in a truckline that I had a piece of and did some 121 fill in on long reserve. Kinda had a lull last year and it opened up 1st of year to come back to old company awhile. I think after this is over with, I am not sure if I'll even keep a private ticket. Really likin that back porch and creekbank.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
You could take lessons from that character in your pic.
I'm sure rates are reasonable- bellyrub & occasional treat.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
How about sea plane n fishing ? Sitting on the float with the rod and basket and all that !
Best of both worlds ?
No ?
preacher1
preacher1 1
I don't need any lessons in that. It seems to come natural these days. LOL
preacher1
preacher1 1
I'm not sure if I'll even keep a private ticket
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
Didn't take me long either, pat the pup. LOL
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I'm afraid you're stuck Once an airplane driver you're always an airplane driver. Pilot, Coast Guard licensed captain,... are 'till death do we part' except it's bifurcated with a qualifying physical certificate :-) "Sorry Charlie" you're a flyboy forever. You just graduate to the ancient pelican club.:-)
preacher1
preacher1 1
I didn't say I wouldn't miss it or not keep track of things but I've been on waivers on the medical now since before 1st retirement for diabetes and a little AFib on the heart. Just don't know that I'll fool with it.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Et tu, brute? I went through the same thing a few years ago and came up with the same solution. You realize after a while, there are things undone that need doing before final departure. Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey ... get surpassed with even more important things like old dogs, grand children and time on a fishin' pond with same.
preacher1
preacher1 1
That last part is really coming into focus. At least my thinkin' is halfway straight. LOL
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
You're betting that mine is. hehe If you ever find your way through BWI I know a good spot for a crab cake. You'll probably want to airfreight one back with you if you can find room. It's a much nicer approach than DCA's River Visual, and I'm not far from Signature.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Closest my bunch has been to that part of the world was IAD about 2 months ago and I stayed home, let some of the young pups work.LOL
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I never lost anything in Chantilly Va.The whole area is pretty barren other than big houses and the airport I've flown out of there a couple of times and it took me as long to get to the aerodrome as it did to get to my destination. BWI is a much better choice if your business is North, East or central DC. I'm not sure DCA even permits a 75. The 78 needed dispensation and departures after 2130 or 2200 loc. used to be a no. no. Problem with IAD is you have to drive 30 minutes before you can start to go anywhere. I don't think Northern Virginia developed as quickly as the planners figured it would and the old Friendship Airport was only 20 miles North in the fast developing corridor between the two cities.
preacher1
preacher1 1
I haven't been up that way in a long time. We were doing a WalMart shuttle a couple of months back and they took the CRJ in there, then down to RIC and back up, then came home. I rememember coning thru DCA one nite as a kid back in the late 50's. Only view I've ever had of the Monument. Braniff DC-3
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I guess I'm a yankee but I have a love for the Southland. Grandma lived in Baltimore and I grew up In Northern New Jersey, N of TEB. Flew into BAL from EWR on a 3 when I was a youngun then service changed to the Connie.I never fell outa love with the Goony Bird. My first airplane ride and my first twin.
preacher1
preacher1 1
That was my first ride. We were headed overseas to Germany. Mom had booked AA LIT-STL-JFK. Military came back. This was a mail run; LIT-MEM-BNA-Knoxville-DCA and Idlewild. Bad tired after that. 2 days in NYC, ship over.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Do you still hail from Arkansas?
preacher1
preacher1 1
Yeah. Live about 3 miles from KMPJ. Flying out of KFSM, about 72 miles away, West side of State
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Funny how most people don't wonder too far from their origins.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Born at KRUE. Daughter married and went to W.VA for 3 years. Came home. Son in area
All of them here
preacher1
preacher1 1
Grandkids are closer that way.2 boys 1 and 3
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
There is comfort in family being around for all generations
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear friend preacher1,seems you never tried a longer rope/leash ? If not, try it and enjoy both worlds, best of them !
preacher1
preacher1 1
Well, I was an Army brat and traveled the world and many different schools plus 4 years USAF on my own. I came back home and ready for roots. Raised my kids here in on school district and choice is theirs to travel. Like I said, my daughter went to W VA 3 years but she came home.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Not to interrupt. 0730 edt, heading out the door. Have a great day y'all. Fog settling in. local traffic calling RVR on clearance. Stay safe.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Be careful
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 0
Sounds nice. Let me know if you want some company and I'll pack my fishin' rod.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
You've departed from the discussion and while your point may be valid, Asiana was not working in an Airbus environment. Even if they had been, the pilots did not scan their primary instruments, the only defense against electrical or electronics failure. But I digress. The thread here is the front end crew's responsibility to scan the primary instruments, and fly the airplane to the ground rather than conger up excuses for destruction and loss of life that NEVER should have happened. I can't disagree with you because I'm not familiar with Airbus' electronic systems, but I can reiterate the concerns of the majority here that, they and others like them are too dependent on automatic controls and assume they won't fail. A departure from the primary flight training I received where I was taught that anything could fail at any time
preacher1
preacher1 1
Got to agree. A simple mistake of not rearming the AT's, compounded by lack of neglecting the basics. I have heard that same thing about Airbus but don't know. Only difference is whether the machine would save you or if you would save yourself. I am sure that the evacuation delay resulted from addled brains wondering what happened. More of the culture, with nobody making a move until Captain said so. That is normal procedure to a degree but at some point #1 got to take it upon themselves.
Musketeer1
Musketeer1 4
This mentality of not taking responsibility that the World is taking on is going to lead to a really strange future. I can already see my sperm named in a lawsuit for something that my great great grandson does in 2115.
RECOR10
RECOR10 2
I wont blame you....however, your great great grandmother on your fathers side once killed (on accident) a pet spider who was living in a window (no one knew it was a pet but your great great grandmothers son, your great grandfather. That incident has had effects on your family to this day. So, when your great great great great grand son fucks up - your soul can point at that silly spider.
Moviela
Ric Wernicke 5
I echo what preacher has written, and add that English continues to be a problem with foreign pilots. I really don't care what mad flying skills you have, if you don't speak the language of aviation, you don't belong in the cockpit.

Not knowing the nuance between "ARMED" and "ACTIVE" is strictly an English problem, but also cultural. People not familiar with American idiomatic speech might not have a clear understanding of what it means. I know what symbol is on the men's room door in China, but have no understanding what the symbol means culturally.
preacher1
preacher1 17
Had a French controller one time wonder aloud why he was speaking English out of a French tower to a French Airline landing at a French Airport. Someone on the ground answered him and said "cause the yanks kept you from having to speak German."
RECOR10
RECOR10 4
That is a great one! LOL
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 0
The pilot got to used to his plane calling him 'RETARD, RETARD, RETARD'.

He just felt lost without it.
captoats
John Oc 1
LOL! I tell my OE pilots the first two times you hear RETARD, its telling you to do something. After that, its talking about you!
james801
James Farnsworth -1
Thats kind of a dis to any Airbus pilot.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 4
Actually, I just thought it highlighted 2 issues: the language and communication proficiency of these foreign language pilots, and the very real issue of transitioning between aircraft types, particularly when the manufacturer changes in the transition.

The NTSB may recommend more training, more sim time not only of 1) approaches, particularly manual approaches. All pilots should feel comfortable landing their primary plane type manually. But also, when transitioning between type when a manufacturer change is involved, more training may be needed to smooth the transition early on, for the period of time the pilot us fairly new on type.
preacher1
preacher1 2
Just on the simple side, one reason Boeing kept the STICK/Yoke on the 787 was for PILOT FAMILIARITY. Them and MD had been building airplanes since Moses was a pup and most of us cut our teeth on them. I personally am glad my time is about through and I don't have to worry about learning how to drive a Bus. Even though Bombardier C series has the joystick, that's about as far as it goes. It's not a whole different breed of thought processes in flying
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 2
Since Moses was a pup huh...
SootBox
SootBox 0
Since Moses wore short pants is better.
preacher1
preacher1 1
At any rate, how about just a long time ago. LOL
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Moses stopped wearing shirt pants? I was totally out of the loop. Shows you how much I know (or not).
rospeunt
40 years of flying have given me lots of experience, today's problem is that there is too much electronics in the cockpit and todays' pilots arnt' capable to fly without the glass! All ATP's should had fly to altitude and take off "Roger" below FLL100 to land and we get again real pilots!
chalet
chalet 2
I bet that some American reverse ambulance-lawyers visited Asiana and offered their services based on this grandi-eloquent account version of facts which will allegedly reduce the inevitable six or seven figure law suits looming on the horizon to vistually nothing and the sharpies would stand to collect hefty fees but Asiana would still be handed down stiff penalties.
Figmo
William Howell 2
Excuses, Excuses, Excuses!
Who was being paid to FLY the Aircraft!
That says it all.
stevooz
steve rogers 2
still comes down to three trained guy's missing something not right , wow, what are the odds !
brecka95
Alex Breck 2
So remind me again, exactly why they were using autothrottle on a visual approach in the first place?

Besides that, it's already been established that the autothrottle was armed, not on.
mpradel
Marcus Pradel 2
There's nothing wrong with using the A/T for speed control thru the steep descent.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Yep. Sounds about right.

But there's no meat on that bone. I don't see Boeing paying out on such a substanceless claim. Though they do make a nice target. Lawyers?! There may be settling out of court for small change with non-disclosure and not admitting to any fault (just to avoid the cost of litigation).
preacher1
preacher1 1
I couldn't agree more. In spite of all the automation, most older pilots will maintain stick/rudder skills and use the automation for what it is designed to be, a help rather than primary. Problem is, too many bean counters that have never seen the inside of a cockpit have made things like auto throttles, etc. mandatory in the name of fuel saving. I guess that's alright when managing a large fleet but the Captain should always be in control and have the final say. Many younger pilots have accepted it as the norm, rather than exception. The number one rule for me is to know how to FLY THE PLANE; makes no difference if it's a c150 or big iron. The basics are the same and not to be forgotten.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
They'd better go on flat fee billable hours than contingency on this.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Dag-gone! That's what I've been trying to say. Maybe one day I'll learn how to write. You fellas have the right idea and a good handle on the problems.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
I have often heard that good writers/authors make bad readers !
So choose carefully !
;-)
preacher1
preacher1 1
Hang in there. It'll come to you. LOL
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I can imagine that to be true enough. It's tough to listen (read) when you're considering the next thing your going to say (write).
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Thanks, Dad. :-)

You need only look at people in the grocery stores, in their cars, ... . Folks can't seem to put down their cell phones (communicators). I ran into the problems myself with E Nav. aids.. Fortunately, I learned on my marine programed steering, back in the daze of Loran C, experimenting at inappropriate times or using it because I could. I never did carry my new bad practices over to aviation, although I do remember playing with my wing levelers. I suspect I got smart by accident.
preacher1
preacher1 1
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
Did you mean the people who can't find the 'any' key when the instructions say "press any key to continue"?
sparkie624
sparkie624 3
Sounds like they are making excuses for not understanding the system.. They screwed up. they are supposed to monitor all of that in case of a failure... they are just blowing wind...
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 1
Which plane was that?
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Mentioning the first planes with Auto Throttles, it was not called Auto Throttles. I worked on the first ones that came out and they were called "PMS" which means "Power Management System". The big difference is that the PMS was a totally self sufficient system that did not rely or or talk to the A/P in anyway. All it did was to control the throttles. It even had it's own Pitot Static built into it so that it did not need access to the Air Data Computer. You set your Airspeed you want to fly at, and the PMS did the reset in regards to controlling the engines.

[This poster has been suspended.]

sparkie624
sparkie624 1
In all autoland systems the A/T plays a huge roll being interconnected to the A/P. Some A/C require the A/P to be active to have the A/T active. The 777 is that type of plane. I cannot speak for the L1011, but it had its own problems as we found out in Florida... And the fix was a Louder Horn/Alarm.
btweston
btweston -1
Well done. You almost made it through an entire comment without being a complete dick. Keep working on it.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
"The pilots’ statements—along with details of Asiana 777 maintenance logs showing a number of “uncommanded auto-throttle disconnects”—are part of the arguments Asiana officials intend to make during a planned visit to the NTSB later this year"

I found a reference to an incident in 2005 from the Australian Transport Agency regarding a 777.

Have there been other non Asiana reports?
tomkennedy
Tom Kennedy 1
I get an even stronger feeling that pilot error is the key to this crash. If there was a history of malfunction with the auto-throttle on this plane (something which has very conveniently just surfaced), it should have made the flying pilot super aware of monitoring airspeed/throttle position.
Guycocoa
Guy Cocoa 1
I find it hard to believe they would use such a lame excuse in trying to blame the AT system when it was so obvious that their approach was perfect but just before touchdown an earthquake occurred and the seawall rose up and caused the aircraft to crash into it. I'll bet that's what it looked like from the cockpit.
fritzjames
James Fritz 1
Attention all sea rated pilots.......has anyone considered that depth perception issues due to the light winds at that time which caused a flat water appearance( view from 1000ft-500ft)very low height waves may very well have contributed significantly to the cause of the accident. I think that it did so but won't go into the very long explanation now as to why I think it is true but sea plane pilots know of the issues present when making an approach over flat appearing water. Would be interested in comments from sea rated pilots. Thanks.
cparks
cparks 1
Maybe Asian pilots should learn how to fly airplanes, not boxes.
skystars
skystars 1
Yeah right!

What failed is the device between the Mike button
and the throttle. Here we call it the pilot!

And gravity won!
boba300cpt
The entire flight crew should be canned due to stupidity.
stuoster
Stu Oster 1
What a bunch of crap. Turning on the auto-throttles does not relieve the pilot flying and all others in the cockpit from the need to monitor airspeed, not does it prevent anyone from manually moving the throttles as needed. These guys were definitely asleep at the controls.
Doobs
Dee Lowry 1
The only malfuction with the B-777 were the 4 members on the Cockpit! Disengage the AT and Hand fly the "beauty". "Auto Throttle" allows the pilot to control the power settings of the engines. Those so called "pilots of asiana" chose to maintain the AT....why? Because it the system saves fuel? Not only that but it also attains an indicated airspeed. Give me a break...Every aspect of the landing was a perfect day. VFR! Obviously, these Pilots don't have a clue about "Hands on Flying"! And it is sad!
Hey...they F...ked up big time...and Boeing is not going to put up with inept pilots. I think Asiana has to get over it...cut the culture shit and admit that they were wrong! Don't go blaming the "Auto Throttle"...don'blame Boeing
Doobs
Dee Lowry 1
The only malfuction with the Asiana B-777 were the 4 members in the Cockpit! Disengage the AT and Hand fly the "beauty". "Auto Throttle" allows the pilot to control the power settings of the engines. Those so called "pilots of Asiana" chose to maintain the AT....why? Because it the system saves fuel? Not only that but it also attains an indicated airspeed. Give me a break...Every aspect of the landing was a perfect day. VFR! Obviously, these Pilots don't have a clue about "Hands on Flying"! And it is sad!
Hey...they F...ked up big time...and Boeing is not going to put up with inept pilots that destroy a beautiful airplane! Asiana has to get over it...cut the culture shit and admit that they were wrong! Don't go blaming the "Auto Throttle"...don't 'blame Boeing! Blame "Asiana" and their lack of "training"! A real pilot is one that can FLY! Not to rely on "Cockpit Glass Window"! Obviosly... they don't know to do that either!
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
According to this article ...
"The pilots, according to these people, have told U.S. investigators they believe an automated speed-control system, called auto-throttles, disconnected on its own, allegedly without any warning to the crew, .... "
If sao, what next ? May be ....
Aircraft starts to taxi at her own because the AP got engaged at its own ! Leaves many passengers behind , including the PIC ! !
And all are seen racing behind her to board.
ha ha ha
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
One thing that should come out of this thread is that foreign pilots and airlines are not held to the same standards as US. Lots of people don't realize this. These are the same people who think their rights go with them outside the US. Nowhere else in the world even comes close to the overall standards of the US. Some may rank in one category or another but fall far short in the big picture. Realize this when you travel. Your safety, rights, and well being are always reduced. Just saying. Of course many will disagree but they probably won't move.
Doobs
Dee Lowry 1
"Auto-Throttle" malfunction...? Don't think so. The malfunction is the so called crew in the nose with their head up their ass.
tlblosser
tlblosser 1
Isn't this the same airlines that sued a TV News station in San Fran shortly after the crash who erroneously reported the pilots' names? The airline claimed that it caused irreparable harm to their business and reputation.

Can we believe ANYTHING that Asiana says?
chalet
chalet 1
These sorry monkeys had no business being in the cockpit of a wheelbarrow, forget about a 777 with almost 300 souls on board. Lets hope that justice is brought and most of all that the safety of passengers flying Korean commercial aircraft is protected from now on even if that requires bringing American and European expatriate pilots to fly them.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Asiana are acting like a blind man looking for a black cat in a dark room which is not there .
fritzjames
James Fritz 2
Correct! Who knows what the final out come will be but if I were the father of one of the innocent girls that were killed that day I would not rest until found out the REAL truth. Given enough rope those Korean pilots will eventually hang themselves.
tomkennedy
Tom Kennedy 1
Good point! It's been mentioned elsewhere that Asiana has closed ranks around these guys, but if the NTSB does its job correctly, we should get the truth.
bbabis
Bill Babis 1
This would only be an issue if they were looking outside. Besides, height perception is only one factor in a visual approach. Among other things, you still must pay attention to speed and distance to go. This crew missed everything.
preacher1
preacher1 1
You are entirely correct, Dee, They would have been OK even with the AT if it had been in the right mode but they messed up bigtime for whatever reason. Sad part is though, the culture part will not go away. It is a way of life with them and unless we have lived there among them, we can't understand it anymore than we could Hari Kari with the Japanese in WW2. That is a part of Americana they have and probably never will adopt.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
No. The NTSB made clear that the plane responded exactly as would be expected, and as it was commanded.

We're not talking about non-professional hobbyists in an emergency find themselves in a 777 flight deck or the first time. These are professional pilots being paid to competently deliver plane and passengers to the destination without death or damage. They should be intimately familiar with the plane and all her controls.

No excuse to not know the plane (automation).
No excuse to not monitor the basics and catch their mistake
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Asiana threatened to sue for immediate PR gains, but I don't recall them ever filing suit. The fallout was that a bunch of people were fired over a joke that was broadcast and that may not have presented the airline in the best light. The airline didn't do any better. Crashing your plane, damaging passengers' bodies and killing them does nothing to create a good public image.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear friend Terry Blosser, in a case like this, statements released by Asiana have no better credibility than that of a guy charged with murder seen by dozens of witnesses and he claims innocence !
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
NTSB already reported at the briefings contemporaneously with the on-site investigation right after the crash that:
1) there were multiple settings commanded (buttons pushed) affecting the auto-throttle setting in the moments before the crash
2) aircraft responded appropriately to all inputs commanded by the pilots.
3) apperently there were any mechanical problems with the plane
4) not said but easy to derive from released info, pilots pushed the wrong buttons

5) in addition to that, any experienced pilot will you that these pilots did not monitor airspeed and altitude on final approach.

So not only did the pilots make the mistake, but they also didn't monitor the basics, and so didn't catch their own mistake until it was too late.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Out of everything you have posted over the last few weeks, this is the most true statement that you have made. As myself and several others have said, It wouldn't matter if it was UAL or some other American Carrier, it was a simple mistake that anyone could have made, that had catastrophic results. The culture thing just compounds it. It is human nature to grasp at straws to shift blame and that is where Asiana is at now. They might make that sound believable to the non-flying public but not to this bunch
preacher1
preacher1 1
Sea rated and flat appearing water or not, in the preliminary NTSB report at an airport press conference, everything was working. By the pilots own admission the thought they were using auto throttles to maintain speed and they were not due to the wrong setting. They did not monitor speed. You go to slow, you get to low. You get to low, you crash. They did
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
No excuse not to monitor air speed indicator and altimeter. No matter what electronic marvel was broken or not there is no excuse for not flying the aircraft with an intact throttle and flight controls. It's like blaming a car accident on a non functioning cruise control. These "professionals" killed people and they should not be allowed to fly in the United States.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
* 3) apperently there WEREN'T any mechanical problems with the plane. (typo)
fritzjames
James Fritz 1
With a glassy water or flat water appearing approach you will think you are higher than you are if you look outside the aircraft, forward and toward the surface. PIC acknowledged they were too high at 4000ft so they probably thought the reduced power setting was correct in order to loose the necessary altitude so as too get back on the proper glide slope/path and at 500ft(airspeed 134kts) the PIC saw three red and one white PAPI lights and commands the IOE left seat pilot to pull back. Of course they did not monitor their airspeed and by visual observation of the water did not yet think they were getting way too low in spite of the PAPI observation and that they had time to increase power enough to make the runway. I assume the radar altimeter provides the same correct height above surface over water as it does over solid ground and the altitude call out of AGL automated voice system was announcing the correct hundred foot levels as they got closer to the runway so it is known that they were way slow in responding to the low and too slow situation for whatever reasons but I contend that they were convinced that they were still high enough do the false depth perception view that overrode in their minds the true situation even with the PAPI and alt call outs so that they only realized it when it was too late.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
ThanX my friend preacher1. May be this is the first time I said some thing in American English !
Perhaps, so far I was using the conventional Queen's English, which itself is not so common even in its native land, UK !
And that's the language I know !
Sadly , :-(
I have never defended or supported ANY action or statement given by Asiana or by any one else which in any way defends them. Without knowing their training schedule I condemned it on basis of first principles of Human Resource Management ! I guess CRM in your parlance .
Blame shifting can never help in such serious accidents(crimes) where the procedure of fixing culpability will run its course in such details that even the minutest error or deviation will be thoroughly analysed thread bare, before trial and during trial.
I have always held, they are guilty prima facie (even unequivocally). And deserve every punishment, legal and social.
The only rider comes by way of procedure of crime and punishment. That has to run its natural course. Like it or not.
ThanX again.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Even if there had been one malfunctioning aircraft system, it was still the pilots' responsibility to use every other functioning system to get the plane safely to land.

But even on that point, the NTSB was very clear. The plane did not malfunction. Every system worked exactly as expected, and performed every command of the pilots as commanded.

Now whether the pilots had their heads up their ass, and royally screwed up, that's an entirely separate issue to be considered.
preacher1
preacher1 1
May be a factor but fact remains they did not monitor altitude or airspeed. Basics
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Clearly a case of GIGO !
Ironically the machine performed the way she was asked to !
And hence the crash.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear friend James Fritz, a wonderful set of details and comparison.
I am sure, even sea plane pilots recheck instruments when faced with such a dilemma. It can happen the other way round also. Many of you pilots will have plenty of stories when instruments failed and human eye did all the tricks !
But these Asiana pilots failed like every one says with professional elaboration. They failed to land a good healthy a/c on a nice sunny day inspite of clear ATC instructions !
They failed in every area of flying, IFR as well as VFR as far as I can see.
Too much of automation ? It has been done or invented to augment human effort. As a double check and vice a versa.
So even in conditions like error in human perception where is the problem to rely or recheck through instrumentation ? Similarly in situations when visuals say differently than the instruments, recheck both and decide. That is what humans are there for. Even for drone flying ! No ?
By the way, if I remember correctly, in the earliest stages it was reported that one of the pilots claimed that he saw some 'bright light' and this too was discussed here at FA by our pilot friends in humourous as well as in professional way!
Could this be the kind of glassy water effect you are referring to ?
Even then they were to do both, visual as well as instrument flying .
And that is what every pilot is expected to do from departure gate to arrival gate. Every minute, every second.
This is what I am beginning to understand.
Right ?
preacher1
preacher1 1
CRM is short for CREW RESOURCES MANAGEMENT and was FAA Mandated in the early 80=s. In a nutshell it starting doing away with the "CAPTAIN IS GOD" attitude that was prevalent prior. Many other things but it basically puts everybody on a equal footing in the cockpit. There are a lot of other things in there as well. Captain is in charge but FO can speak or point out error. There is a fair synopsis in Wikipedia. Go to Google and type it in. It will come up. A lot of the younger pilots out there have never known that authoritarian world of which I speak. As I said, it was implemented in the early 80's but in reality it went into the 90's before it really started taking hold.
preacher1
preacher1 1
You're starting to understand now. LOL. The responsibility of a pilot is to fly the plane as best he can, with all that is available to him. That is aviation 101. They failed.
Doobs
Dee Lowry 1
Preacher...They didn't have basics! I could have flown that "Puppy" in!!!
And they had 4 pilots in the cockpit and non of them pulled the nose up and increased power to get beyond the wall. No Flying skills! They didn't monitor anything...they were landing on a wing and a prayer...they couldn't fly the airplane!
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
ThanX preacher1. I had done earlier. But did again.
I distinctly remember I asked you professionals long ago just post Asiana crash, about the technical functionality of the Right Seat(co pilot). Hence I held that in a case of crisis, flying matters and not seniority or right vs. left seat conflict, simple.
I am trained as a professional, by attitude also. I studied MBA and LlB by part time courses and was taught by teachers some of whom were younger to me ! I had no problem in learning from them.
That is how I have been groomed professionally.
Hence I can never pardon any pilot for not flying, unless incapacitated by physical reasons. Not psychological.
I am getting impatient to see how this aspect of flying vs. seniority is taken up , in the NTSB report and THEN during trial when Asiana will give their hollow and shallow 'defence' !
But, I can not go beyond a point in my views due to limited aviation knowledge. Using first principles is what I have been doing.
preacher1
preacher1 1
I'll be mighty surprised if culture does not come into play here. PF, although very junior and training on the 777, was senior to all others on board and nobody spoke up to him. That culture will override CRM any day of the week. CRM is so foreign to their culture it's not funny. PF made a serious mistake, if he was using AT's, in that he selected the wrong mode. Simple mistake and no big deal. The big deal was failure to monitor basics and catch that mistake. Ain't a one of us that haven't screwed up in some way over the course of a career but in most cases we have caught it and unscrewd it before it bit us.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
ThanX. Yes, a month ago 101 was not decipherable but today it is . Perhaps.
Flying has NO scope for errors. Pilots HAVE to deliver 100%, at all times.
And in the same vein ATCs too. A blink ! ... vroom .... Crash ! !
preacher1
preacher1 1
I don't think they prayed cause they didn't land well at all. LOL
Doobs
Dee Lowry 1
Culture has a lot to do with it, as I have posted when the incident occured. But really...are these so called pilots going to sit in their Jumseats and watch the B-777 clip the wall? They knew they were whay to low? Don't rely on AT or Auto-Land.
Obviously they need a lot more training. Like I have said before...there is no hands on flying anymore. We know why none of the pilots shouted out..."nose-up" and give it some "throttle"! So basic! So Culture. But to put the lives of those.onboard in harms way and do something stupid like that....I can't wrap my brain around that one.
preacher1
preacher1 1
101 is a slang relating to college courses as they are labeled in a higher number series regarding their level or intensity, the 101 being the basic of all.
preacher1
preacher1 1
By gab, there may be hope for you yet.LOL
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
During WW II in the pacific, some of the Islanders influenced by Cargo Cults seemed to believe the Americans had a deity they invoked whenever bad things happened.

They were frequently heard to invoke AHSHI*
Maybe the CVR picked up that invocation as part of the 'wing and....'
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Please, remember I am not incorrigible.
I have gone through instruction and training of three professions, not to mention different organisations during that journey !
;p
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
A severe clear blue bird kinda day. Needle ball and airspeed.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Seems some lack of communications, my friend preacher1.
I was and continue to be against class bias. Which so profusely exhibited here. It is needless to repeat the expressions. You ALL know it , it's in you, most of you .
All other comments based on assumptions etc. are passe !
preacher1
preacher1 1
If you have never been over there and around it, I doubt you can wrap your arms around it as it is so foreign to our way of life. Thing about it was a simple mistake easily rectified. AT kicked off as the AP was turned off as they set up for manual approach after the flight and not rearmed for manual use on landing. Simple fix but got missed and further compounded by not monitoring speed/altitude.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Now I see who sits on the back porch with you. Lol
preacher1
preacher1 1
Had the others lost their lives or been severely injured, it would have been thru the fault of PF and they would be absolved of any blame. That is just the way it is. Totally foreign to us. Here in the US, we screw up like that, we take the blame(hopefully)and any penalty, a little retrain and we go on. Life/Career ending deal over there.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Oh !
I get it Even if 101 meant 'basics' , this is appropriate in EVERY profession, job, vocation and activity.
And flying, no place for error, unlike so many other professions and jobs !
Ironically though .
preacher1
preacher1 1
Maybe to a degree, but, as you are, we are professionals in our field and nationality really matters not in this deal. It would not have mattered what nationality these pilots were. How such a simple mistake, so easily preventable, could have happened. The fact that they ere foreign pilots just added fuel to the fire and highlighted a lack of training for that group of pilots. Right or wrong, everybody has the "It can't happen to me" attitude.
Doobs
Dee Lowry 1
Preacher- I flew to Asia for 5 years and yes it is so foreign to our way of life. I just don't understand their mentality. Manual flying? VFR conditions? Granted they did not monitor their speed nor altitude. But I have to tell you... my grandmother could have put that puppy on the pavement!
preacher1
preacher1 1
We ain't that close yet but he is coming around. LOL
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
The answer you're looking for is that you have airlines (in that country) where a substantial portion of the pilots have a fear of flying manually (many pilots were hired without any piloting experience and were trained as plane monitors). The cultural import is that the need to save face and protect the status of the pilots is more important than making sure pilots that show deficiencies in their check rides should be expected to repeat their check ride to demonstrate the expected proficiency.

So the culture has been an essential component in covering up the pilot skills deficiencies. (Even after there were outside contractors to help correct the structural deficiencies in the airlines' pilot training, there has been resistance to accountability for pilot performance because they challenge the established cultural norm of saving face.)

That doesn't mean the culture is evil. Having respect for elders is fine. Resisting pilots' accountability for their skills, even elder pilots, not so much.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Simple Q dear preacher1. How do you associate nationality when an American pilot makes mistake/s ?
In similar vein, I repeat my often asked Q which to date remains unanswered ! If Asiana/Korean culture is bad and/or not commensurate with flying, how and why all other Korean flights are going on OK ? Before or after this crash ?
Being new and outsider, I am entitled to be ignorant and deserve to be enlightened !
I definitely find these crash causing pilots guilty on every possible count. Whether legally or socially.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
The pooch!
preacher1
preacher1 1
If he had simply REARMED the Auto Throttles, he would have too
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear friend PhotoFinish, in a man-machine connect what role culture plays ? Or in a GIGO equation where is the place for culture ? Unless culture is part the garbage !
Can my son not point out my mistake to me ? Yes, ofcourse, maintaining the father-son equation !
Like we do in lawyer-judge situation. In every other professional world.
Another example, professional class rooms with varied age groups on either side of the desk ! Teacher-student combine is same/similar all over the world.
Further, any cover up can not last long. Especially in the flying profession as I have understood now. In legal world, may be yes, but under specific conditions.
You all are entitled to your conditioned views on the matter related to class bias. And I will stick to mine. .
preacher1
preacher1 1
I just wonder as well what the aftermath would have looked like if he had tried landing at the old KaiTak. Sad part is, probably an otherwise decent career and one mistake takes it all away. Everybody talks about pilot pay and all that, but there is so much there that gets placed on their shoulders and 1 simple mistake takes you from the tower to the toilet so quickly.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
In the pic.
preacher1
preacher1 1
As with all nationalities, there is a difference in training and upbringing. As I said, this was a simple mistake, magnified by the catastrophic results. Could have happened to a lot of folks; it just happened to them and then the culture, lack of training, and different standards all came out in the conversation. I still maintain it was personal status in the cockpit rather than PNF carrying the authority as he should have. It reminds me of the progressive insurance commercial in which the guy goes after the juggling chain saws saying "I GOT THIS"
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Most of what you wrote makes nonsense and has no basis in what anyone else has written, so will be cast aside.

"Further, any cover up can not last long." That's the point you're not getting through your thick skull. It is part of te normal way of doing things. To change the norm will take actual intention to do so and effort to get it done.

It was pilots with thousands of hours who didn't have the proficiency to not let it crash (didn't know) and/or allowed the plane to crash despite knowing it was going to (knew but didn't act).

No mater how you slice it or dice it, that's awful.

You can call it cultural or discrimination, but in the US senior pilots with this amount of experience would have the proficiency to perform this landing almost with their eyes closed, no matter the race of the pilot.

At issue is the system. Either the system demands proficiency from all pilots, or allows senior pilots to slide to save face. You can't have both.

It is sad when many people with experience inside the airline and out, thinks of course it makes sense that it happened to senior pilots. That's an indictment if the system that wouldn't happen in the US. Senior pilots in the US are among the best pilots in the world.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear preacher1, 101 ... that's your quote. Ain't it ?
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Funny commercial. It is difficult to believe nobody noticed an airspeed that far off target. Hence, why didn't they say something? Could very well be exactly as you conjured. I think A.K. Is taking it as a slam on the culture instead of just a fact that may be pertinent. . People are just way too sensitive.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear friend preacher1 you have evaded the point.
These pilots blundered. And deserve no sympathy, no defense,whether legal or social. I am sure that their respective family members are also feeling the heat of their blunder in their local communities.
BUT my point is , IF all basics are common, like culture, training and standards why and how no body else(pilot) is committing similar blunders, even misses ? When every flight, every pilot is under radar ? For the present, I am not including their training system and the training institute which also are under the microscope for criminality and errors !
These particular pilots defaulted in every area of professionalism. No doubt.
BUT the rest of the pack as a whole ? No accross the board condemnation, please !
PLEASE !
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear friend WALLACE24, I am not being sensitive here.
I am being objective and seek the same from you knowledgeable persons (professionals) !
That's all I ask for ! Is it too much ? Ot unfair ?
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear friend PhotoFinish, thanX for the wonderful choice of words. You are really capable when it comes to language, in addition.
Clearly you are as incapable to read what I write or say, as I fail to read class baaed condemnation as no bias.
ThanX.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
No problem. So you agree the culture could have played a part in piss poor CRM. We're on the same page.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Different people interpret differently the words like good manners, politeness and decency !
Class bias ? We are on different page. Sadly.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
I'm going to give up. No bias here. Only stating that their culture keeps juniors in the pecking order from speaking up to a senior. We had a lot of that in flying in the US decades ago, as the old heads will tell you. When I went thru the Army flight school in 1969 it was not uncommon for the instructor to whack you on the helmet if he didn't like how you were doing a particular maneuver. Same thing. Pecking order. He could whack me but I couldn't whack him. Lol nor could I say anything if I didn't like his flying.
preacher1
preacher1 1
And as James says it was prevalent here. We all went thru it before CRM. Problem is their culture just magnifies it. I'm outa here. long day.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 0
Condemning Asia and Asians ad nauseum !
What a pity ! !
preacher1
preacher1 2
While the public may not see thru it, this group of pilots sees it for what it is, BS. As far as condemning Asians, not them personally but the culture, a culture where a loss of status or face can cause such disgrace, it can take you from the tower to the toilet quickly. Had any 2 other Asian pilots been in this same situation and this happened, it would be the same thing. There is no forgiveness or consoling over a mistake in that part of the world. It is just move over and let me have my turn. Go live there awhile and you will understand it. Without that, I doubt that you ever can.
tomkennedy
Tom Kennedy 2
While I agree that some of the comments can be badly put and seem biased against a group or culture, you have to remember this is the internet, where not everyone is a 'professional' writer. Having said that, when it comes to the cockpit, this problem of high and low ranking officers not communicating because of an outmoded hierarchical structure in some Asian and Middle Eastern cultures has been responsible for many fatal accidents. And that is something people who are interested in airline safety SHOULD be talking about.
fritzjames
James Fritz 4
NTSB may at some point find the pilots at fault, which is the truth, but the Korean airline will just say they are mistaken and continue their CYA/BS and dare anyone to anything more about it. Have to wonder what the parents of those three killed are going thru and how they are trying to cope....may hear something in that arena sometime in the future, eh?
preacher1
preacher1 3
Those Pilots are just trying to keep from having to go to the rice paddy. They are expendable from the airline standpoint and I imagine the airline is just keeping them around while they have too. NTSB comes out, pilot error, Pilots to rice paddy, airline fired them and got somebody better. Problem solved.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Ditto, my friend Tom Kennedy. The Asiana pilots made grave, no, very grave mistakes and deserve every possible punishment. Social and legal.
Even I as a passenger can visualise the graveness of errors committed . But all in good time. Every thing has a natural time to happen.
I do not find any new observation. Just repetition.
Yes, once the report is public, it will be worth to read different interpretations from experts. And debate will be real informative and educative !
But until then .... ?
What is happening to subsequent Asiana flights, safety wise ? If Asiana/Korean culture is erroneous in some ways then SOME kind of errors are inevitable and must become noticeable especially post the crash. Every flight and every pilot of Asiana must be under scanner in some form or the other. All over the world.
But what is the general observation ? Any abnormality reported, even unofficially ? As a grape vine ?
Yes, this portal is a sort of undeclared 'club' mostly visited by pilots but is there no limit to repeat/discuss same story again and again ? Without adding a new dimension ?
:-)
preacher1
preacher1 1
Regarding subsequent Asiana/oriental airline flights. I can guarantee you that they have all taken notice of this happening and can probably see it just as we do and have probably taken their individual steps to keep it from happening to them. They can see this issue that is now being raised as BS, just as we do.
preacher1
preacher1 1
It really is not a repeat. The Asiana pilots were the ones that came out with this BS. We are merely responding to something proffered as new.All the talk on the crash itself had pretty much died out.
fritzjames
James Fritz 1
Er.A.K Mittal. Check my recent 2nd lengthy comment above about the effects of a visual approach over water that has a near glassy or flat water appearance with very low/very small waves which causes the pilot to think he is higher than the true altitude.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
As far as I can recollect, this kind of bogey was raised at the initial stages and was well discussed here. Even I could understand a vee bit too. And that is exactly why I made the kind of remark I did.
Is it possible that this line of argument/excuse is now being released officially? And hence it is creating waves in the professional circles ? Again !
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
ThanX my friend James Fritz. I will. But I will need a few repeated readings to understand once, that too partly. Even if it is 10-15 % it would be fine with me.
:-)
preacher1
preacher1 1
You are correct in that it all was raised initially, and as I said, there probably would have been no further comment had the issue not been raised again. The difference here is just denouncing it for what it is, BS and CYA.
winga34
Cameron Mitchell -1
I guess we'll just have to let the NTSB figure it out and keep crazy theories to ourselves....
SootBox
SootBox 2
The NTSB is better at crazy theories anyway.
billykid05
billykid05 -2
Boys at Boeing ain't gonna like this story...but then again, they have to sell airplanes..Catch-22.
preacher1
preacher1 2
They'll get over it and it will be seen through for what it is, BS and CYA.