It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Reports: 777 crash lands at San Francisco

page: 20
<< 17  18  19    21 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 10 2013 @ 10:05 PM
reply to post by _Del_

The fire crew has documents for every type of plane regarding where they can do whatever. [OK, my phrasing could be better here.]

You may recall they took a "technical order" offline when the powers that be noticed it revealed a lot of information about Air Force One. [Please don't lecture me that AF1 is whatever plane POTUS is on. I'm trying to avoid inside baseball talk. VC-25 for those nitpickers.]

technical order that you shouldn't see

posted on Jul, 10 2013 @ 10:45 PM
reply to post by Zaphod58

Agreed. I'm not a pilot but I have landed flight simulator planes and even I know that airspeed is one of the most important things to watch on landing, so even if the autothrottle failed, that doesn't get them off the "pilot error" hook for not watching airspeed, but I doubt it failed.

Originally posted by SheopleNation

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by SheopleNation

Because the new fire trucks have a metal hose that can punch through the side of the plane and spray water directly into the cabin to fight an onboard fire.

Oh wow, sounds real brilliant, a hose that can punch through an aircrafts shell? I imagine that it would fracture someone's skull or at the very least blind them. Nice try, but = Epic fail bro.

Yuh know, it's nice to believe that one has all the answers to everything, but you just proved that is not always the case. LMAO! ~$heopleNation
Actually I was concerned about the claim about it punching though the side, but when I looked it up, I found a diagram of it punching though the top, not the side. Punching though the top seems a lot safer, plus it apparently has some kind of flange on it to prevent it from intruding too far into the cabin, so I felt a lot better about the safety of it after looking up the details.

Originally posted by _Del_
It doesn't seem like it'd be too difficult to program an exception at low altitudes, although generally FLCH wouldn't be used at low altitude because you'd switch modes (G/S, V/S, HOLD, SPD, whatever modes the 777 has available) at that point.
Maybe they should get some kind of warning if they descend through a certain altitude in FLCH mode, as a reminder to switch to another mode if that's what's needed? I thought about the low altitude exception also, maybe they didn't foresee a need for it or thought it would create a problem with engines suddenly going full throttle right at landing, when you not only want no thrust, but you're about to engage thrust reversers?

posted on Jul, 10 2013 @ 10:50 PM
reply to post by SheopleNation

You're right, they might put someone's eye out, so it's much better to let 301 people burn to death than to risk fracturing someone's skull, or putting their eye out.

Meet the Oshkosh Striker, introduced over 10 years ago, and in use at over 200 airports, and military bases around the world. And just in case you're too lazy to click the link, let me just point this part out especially.

If fire erupts inside the hull and responders can’t enter on foot, the Striker’s operator can use the “Snozzle” to puncture the aircraft’s skin, and then spray foam or dry chemical agents into the cabin. The 56-inch piercing nozzle is mounted at the end of a retractable 65-foot roof-mounted boom. The Snozzle can also provide cover to escaping passengers by raining a protective “water umbrella” over the plane’s emergency slides at 250 gallons per minute.

Here, even a little video of it in action for you.

So tell me again how it's an epic fail there "bro".

Yuh know, it's nice to believe that one knows more than everyone else, but you just proved that is not always the case.

A little free advice for you. If you are going to come into a thread, especially on something that someone has been involved with almost their entire life, and tell them that they don't know what they're talking about, you might want to make sure that YOU do, and can prove them wrong.
edit on 7/10/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 10 2013 @ 11:27 PM
Now this is interesting.

The lead flight attendant entered the cockpit after it came to a stop off Runway 28 Left at San Francisco International airport and asked the flight crew what she should do.

"The flight crew told the flight attendant not to initiate an evacuation," Hersman says.

Instead, the lead flight attendant announced to the passengers to remain seated. In the economy class cabin, however, another flight attendant could see a fire on the No. 2 engine, tucked next to the fuselage around Row 10 of the passenger cabin. He sent another flight attendant to the front to explain to the flight crew that the passengers needed to evacuate, Hersman says.

Videos reviewed by the NTSB show that the passenger doors were not opened and the slides deployed until 90sec after the Boeing 777-200ER with 307 passengers and crew came to a stop

The pilot has also said he was temporarily blinded by a bright light as they passed through 500 feet.

Federal crash investigators revealed Wednesday that the pilot flying Asiana Airlines flight 214 told them that he was temporarily blinded by a bright light when 500 feet above the ground.

Deborah Hersman, chairwoman of the National Transportation Safety Board, said it wasn't clear what could have caused the problem. Asked specifically whether it could have been a laser pointed from the ground, Hersman said she couldn't say what caused it.

"We need to understand exactly what that is," Hersman said. "It was a temporary issue."

posted on Jul, 11 2013 @ 02:23 PM

Originally posted by Zaphod58
A little free advice for you. If you are going to come into a thread, especially on something that someone has been involved with almost their entire life, and tell them that they don't know what they're talking about, you might want to make sure that YOU do, and can prove them wrong.
edit on 7/10/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

Oh don't get your feathers all ruffled bro, I didn't say that you don't know what you're talking about, I said that you don't know everything. I am sure it came across as rude, but I meant it in a joking manner.

Anyway, I still think at that pressure I would not want to take it to the face and surely not an infant. However as a earlier poster pointed out, I would take it over being burned alive any day. Thing looks effective though. ~$heopleNation

posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 01:13 AM

I'm still amazed at how well the fuselage held together.
Also no wonder the people at the back were injured / killed.
edit on 12/7/13 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 02:00 AM
reply to post by C0bzz

That animation doesn't match the ADS-B data. Here is the link again:
AAR214 ads-b via

posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 08:21 AM

The structure of the Boeing 777-200ER performed mostly as designed in the double-impact with the runway during the 6 July Asiana Airlines crash in San Francisco, says Deborah Hersman, chairman of the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).

The incident that claimed the lives of two passengers onboard put the first blemish on the 777 family's 18-year service history without a fatal accident, but so far the NTSB has found no reason to fault the performance of the structural design of the twin-engined widebody.

In particular the NTSB's on-site team has verified that the landing gear and the fuel tanks performed as their designers intended in such a crash, Hersman says.

The main landing gear struck the lip of the sea wall as the pilots of Flight 214 came in too low and slow on the approach to Runway 28 Left. Instead of getting jammed into the fuselage, the gear broke cleanly off the aircraft.

posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 09:16 PM
I'll just leave this here.

posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:19 PM

I would think it might be another of the Chinese girls headed for camp.

A third person, identified as a minor girl, died from injuries suffered in the Asiana Airlines crash last week, hospital officials said.

She had been in critical condition at the Bay Area hospital since the July 6 crash, San Francisco General spokeswoman Rachael Kagan said

The hospital didn't release any additional information about her -- including her name, age or ethnicity -- in keeping with her parents' wishes.

posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:14 PM
I came to post that, but you saw and posted before I did, How many others are critical at this point I wonder.

posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 02:36 PM
reply to post by research100

Two more adults are still critical.

Liu Yipeng, travelling with the group going to camp was the third victim. Six people remained hospitalized, with two of the adults in critical.
edit on 7/13/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 03:31 PM
There were two calls to abort the landing, although both would have probably been too late. The first occurred three seconds before impact, the second 1.5 before impact. The NTSB has said the light that blinded the pilot temporarily could have been a reflection of the sun and didn't play a role.

posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 07:44 PM
Runway 28L reopened after repairs completed.

Officials at San Francisco International Airport re-opened runway 28L, the site of the Asiana Flight 214 crash, for full operations at 5:05 p.m. Friday and said all airlines would resume normal schedules immediately.

The National Transportation Safety Board, which is investigating the crash, released the runway on Wednesday night and the airfield on Thursday. Since then, airport staff had been working to clear and repair runway 28L.

The fuselage of the airplane was removed from the crash site early Friday and transported to a remote section of the airport for temporary storage. The airframe will be moved to new and permanent location sometime within the next two weeks.

Meantime, back on runway 28L, repair work had begun even before they hauled the plane away.

In the past 24 hours, airport crews picked up debris, cleaned the grass, repaired electronics, repainted lines, and repaired deep gouges the plane left in the asphalt as it came grinding in.

"The deepest gouges were eight inches deep," airport director John Martin said. "One foot by one foot scrapes over a hundred feet long."

Repairs consumed more than 1,000 tons of asphalt. The total damage in dollars is unknown, but Asiana Airlines will pay the bill.

Officials say the Federal Aviation Administration conducted a final inspection of the runway before clearing it for reopening, including special flyover flights Friday afternoon.


posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 12:41 PM
The South Korean government is auditing Asiana, investigating training, and safety procedures.

The three-week probe, which started on 14 July, will review Asiana's safety management system and look at whether the airline violated any rules in its training, maintenance and operations, Man-Heui Chang, director of flight standards at the civil aviation bureau tells Flightglobal Pro.

"We need to review the airline safety system to find out whether there's something that needs to be improved and enhanced," Chang says. "We will look at its operations, maintenance, safety management, cabin training and so on."

Chang adds that should investigations reveal a need for changes to the country's aviation rules and regulations, it will be done "as soon as possible".

The transport ministry has also sent out a "precautionary message" to other airlines in the country, urging them to strengthen their safety measures, Chang says.

posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 06:33 PM
Not a lot to be said about this one.

posted on Jul, 18 2013 @ 06:47 AM
The pilots are reported hospitalized in Korea after being examined upon their return. It's reported they're suffering from psychological trauma, and physical injuries related to the crash. They also apparently fear prosecution in Korea.

posted on Dec, 11 2013 @ 10:44 AM
And the pilots screwed up worse than we thought it appears.

Shortly after passing through 4,800 feet the crew selected "Vertical Speed Mode" on the autopilot with a descent rate of 1,000 feet per minute, and put the throttles into "Speed Mode" set for 172 knots. That wasn't enough for the aircraft to maintain glideslope.

At 5.2 miles from the runway, at 2,400 feet and 175 knots, they set the altitude to 3,000 feet to prepare to go around if necessary, which is normal procedure. At 1,600 feet and 3 miles, they activated the Flight Level Change switch, which caused the aircraft to attempt to climb to 3,000 feet as commanded.

The pilot flying responded by deactivating the autopilot and pulling the throttles to idle, which put the autothrottle to "Hold", and disconnected it. The speed was then set to 137 knots, and the throttles left at idle, but the autothrottle was no longer controlling speed.

Lee Kang Kuk, the pilot flying at the time, told investigators he was "very concerned" about landing the plane visually that day. The ILS was down for maintenance, so there was no aid to give them glideslope information. He only had 45 hours in the 777, and last landed at SFO in 2004.

Another captain that flew with him two days prior said he did not perform well on that flight. He said he was "not well organized or prepared". Kuk was an experienced pilot in other types, but was just transitioning to the 777 at the time of the crash.

He apparently raised the issue of being nervous about the approach during flight planning. He also told investigators that as he realized the approach was off, he might "fail his flight and would be embarrassed."
edit on 12/11/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 11 2013 @ 02:58 PM
reply to post by Zaphod58

The USA Today website has what they claim is new video of the crash.

posted on Dec, 11 2013 @ 02:59 PM
reply to post by gariac

It is new. This was caught by airport cameras and is much closer than the video that was released at the time of the accident.

new topics

top topics

<< 17  18  19    21 >>

log in