Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Fri Apr 26, 2024 11:35 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 56 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 8:39 pm
Posts: 359
This pilot was on "new guy" OE (new to airplane) with a check airman. There would have been no cultural "I cant question this Captain" because its the OE Check Airmans airplane (he is PIC) and its his job to do exactly that. This guy got slow and was already low before anyone woke up, by then it was too late. Lots of accidents lately stemming from experienced pilots forgetting how to fly and forcing an airplane to stall. Colgan, Air France etc etc.

_________________
Cessna 195


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 7:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 5:29 am
Posts: 115
Location: NAS Pax River
Why isn't anyone (media, NTSB briefs...) addressing the fact that the tower had communicated to these guys that "Emergency vehicles will be responding" prior to them crashing?!

Did they declare an emergency or what? Were they having power (engine) issues which may have lead to them being slow and unable to correct for that? Was something else giving them issues for them all (flight crew) to be "scope locked" on something else besides flying the bird?

I don't get why none of the so called "reporters" are asking these questions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 3:46 pm
Posts: 515
Location: CYYJ
AFWhite wrote:
Why isn't anyone (media, NTSB briefs...) addressing the fact that the tower had communicated to these guys that "Emergency vehicles will be responding" prior to them crashing?
Because that transmission was after the event.
See: http://www.liveatc.net/forums/atcaviati ... t-ksfo/15/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 5:29 am
Posts: 115
Location: NAS Pax River
WallyB wrote:
AFWhite wrote:
Why isn't anyone (media, NTSB briefs...) addressing the fact that the tower had communicated to these guys that "Emergency vehicles will be responding" prior to them crashing?
Because that transmission was after the event.
See: http://www.liveatc.net/forums/atcaviati ... t-ksfo/15/


roger that...watching the "news" they make it seem as if it is prior to. Surprised they were able to still transmit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 8:39 pm
Posts: 359
NTSB report says they were supposed to be at 137 kts. They were at 134 and idle thrust at 500 feet. They slowed to 103 before they tried to go around. That's slow for a turboprop let alone a 777.

_________________
Cessna 195


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 5:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 5:29 am
Posts: 115
Location: NAS Pax River
I gotta think, that with all that experience up front, something else had to have been going on with the aircraft for them to get that low and slow without anyone noticing just how off their sight picture was on a day when it is clear n' a million...sugar, in a heavy you can feel when you're too slow let alone all the eyes in the flight station to notice.

* I didn't type "sugar" just so ya know...lol


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 8:26 pm
Posts: 622
fotobass wrote:
Here's a question I have...

This was a pilot new to the 777, but well experienced outside of that. I find myself wondering what the supervisory pilots were focusing on, and why they didn't catch the issue before it became unrecoverable? If they're the ones who are most familiar with the aircraft, shouldn't they potentially have recognized the situation before the PIC?


Read the book Outliers by Malcom Gladwell...he covers the cultural problems that caused a rash of Korean Airlines accidents....maybe the same holds true for this airline.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:00 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:52 pm
Posts: 3401
Location: Wichita Falls, Texas, USA
jtramo wrote:
This pilot was on "new guy" OE (new to airplane) with a check airman. There would have been no cultural "I cant question this Captain" because its the OE Check Airmans airplane (he is PIC) and its his job to do exactly that. This guy got slow and was already low before anyone woke up, by then it was too late. Lots of accidents lately stemming from experienced pilots forgetting how to fly and forcing an airplane to stall. Colgan, Air France etc etc.


You're still putting a Western point of view on this. It is very difficult for us to understand how this works. Just because the guy is in training, he is in the LEFT seat. This is what has continually been the issue. The Captain sits in the left seat. Thus, whomever is in the left seat is the PIC and knows the answers. If he was "in training", he would have been in the right seat. That's how they do things. It is very difficult for most people to understand just how ingrained this is in many Asian societies. It took the Japanese a very long time and several major accidents before they were able to break the trend. The Koreans I'm unfortunately not sure that it's happened yet because there have been additional incidents that indicate it is still a problem beyond the accidents prior to this one that were proven to be caused by this issue.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 8:39 pm
Posts: 359
The "culture" does not recognize seat itself. Their culture is based on rank and seniority. In this case, besides a Chief Pilot, the Check Airman is senior regardless of seat, left right or in the Lav.

It will be interesting to see what went on here. Was the PF trying to do a flight idle "energy management" approach or did the check airman fall asleep? Either way, no one called for a go around until it was beyond too late. There was no call on the flight deck that went unanswered that would suggest someone was ignored.

_________________
Cessna 195


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 12:01 am 
Offline
Been here a long time
Been here a long time

Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am
Posts: 11281
This whole thing is just getting worse! Talk about incompetence... They pointed the aircraft towards the runway with the engines at idle and no speed control because they never turned on the autothrottle and never bothered to check their airspeed. I don't know how these guys even drove to the airport without crashing. :evil:

http://news.yahoo.com/ntsb-pilots-relie ... 06710.html

Asiana should cease operations immediately in my opinion, or at a minimum not be allowed to fly into the US.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 7:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 691
Location: Ohio
Everything that comes out about this makes the command crew look worse and worse. The cabin crew, on the other hand, in spite of missing several of their number, a few being pinned underneath one of the emergency slides that inflated within the cabin, and several others that did not work, id a masterful job of evacuating the aircraft.

I will add the caveat that they waited an additional 90 seconds after the aircraft came to a stop and asked the PIC before beginning the evacuation.

_________________
"Anyway, the throat feels a bit rough...the legs have gone...but I'm still able to chant, so let's get going."

Joe Strummer, 1999


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 7:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 3:46 pm
Posts: 515
Location: CYYJ
fotobass wrote:
Everything that comes out about this makes the command crew look worse and worse. The cabin crew, on the other hand, in spite of missing several of their number, a few being pinned underneath one of the emergency slides that inflated within the cabin, and several others that did not work, did a masterful job of evacuating the aircraft.

I will add the caveat that they* waited an additional 90 seconds after the aircraft came to a stop and asked the PIC before beginning the evacuation.
*The "they" who waited was the pilot; the lead FA asked about evacuating immediately the plane came to rest. The PIC meanwhile announced that everyone should remain in their seats!

Talk about denial. You've just had the mother of all tail strikes, done a 360 ground loop and a quarter barrel roll, the plane is on its belly and you don't think it necessitates evacuating. Boggle.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 9:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:37 am
Posts: 215
Location: Tx
Asiana Airlines just released the names of the crew in the B-777
accident in SFO.

Pilot-in-Command: Captain Sum Ting Wong
Line Check Airman: Captain Wi Tu Lo
First 'Relief' Officer: Hoe Lee Phuk
2nd Backup Officer: Bang Ding


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 9:45 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:43 pm
Posts: 1168
Location: Marietta, GA
fotobass wrote:
Everything that comes out about this makes the command crew look worse and worse.


I'm not making excuses, but as they say, an accident is a chain of events.

A slam dunk approach.
Pull the engines to idle.
Misengage autothrottles (oops).
Lose situational awareness (oops)
Regain it too late (oops).

Every accident - airline or otherwise, looks pretty much like this. So easy to avoid in hindsight, but it happened because all of those 0.001% chances lined up and resulted in an accident. The other 10,000 times those pilots landed, the checks and balances worked. But not this time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 10:38 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:52 pm
Posts: 3401
Location: Wichita Falls, Texas, USA
Only problem - any "slam dunk" approach was crew-initiated. I listened to the ATC recording on LiveATC and watched the radar track on FlightRadar24 and they were put in the sequence at the same spot as everyone else at the same altitude. The only indication of trouble was when the tower said something just before impact. If they had to idle the throttles to get on glidepath, they just busted the stabilized approach and should have gone around at that point anyway, so yet again, it goes back against the crew and no one else.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 56 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group