Plane Crash in San Francisco

[*_ash_*]

 

My thoughts go out to who ever bore the brunt of this, America does not have good luck as far as planes are concerned.

 

Click on this and scroll to hover over all USA. It doesn't matter when you click on it, you should get the point.

 

-

 

Looking at the footage (which someone just showed me, and it made me look in here) - asked if anyone survived, I have put it at 50/50 or worse. 1 dead is incredible.

[Vague_Boy]

America does not have good luck as far as planes are concerned.

 

By the 1980s, almost half of the total flying in the world took place in the U.S., and today the domestic industry operates over 10,000 daily departures nationwide.

 

LINK

 

10,000 flights a day.

 

Apparently, even with the 39 airlines with the poorest safety record, the odds of being killed are 1 in 1.5 million [LINK]

 

Meanwhile, an average of 1,900 people die on the UK's roads every year [LINK]

 

32,000 on U.S. roads every year [LINK]

[Rupert_Baehr]

Boeing..., America does not have good luck as far as planes are concerned.

 

Believe it or not, Most airlines in the developed world do not rely on 'luck'

[melthebell]

Believe it or not, Most airlines in the developed world do not rely on 'luck'

oh i dunno, these days with all the cuts being imposed around the world, we may go back to the days of icarus and be held together with not much

 

stay away from the sun

[dosxuk]

Believe it or not, Most airlines in the developed world do not rely on 'luck'

 

Unfortunately, several do rely on using aids to flying and not their own eyeballs, such that when said aids are not available they don't know what to do, so it could be said that the safe landings they have carried out have been down to luck.

 

That said, numerous countries have rules which do not allow the use of runways for turbojet aircraft without said aids being available - this would have meant SFO closing two of it's runways or providing temporary facilities [ they have adjusted the touchdown point to give better underrun protection, and have decommissioned the old ILS and PAPIs, and are currently in the process of installing new equipment - in the meantime both 28L & 28R have no landing aids].

[Rupert_Baehr]

Landing in the Undershoot (particularly if there's a runway lip) tends not to be very good for an aircraft.

 

The aircraft landed 375ft short of the planned touchdown point. Most pilots, I suggest, can carry out a visual approach in good weather.

 

This picture shows where the aircraft landed and shows the displaced Touchdown point markings, together with the 'Piano Keys'

 

I've no doubt the Aircraft Captain is going to have a lot of explaining to do.

[dosxuk]

Most pilots, I suggest, can carry out a visual approach in good weather.

 

Obviously you're right, but from what is being said by people with experience of the issues on PPRuNe, the culture of several of asian airlines leads to less than ideal people being sat at the pointy end, and an over reliance on the computers to fly the aircraft means that when it comes to actually flying the planes by hand, many of them are lacking skills which should be expected.

 

There has been a spate of high energy failed landings this year.

is a pretty good example of how not to carry out an approach.

 

This picture shows where the aircraft landed and shows the displaced Touchdown point markings, together with the 'Piano Keys'

 

This image is pretty good too. Shows how short an amount of space the plane took to stop.

 

I've no doubt the Aircraft Captain is going to have a lot of explaining to do.

 

Along with the other 3 crew in the flight deck who should have noticed something was going wrong. But if it comes out to be an issue with the approach, I would be surprised if things at large, busy airports like SFO don't change with regards to removing all approach aids.

 

From another pilot landing at SFO (who at least had the PAPIs):

 

I departed SFO a few hours before this tragic accident in a heavy jet.

 

Our approach to SFO was 'interesting' to say the least. It was the usual, over the field and downwind at 11000 ft, full speedbrake and lots of flap to get down before the inevitable early turn to base.

Cleared for a visual on 28L maintaining own separation from an A320 joining visually on 28R.

High ROD to catch up with the ideal vertical approach path while turning final while watching the other jet.

28L LOC transmitting so followed that, back to Vref+5 early to avoid overtaking the A320 on 28R but end up alongside.

Below 1000ft the (local) A320 flying visually on the right wanders off the centreline towards us. TCAS TA goes bananas but RA inhibited below 800ft. We quickly discuss going around before he corrects back towards his centreline. Look forwards to see four whites on the PAPI's (I had been concentrating looking right at the VERY close A320 for approx 10 secs).

Reduce thrust, set 1000ft ROD, regain profile by 200ft, flare and touch down.

 

All this after a ten hour flight when it's past 4am on my body clock. How nice it would have been to fly a nice lazy ILS instead.

 

It's an accident waiting to happen, and it did.

[buck]

Boeing 777 jet crash lands at San Francisco airport

 

A passenger jet has crashed at San Francisco airport, with black smoke seen billowing from the wreckage.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/10164727/Boeing-777-jet-crash-lands-at-San-Francisco-airport.html

 

My thoughts go out to who ever bore the brunt of this, America does not have good luck as far as planes are concerned.

This is almost certainly a pilot error crash. The pilots were not American. The aircraft was a Boeing 777, which has a very good safety record, but will not tolerate being slammed into the runway. I hope I don't have to go into British Airways history of crashes, or especially Russia's. Try being a little less Anti, it gets a bit boring donchaknow.

 

---------- Post added 07-07-2013 at 12:06 ----------

 

Unfortunately, several do rely on using aids to flying and not their own eyeballs, such that when said aids are not available they don't know what to do, so it could be said that the safe landings they have carried out have been down to luck.

 

That said, numerous countries have rules which do not allow the use of runways for turbojet aircraft without said aids being available - this would have meant SFO closing two of it's runways or providing temporary facilities [ they have adjusted the touchdown point to give better underrun protection, and have decommissioned the old ILS and PAPIs, and are currently in the process of installing new equipment - in the meantime both 28L & 28R have no landing aids].

As it happens, it was a perfectly clear day at SFO when they were landing. There was no need to auto land at all. With one pilot PIC doing the landing, the other handling the radio and keeping an eye out, the landing should have been a piece of cake. Triple sevens are considered among the very best of the heavies flying today. Somebody screwed up, and it cost the lives of two 16 year old Chinese schoolgirl. That's tragedy enough for me, but everyone else was very lucky indeed. Many years ago I was scheduled to fly from Montreal to Toronto on a weekly business meeting. The aircraft was an Air Canada Douglas stretched 8 stopping at Toronto on its way to Los Angeles. As it happens, I was delayed and missed the flight. As it was landing the first officer pulled the air brake before the plane touched the runway. It hit the ground so hard that the starboard outer engine fell off. The captain tried to get airborne, got to about 500 feet before it stalled and nosed in. No survivors. One of my colleagues at the airport said the place was in horror, people cancelling flights everywhere.

[dosxuk]

As it happens, it was a perfectly clear day at SFO when they were landing. There was no need to auto land at all.

 

I'd change that to "there should be no need to auto land", but unfortunately some carriers and their crew are iffy at doing what we expect them to be perfectly capable of.

 

As I said above, if this turns out to be another mangled approach and landing, with poor decisions from the cockpit being the primary cause, it's only one of many to happen in 2013. Some have been lucky and only caused superficial damage, others have been less lucky. Common factor so far seems to be an unwillingness to go around when (if?) they've identified they're not going to get on the ground properly.

 

Interestingly, this flight did go-around the previous day. Whether this was traffic based or not being happy with the approach I don't know.

 

Important thing, even if it is identified that the crew are the primary cause, is not to avoid looking into what other lessons can be learned and what factors added to the accident. There should be serious questions asked about why there were no landing aids available on the runway (not just auto land / ILS) if the lack is identified as a factor.

[buck]

I'd change that to "there should be no need to auto land", but unfortunately some carriers and their crew are iffy at doing what we expect them to be perfectly capable of.

 

As I said above, if this turns out to be another mangled approach and landing, with poor decisions from the cockpit being the primary cause, it's only one of many to happen in 2013. Some have been lucky and only caused superficial damage, others have been less lucky. Common factor so far seems to be an unwillingness to go around when (if?) they've identified they're not going to get on the ground properly.

 

Interestingly, this flight did go-around the previous day. Whether this was traffic based or not being happy with the approach I don't know.

 

Important thing, even if it is identified that the crew are the primary cause, is not to avoid looking into what other lessons can be learned and what factors added to the accident. There should be serious questions asked about why there were no landing aids available on the runway (not just auto land / ILS) if the lack is identified as a factor.

I wonder if you would agree that so much attention being paid to flying aids is creating ATPs who are incapable of flying when the aids are not working properly. The old military

route to the airlines is going away, and at least you could say that air force pilots who survived the dangers of training and action became very good at pilotage. While the simulator is a very good tool, a new pilot does not feel the danger inherent in a real emergency. It costs a good deal of money to learn to fly at transport level, and the pay for a first officer is a joke. Its a wonder anyone does it.