Asiana Crash Landing At Sfo Saturday

[Don Hudson]

Rich;

I concur with what you've written in response to Maverick.

Maverick, on 06 Jul 2013 - 7:25 PM, said:

Seriously? You guys are saying that they could have muffed an approach on a day like today?
What transport category pilot would need an ILS in CAVU conditions with an 8 knot wind?

1. Very seriously.
2. Yes.
3. More than you want to know about. It's a scary world there! Based on what I've seen during my travels, I'm surprised we haven't reached the predicted rate of one hull loss every week. The increased use of ILS instead of VOR or NDB approaches has probably helped the situation, but take away the ILS and watch the pandemonium ensue.

Maverick - it's both better, and worse today than when pilots were actually permitted and encouraged to fly, (vice "program") their aircraft.

No one knows yet what went on with this aircraft or the cockpit crew prior to the aircraft striking the rocks at the runway threshold.

We'll see what this one is but I strongly suspect that the PF simply got too low and hit the tail, not realizing that, ILS or visual, for a widebody there is a minimum threshold crossing height so that the rest of the airplane behind the cockpit clears everything before the runway threshold.

rozar, re, "I prefer to manually fly the approach (AP/ATHR off) in that scenario because I find using automation to be quite a bit more work and difficult to do smoothly on a visual."

I discovered a long time ago that there were A320 pilots out there who actually tried to program the Stadium arrival onto 31 at LGA! I thought, my god has it come to that?! How could someone hand over so much fun to a bloody computer? Then I realized that it actually "made sense" to a different generation of pilots who had been led to believe that the term "competency" referred to how well one used the FMGEC and the autoflight system and that manual skills were either assumed, or no longer primary.

Sad.

[JL]

Google Earth/Flight Aware graphic comparing previous Asiana approach to today's. Not too sure about the accuracy, but interesting none the less... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BOhIDCWCUAApHFV.jpg:large

[cp fa]

From my network of friends.....it was a training flight. Upgrade Captain flying.

Was he new on the aircraft, or just changing seats?

[Super 80]

Would autothrottle still be employed when landing without ILS?

[B75/76]

Would autothrottle still be employed when landing without ILS?

Yes it could. The A/T on the 777 will work from the take-off roll through to the flair on landing regardless of the approach flown: ILS, RNAV, visual etc. with or without the A/P.

It is Boeings recommendation to use it for all phases of flight.

[B75/76]

... I prefer to manually fly the approach (AP/ATHR off) in that scenario because I find using automation to be quite a bit more work and difficult to do smoothly on a visual. ...

With the high levels of automation on today's airplanes, they are indeed marvels of technology. The challenge sometimes, however, is selecting the appropriate 'level' for the circumstance at hand.

[blues deville]

Posted Yesterday, 10:31 PM

Google Earth/Flight Aware graphic comparing previous Asiana approach to today's. Not too sure about the accuracy, but interesting none the less... https://pbs.twimg.co...ApHFV.jpg:large

It's amazing to see what information is available on the Internet.

Looking at both profiles, you can see the July 6th approach shallows out at the last segment. To me that might indicate an incorrect or late selection of altitude in the MCP window. Two miles prior the the FAF, you must select MDA and then after passing the FAF and 300' below, you select the MA altitude. As I mentioned earlier, a VNAV approach is not a difficult task, but it is something not done very often. Two critical items are altitude selection and speed intervention.

From the B777 FCTM...

"Final Approach using VNAV Approaching intercept heading, select flaps 5 and ensure LNAV or other appropriate roll mode is armed or engaged. Approaching the FAF (approximately 2 NM), select gear down and flaps 20 and adjust speed. Set the DA(H) or MDA(H) in the MCP altitude window, select VNAV, and ensure VNAV PTH and appropriate roll mode is annunciated. Use VNAV speed intervention to control speed".

[blues deville]

Was he new on the aircraft, or just changing seats?

Unknown. However, at my airline the sequence to 777 Captain can be a 15-20 year process and is normally:

1) FO B737 (hired through cadet program or former Korean Air Force/Navy)

2) FO B777/A330/B747

3) CA B737

4) CA B777

[inchman]

Here goes.... I can see the NTSB calling for landing threshold safety zones (LTSZ) so that there is a 1000 ft displaced threshold on EVERY runway... until someone lands short of that or overruns because they took some of his runway away for the LTSZ ... then they'll add another thou to each end.

Soon we'll need 20,000 ft of land to build a runway with an LDA/TODA of 11,000 feet.

[DEFCON]

Too low & too slow? If so, this crash will provide another demonstration of an industry wide problem; there's far too much dependency on too many gadgets. Today's pilot is required to be a skilled typist rather than an actual pilot that's capable of competently hand flying an aircraft.

[blues deville]

Too low & too slow? If so, this crash will provide another demonstration of an industry wide problem; there's far too much dependency on too many gadgets. Today's pilot is required to be a skilled typist rather than an actual pilot that's capable of competently hand flying an aircraft.

Definitely too low........and probably idle thrust but not too slow. Unstabillized? Absolutely!

Industry wide problem? I know what you're saying but a good training department can teach pilots what's a need to have and what's nice to have and when to being doing them.

[Johnny]

We all know what will happen "The System" will not fix the training problem. If the ILS is down, operations suspended - problem solved.

The vast majority of North American Pilots can do a Visual Approach, in any Aircraft, on any day - using the "Mark One Eyeball."

A skill that has been deliberately destroyed by the Bean Counters that want, something - for nothing.

Don't forget the modern day Airline Mission Statement; "Safety First - Unless it Costs Money."

[Don Hudson]

Actually inchman, I think SFO, and the FAA are going to wear some of this; SFO ATC for their famous habit for issuing slam-dunk approach clearances, and the FAA for permitting the shutdown of all approach aids. What is this?...SMS for ATC as well? Is there no independent non-conflict-of-interest oversight anymore?

[blues deville]

Actually inchman, I think SFO, and the FAA are going to wear some of this; SFO ATC for their famous habit for issuing slam-dunk approach clearances, and the FAA for permitting the shutdown of all approach aids. What is this?...SMS for ATC as well? Is there no independent non-conflict-of-interest oversight anymore?

Slam-dunk approach vectoring seems to be the norm for ATC in the US. I'm not sure why that is. I find Canadian controllers to be more considerate when vectoring you onto an ILS.

[JL]

Too low & too slow? If so, this crash will provide another demonstration of an industry wide problem; there's far too much dependency on too many gadgets. Today's pilot is required to be a skilled typist rather than an actual pilot that's capable of competently hand flying an aircraft.

It's difficult to make this rationalization when you do not know the number of hull loss accidents that were prevented because of automation. The only reference we have to this notion is the overall accident rate...which is doing down. I believe that loss of control accidents (I would classify this as a loss of control) have eclipsed CFIT as the number one reason for hull loss accidents in transport category aircraft, but given the number of movements worldwide, the current technology and way of using that technology is contributing to the low accident rate.

[dagger]

Stupid question from a non-pilot: With CCTV ubiquitous in post 9/11 society, do major airports not have runway cams that would provide a visual record of the initial strike, the breakup of the plane, etc?

[Don Hudson]

JL, re "It's difficult to make this rationalization when you do not know the number of hull loss accidents that were prevented because of automation."

Yes, I think so and it's a point well worth remembering. We just have to get the balance right and that is tough work in a financially-challenged world in a western neoliberal economy.

[inchman]

Actually inchman, I think SFO, and the FAA are going to wear some of this; SFO ATC for their famous habit for issuing slam-dunk approach clearances, and the FAA for permitting the shutdown of all approach aids. What is this?...SMS for ATC as well? Is there no independent non-conflict-of-interest oversight anymore?

I agree, Don. Especially in a situation with no approach slope aids, a slam-dunk approach is just asking for trouble especially when coupled with an increasingly dependent-on-technology pilot force.

It's been a while since I've been into the U.S. But I recall lots of approaches high on downwind with extensive use of spoilers to get into the slot. Dallas and Denver come to mind along with SFO.

Once place where I found that not to be the case, ironically, was ORD. Even with the amount of traffic they move, they always seemed to turn me onto final right on the glideslope without any use of spoilers.

And quality communication seems to have gone by the wayside, too. I'm not sure if it is internet audio clipping, but I found it difficult to understand a lot of the controller's transmissions on the tapes from this accident. Not that crummy communication led to this particular accident, but may be, perhaps, a indicator of expediency trumping "safe and efficient" within air traffic control systems.

[blues deville]

That's a good question, especially in this case. If the trainee was converting from the B737, the sight-picture ............

FYI. Asiana does not operate 737s. Their single aisle fleet consists of A320/321s. This may have been a conversion back to the 777 after flying Airbus for a number of years. However, one report says the second pilot had only 43 hours on type so perhaps new to the 777 as Captain.

Some details of the training Captain and his trainee.

"The pilot's name is Lee Jeong-min, and (he is) a veteran pilot with long experience," said the official, who requested anonymity. "Our investigation committee is looking into the accident in San Francisco," he said.

Lee, in his late 40s, had 12,387 hours of flying experience, including 3,220 hours on the Boeing 777, according to the Transport Ministry in Seoul.

A second pilot on board the aircraft, Lee Kang-kook, had 9,793 hours flying experience and 43 hours on the 777."

[props2you]

Trying to imagine what the UA Captain and FO in this photo must have been thinking as this unfolded uncomfortably close to them:

http://images.politico.com/global/2013/07/06/130706_sfo_aerial_2_ap_605_978.jpg

[blues deville]

Trying to imagine what the UA Captain and FO in this photo must have been thinking as this unfolded uncomfortably close to them:

http://images.politico.com/global/2013/07/06/130706_sfo_aerial_2_ap_605_978.jpg

I think they were taxiing out for departure. Looks like they turned around to return to their gate but probably can't pass the debris field.

[Johnny]

Slam-dunk approach vectoring seems to be the norm for ATC in the US. I'm not sure why that is. I find Canadian controllers to be more considerate when vectoring you onto an ILS.

I have always assumed (maybe incorrectly) that this was due to stringent Noise Abatement, keeping the traffic at a high altitude over the populated areas?

Further part of the modern day; Monkeys Running The Zoo.

[J.O.]

It's rare for pilots to do airborne flight training these days. Simulators are virtually all "Level D" which permits the company to do all technical training in the box and line training and a line check during revenue flights.

[Guest ACSideStick]

Regularly scheduled flight at Air Canada. Can't speak for other airlines.

[cp fa]

I just want to clarify for the non pilots reading this, the progression from simulator to line training is not automatic. You have to pass a transport authority approved check ride in the simulator before you get recommended for line indoctrination training and the final line check.

If I have this wrong, or this is not the case outside of Canada, I hope one of the pilots here will correct me, but one never knows how this aspect of the incident will be reported in the media.