Boeing 777 crashes at San Francisco International Airport

**txradioguy** · 07-06-2013, 05:04 PM

BREAKING NEWS: An Asiana Airlines flight crashed while landing at San Francisco International Airport, Fox News confirms.

It was not immediately known whether there were any injuries.

Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman Laura Brown says Flight 214 was coming from Seoul, South Korea and was supposed to land on runway 28 left at San Francisco International Airport at 11:26 PDT.

She said the sequence of events was still unclear, but it appeared the plane landed and then crashed.

A video clip posted to Youtube shows smoke coming from the silver-colored Boeing 777 jet on the tarmac. Passengers could be seen jumping down the inflatable emergency slides.

Fire trucks could be seen spraying white fire retardant on the wreckage.

A call to the airline seeking comment wasn't immediately returned.

It was not immediately known how many passengers the plane was carrying. A Boeing 777-200 can carry between 246 to 300 passengers. The twin-engine aircraft is one of Boeing's best selling airplane models. It is often used for flights of 12 hours or more, from one continent to another.

The National Transportation Safety Board says it's sending a team of investigators to San Francisco to probe the crash of an Asiana airliner.

NTSB spokeswoman Kelly Nantel said Saturday that NTSB Chairman Deborah Hersman would head the team.

All flights out of San Francisco International Airport have been canceled, the FAA said.

A tweet from Boeing said the company's thoughts are with those affected by the crash, and that the will assist the NTSB in the investigation.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/06...ional-airport/

**SarasotaRepub** · 07-06-2013, 05:38 PM

Yikes, what a mess!!!

**Zathras** · 07-06-2013, 06:24 PM

So far 2 dead and "dozens injured", 10 in critical condition, being reported. I'm familiar with that runway at SFO. It's on the bay itself with a seawall. Judging by the video I've seen so far is the 777 landed short with it's tail hitting the seawall and tearing it off.

**NJCardFan** · 07-06-2013, 11:31 PM

Originally Posted by Zathras

So far 2 dead and "dozens injured", 10 in critical condition, being reported. I'm familiar with that runway at SFO. It's on the bay itself with a seawall. Judging by the video I've seen so far is the 777 landed short with it's tail hitting the seawall and tearing it off.

Apparently, the plane was coming in too low too fast and the pilot tried to pull up but it was too late.

**TVDOC** · 07-07-2013, 11:34 AM

Originally Posted by NJCardFan

Apparently, the plane was coming in too low too fast and the pilot tried to pull up but it was too late.

Simply beyond belief.......I guess the current crop of airline pilots no longer pay any attention to that silly "glide slope" information that's prominently displayed on their flight director right in front of them.......(not to mention all the alarms that "should" have been going off.......approach speed, altitude, ILS deviation, etc......SFO is a "Cat I" airport, which means that in a modern commercial airliner, the onboard electronic systems are capable of landing the aircraft safely WITHOUT the pilot's intervention, until the wheels hit the tarmac.).

We'll have to wait for the NTSB analysis to be sure, but if he/she dragged the tail off on the seawall.......simple "pilot error" would open the airline to a world of legal hurt.......

doc

**Adam Wood** · 07-07-2013, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by TVDOC

Simply beyond belief.......I guess the current crop of airline pilots no longer pay any attention to that silly "glide slope" information that's prominently displayed on their flight director right in front of them.......(not to mention all the alarms that "should" have been going off.......approach speed, altitude, ILS deviation, etc......SFO is a "Cat I" airport, which means that in a modern commercial airliner, the onboard electronic systems are capable of landing the aircraft safely WITHOUT the pilot's intervention, until the wheels hit the tarmac.).

We'll have to wait for the NTSB analysis to be sure, but if he/she dragged the tail off on the seawall.......simple "pilot error" would open the airline to a world of legal hurt.......

doc

They were on VFR. Glide-slope wasn't really a factor.

Personally, I find it downright miraculous that only two people died.

**SarasotaRepub** · 07-07-2013, 08:58 PM

Now I read they are saying the plane was flying way too slow, the engines were set to Idle and they were stalling...

**Zathras** · 07-07-2013, 10:13 PM

Well, someone's career is over if this is true....

Asiana says pilot of crashed plane was in training

SEOUL (Reuters) - Asiana Airlines Inc said the pilot in charge of landing the Boeing 777 that crash-landed at San Francisco's airport on Saturday was training for the long-range plane and that it was his first flight to the airport with the jet.

"It was Lee Kang-kook's maiden flight to the airport with the jet... He was in training. Even a veteran gets training (for a new jet)," a spokeswoman for Asiana Airlines said on Monday.

The plane was travelling "significantly below" its intended speed and its crew tried to abort the landing just seconds before it hit the seawall in front of the runway, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board said on Sunday.

"He has a lot of experience and previously flown to San Francisco on different planes including the B747... and he was assisted by another pilot who has more experience with the 777," the spokeswoman said.

Lee, who started his career at Asiana as an intern in 1994, has 9,793 hours of flying experience, but only 43 hours with the Boeing 777 jet.

Co-pilot Lee Jeong-min, who has 3,220 hours of flying experience with the Boeing 777 and a total of 12,387 hours of flying experience, was helping Lee Kang-kook in the landing, the spokeswoman said.

National Transportation Safety Board Chairwoman Deborah Hersman said Sunday that it was too early to say whether pilot error or mechanical failure were to blame.

But she said there was no evidence of problems with the flight or the landing until 7 seconds before impact, when the crew tried to increase the plane's speed and the plane responded normally. The control tower was not alerted to any plane issues.

Witnesses said the plane on Saturday appeared to be too low as it approached the runway, hit the ground before the runway started and the impact sheared off part of the tail of the plane and possibly landing gear as well.

Asiana's chief executive said on Saturday that he did not believe the fatal crash was caused by mechanical failure, although the carrier refused to be drawn on whether the fault laid with pilot error.

http://news.yahoo.com/asiana-says-pi...010133596.html

And here is the raw video of the accident....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TirXdAecipw

**SarasotaRepub** · 07-07-2013, 10:33 PM

Oops!!! Holy Stall BatMan!!!

**TVDOC** · 07-08-2013, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by Adam Wood

They were on VFR. Glide-slope wasn't really a factor.

Personally, I find it downright miraculous that only two people died.

Under US commercial carrier rules, VFR or not, EVERY approach is accomplished using the ILS (if available), for safety reasons, to avoid incidents just like this......... In an aircraft that large, with the typical average number of souls onboard, nothing is left to chance.......and the flight deck is a really busy place on final........ far too busy to "hot dog" a VFR landing.

So far:

Foreign pilot ( therefore we're unsure of the depth and quality of training )......

Inexperienced........(hell, I have twice as many PIC hours as that guy has)

Failed to use NAVAIDS on approach and final.......(what the hell was the guy in the right seat doing??)

Tragic, and completely preventable, based on the video........

The flight deck crew is toast (at least in the US)......unless some type of malfunction is found.

doc