Looking at the state of that aircraft to lose only two passengers (two too many I may add) shows Aisana had a very lucky day as this could of been a lot worse and would of been a nightmare if it had spun off into that United 747 that was holding. And lets face it how many car crashes happen  each day where more than two people are killed but don't make the news.

This crash looks like Turkish Airlines 738 crash at EHAM. Pilots failed at basic level - forgot to maintain speed; one pilot was at training...

 

Now I understand why after so many landings, my instructor is so persistent to always say, look at rwy, look at speed, look at rwy, look at speed, it's echoing in my head every time I'm at final.

This crash looks like Turkish Airlines 738 crash at EHAM. Pilots failed at basic level - forgot to maintain speed; one pilot was at training...

 

Now I understand why after so many landings, my instructor is so persistent to always say, look at rwy, look at speed, look at rwy, look at speed, it's echoing in my head every time I'm at final.

 

 

Lots of contributing factors in that accident, including distracting and even hazardous system malfunctions:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Airlines_Flight_1951#Investigation

 

The psychologics involved in the Asiana SFO crash are not known yet - and it will probably take a long time until they'll be published - apart from the technical part of the automatic B777 stall protection which has to be considered in the chain of events, too.

Yes airline pilots 'Land' manually 90% of the time however I would say 90% disconnect the automatics at 500ft after being stable on the automatics for the whole approach. Not to mention a heavy jet/longhaul crew may get 2/3 landings a month.

 

It is important to remember that unlike most other Boeings the auto throttle on the 777 is told to be left on during manual flight, why anyone would select FLCH at low altitude and not monitor what A/T mode is on the FMA + allow the speed to decay is beyond me.

 

Especially if the pilot flying is being monitored on a check ride.

 

That's an odd way to do it, why do they leave the AT engaged? I'd always be against the notion of manually flying with the AT engaged, if you're going to fly the airplane, don't pick and chose which parts you'e going to control. If it was the case that the AT failed then not having practiced proper management of the speed could have been a big factor in this accident.

 

On the note of thrust control, do I understand that the T7 only has an alpha-floor equivalent in some cases? Alpha floor if installed here could have totally avoided this situation by sending the Thrust to TOGA upon the first detection of low energy 7.5 seconds prior to impact and not the 1.5 seconds prior when the pilots decided setting TOGA thrust was a good idea. Does the 787 include a proper implementation of alpha floor?

 

Regards,

Ró.

I'm no pro at all but the T7 has alpha-floor protection under certain circumstances only (NOT in FLCH, for example).

 

And leaving the A/THR engaged during man-land is SOP on BA's 777's, for example.

 

"The autothrottle can support stall protection if armed and not engaged. If speed
decreases to near stick shaker activation, the autothrottle engages in the
appropriate mode (SPD or THR REF) and advances thrust to maintain minimum
maneuvering speed (approximately the top of the amber band) or the speed set in
the mode control panel speed window, whichever is greater. The EICAS message
AIRSPEED LOW is displayed."
 

So, does Boeing (and BA SOP) recommend landing with A/THR armed or with A/THR in active mode?

A lot of focus on the new guy Lee Kang-Kook and manual flight with authrothrottles on while on FLCH and Alpha-Floors etc. etc. here.  Kang-Kook was the guy undergoing training.  He is a student.  It should be expected that he gets behind the plane or engages a mode he shouldn't have.  One of the hardest things for an airline pilot is a pure visual approach with no guidance on a clear day.  Throw in a little bit of a high setup from ATC and a new pilot, and things can get fun no matter what kind of automation or plane.  My only question is where the heck was the checkairman during all this?

The final phase of the approach reminded me of that A320 that was stuck in "high angle of attack" mode, and crashed into the trees.

Quote from another forum: 

 

The autothrottle can support stall protection if armed and not engaged. If speed decreases to near stick shaker activation, the autothrottle engages in the appropriate mode (SPD or THR REF) and advances thrust to maintain minimum maneuvering speed (approximately the top of the amber band) or the speed set in the mode control panel speed window, whichever is greater. The EICAS message AIRSPEED LOW is displayed.

Note:

 When the pitch mode is FLCH or TOGA, or the airplane is below 400 feet above the airport on takeoff, or below 100 feet radio altitude on approach, the autothrottle will not automatically engage.

So, does Boeing (and BA SOP) recommend landing with A/THR armed or with A/THR in active mode?

 

Active (AFAIK). But there's additional speed/stall protection when it's "just" armed.

 

A lot of focus on the new guy Lee Kang-Kook and manual flight with authrothrottles on while on FLCH and Alpha-Floors etc. etc. here.  Kang-Kook was the guy undergoing training.  He is a student.  It should be expected that he gets behind the plane or engages a mode he shouldn't have.  One of the hardest things for an airline pilot is a pure visual approach with no guidance on a clear day.  Throw in a little bit of a high setup from ATC and a new pilot, and things can get fun no matter what kind of automation or plane.  My only question is where the heck was the checkairman during all this?

 

That's where psychologics/human behaviour enter the equation.

 

The final phase of the approach reminded me of that A320 that was stuck in "high angle of attack" mode, and crashed into the trees.

 

 

Yep. There's a likelihood the Asiana reached the backside of the power curve when the PF tried to pull her out of the - probably unstable - descent.

I've stayed out of the speculation, not because I'm against it, but because I know what I don't know, and also I don't watch TV.

 

I think the irritation comes from the gossip heads on the gossip channels on TV calling themselves "news anchors" or reporters, when in fact they are just professional gossips, and not even professional, really. They are entertainers, with shock material instead of good jokes.

 

This thread has been far more informative, even with the speculation of those of us with only flight simulation experience.

 

It sounds at this point like there is not enough info even at this point to finally explain what at present is looking like unimaginable incompetence on the part of trained crew members who should never have let this happen, and an airline, Asiana, whose procedures should never have let these crew members operate in such an incompetent way. Can a finger be pointed at KSFO and ATC, too? Possibly. Are improvements on 28L and 28R needed? Probably.

 

All I can think of now, though, is the two 16-year old Chinese girls who were supposed to be enjoying themselves now at summer camp. Instead, they are dead, and probably died horribly, given the spectacular, terrifying nature of that crash and ensuing moments. Blunt to say, but true.

 

If you are a parent, or a child and have parents, think of this reality alongside their parents today, and grieve with them over deaths that were so unnecessary. No amount of investigation or money will ever bring them back.

 

 He is a student.  It should be expected that he gets behind the plane or engages a mode he shouldn't have.  One of the hardest things for an airline pilot is a pure visual approach with no guidance on a clear day.  Throw in a little bit of a high setup from ATC and a new pilot, and things can get fun no matter what kind of automation or plane. 

 

He may have been new on the T7, but he had in excess of 9,000 hours. He wasn't new. He was flying visually, the first, most basic, easiest method of flying. That's not an excuse. He had a second pilot there to call him out if he was doing something wrong but unfortunately this did not happen, and is likely down to the culture in Korea and the steep cockpit gradient.

 

A visual approach is the easiest things for a pilot to do, just look out the window and fly the plane. To compare it to driving a car, a instrument approach is like parking a car in a tight spot, it takes concentration, you've to monitor a number of parameters, you've to watch out for things like pedestrians and other cars, you've to work the clutch etc, a visual approach is like driving down a clear motorway, just put it in 5th, and look out the window and stay in your lane, nothing more to it.

 

Visual approaches are super simple, it's literally look and point, with the occasional glance inside at airspeed and altitude, but that's something the Pilot Monitoring should do for you in the majority. If they had become dependent on having FD guidance down to 200' AGL, then there's something very very wrong with their training and approach to flying. We as pilots are paid to be able to fly planes, not to look at them and intervene if something goes askew.

 

Regards,

Ró.

And don't forget the people working for the emergency services: This accident is a traumatic experience for everyone involved.

 

 

The South Korea government announced Monday that officials will inspect engines and landing equipment on all Boeing 777 planes owned by Asiana and Korean Air, the national carrier.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/08/boeing-777-crashes-at-san-francisco-international-airport/#ixzz2YSTYk46M

 

I'm curious why this action is being undertaken.  Is this SOP at a time like this or is this something else entirely?

I'm curious why this action is being undertaken.  Is this SOP at a time like this or is this something else entirely?

Not sure, I know  where I work anyone involved in an incident (Pilots, CC, and last engineers to work on the aircraft) are suspended with pay for a week or two until either they can confirm that they were not at fault, or till there's reasonable certainty they were not to blame. Also gives them time to gather their thoughts. If an accident is put down to a technical problem, there is always a fleet wide inspection carried out, though usually this doesn't reveal much. The schedule for this varies depending on the seriousness of the incident.

 

Regards,

Ró.