[ElkGroveDan]

Before you all get that rope up over the branch, consider a few things. It says he had landed 747s at SFO previously, so it's not like he was a "new" pilot by any means. Also listening to the ATC voice traffic, it sounded to me like he was saying he was having "problems" a minute or two prior to the impact. That tells me it wasn't a case of, "whoops I came in too short." More likely there were issues with non-responsive aircraft controls.

My gut tells me that "pilot error" will not be the final conclusion. I'm going with some kind of equipment failure.

[dragnet2]

Also listening to the ATC voice traffic, it sounded to me like he was saying he was having "problems" a minute or two prior to the impact.

I don't thinks so...I didn't hear that and in fact if they were having issues with the aircraft a full minute or two prior to landing, there would have been much more radio chatter from those in the cockpit to ATC. They would have made this very clear to the tower, since landing is critical, as opposed to cruising at altitude.

[ltc8k6]

Very unlikely as we’ve already heard tidbits from the NTSB that indicate the plane performed normally.

“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.”

Yahoo news report.