Posted on 07/06/2013 12:02:24 PM PDT by FreedomPoster
Currently just Tweets and locals talking about this, nothing on news sites yet. Lots of stuff in the Twitter feed, including links to uploaded videos of the smoking mess.
Typically, the tower controller will issue a go around if the runway is fouled, (vehicle, aircraft, or other encroachments) but most are done by the pilot, seeing a fouled runway, or flying an unstable approach.
I opine that the skipper of this flight wished to show his prowess by making good a bad approach.
If you look at an early port side photo the fuselage is intact(not burned)with heavy smoke coming from the starboard side. The smoke appears to be close to the location of the motor on the starboard.
In later pictures of the starboard side there is heavy charring of the fuselage next to the engine. The burn pattern does not match up very well when you look at the burning point from the engine. However you cant tell what structure is behind the skin of the fuselage as that might have effected the way the plane burned.
Your thoughts?
just heard that a few of the victims in the hospital are paralyzed..damn..just horrible..they must have gone head first onto the ceiling of the plane causing their spinal cords to snap
In your series of how many? Anecdotal evidence doesn’t cut it, but you are certainly entitled to your opinion.
Hearing from a regional airline buddy who was deadheading through SFO when this happened that TSA and Customs were creating real problems for rescuers.
TSA not allowing rescue vehicles on the property till inspected, and Customs not letting the injured leave until they cleared them.
Anybody able to confirm this??
Actual amateur video of crash:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Orw3rbj5MI
After all that discussion yesterday a newly video shows the fuselage at about a 45 degree angle to the ground during the groundloop (with one wing high). So, if you were at the right angle it might have appeared to be a cartwheel, even if not the case technically.
BTW, does anyone know if the missing engine (port or starboard) ever turned up?
“So, if you were at the right angle it might have appeared to be a cartwheel, even if not the case technically.”
I agree. Puts some of the comments made in this thread to shame.
Yes, the engine was on the opposite side of the runway. It was all tore up and hardly recognizable, there is a photo of it somewhere around.
See post 791. My suspicion is that’s the starboard engine and the one close to the right side of the plane is actually the port engine, getting there when the plane did the ground loop.
Well, people were trying to understand what happened. AND, I now know what a “horizontal ground loop” is. :-) My late father would be impressed.
It is amazing to watch such a tremendous ship go out of control like that. A fearful sight, I am amazed more passengers weren’t killed.
“they must have gone head first onto the ceiling of the plane causing their spinal cords to snap”
Same thing can happen if subjected to spinal compression, which is probably what happened when they hit the wall and then got slammed down hard.
"In aviation, a ground loop is a rapid rotation of a fixed-wing aircraft in the horizontal plane while on the ground"
Ground loops were quite common during primary flight training during landing attempts in "taildragger" light planes -- ones that have a tailwheel and no steerable nosewheel. Often no damage was done if the wingtip did not contact the ground.
I’m guessing that is the starboard engine.
It went right of the runway, and the port engine went left.
As the aircraft spun around (top view, counter-clockwise), the aircraft came to a rest up against the port engine, now on the aircraft’s starboard (fuselage) side.
Thanks! That’s a very cool picture, by the way. I wonder which airbase it is That hanger is an odd shape.
Wife says Shanghai TV claims one victim in water?
Hadn’t seen that one.
Unless the procedure has changed, the builder doesn't spec the engines. They just build the airframe and install whatever engines the customer specs. So the only way one or other engine mfgr would have an "exclusive" is if they were the only one offering an engine of the proper size and type.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.