FR is funded solely by the freedom loving folks
who love and use it.
Posted on 07/07/2013 6:01:04 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
The Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 that crashed at San Francisco's airport on Saturday was traveling "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.
Information collected from the plane's cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder indicated that there were no signs of trouble until seven seconds before impact, when the crew tried to accelerate, NTSB Chairwoman Deborah Hersman said at a news conference at the airport.
A stall warning sounded four seconds before impact, and the crew tried to abort the landing and initiate what's known as a "go around" maneuver just 1.5 seconds before crashing, Hersman said.
"Air speed was significantly below the target airspeed," she said.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Ping
That crew really screwed the pooch.
a late term abortion and they feel the pain
Total pilot error.
And in related news, at least one of the 2 fatalities was killed by the rescue firetruck!?! See: http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/state&id=9162574
No way that it could be equipment failure?
Crew under-experienced in visual approaches or lack of manual flying skills, IMHO.
To you GPS addicted pilots, if the ground glide slope station is inop, does your GPS provide you with an accurate glide slope reading?
(In my time a GPS approach was a non-precission approach). Regardless, the conditions were visual but I’ve known too many pilots to rely on instruments and autopilot too much even on severe clear days.
“Total pilot error.”
Probably, but maybe not. There was a navigational aide that was down for repairs.
AND, all you really need is a 70 MPH unexpected tail wind gust for a plane that is about to land to suddenly aerodynamically stall and fall like a stone without wings.
Maybe these guys could be given a job flying Air Force one.
With unlimited visibility and a 7 MPH headwind on a sunny day there is no excuse for pooching a VFR landing. Its actually unbelievable that two veterans pilots could screw this up so bad.
Now I like that idea!
From seeing the video and hearing some of the recent speed reports, I am putting money on that the crew fell asleep and woke too low and too slow. The pLane was in full stall and when they tries more power and a pull up they were too close to the ground so they tail in, belly crunch and then wing roll. It is a classic case
Premature assessment (but a strong possibility).
Unbelievable. Considering the clear and calm weather and an unobstructed approach over the bay, this landing should have been simple. I'd hate to see how this pilot wold handle a tricky landing like Toncontin International Airport, Honduras.
“From seeing the video and hearing some of the recent speed reports, I am putting money on that the crew fell asleep and woke too low and too slow. The pLane was in full stall and when they tries more power and a pull up they were too close to the ground so they tail in, belly crunch and then wing roll. It is a classic case”
That is about the most, not to be rude, inventive and humorous explanation heard to date.
Thanks.
And unbelievable. The pilot had been talking to the tower. He wasn’t asleep.
I guess we will see. This seems to be new information.
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.