News Asiana 777-200 Crash on landing at SFO

[Urwumpe]

I'd be very surprised if this crew didn't at least get a 'SINK RATE' EGPWS warning.

I think this is disabled when gear down, wings level and pitch angle not too low.

 

[ADSWNJ]

OK - got it GaryW - you are pro basic competence to fly and when that's lacking, then the fault is with the pilots. It's a legitimate position, and one that has strong support from many pilots on the various forums.

 

[garyw]

OK - got it GaryW - you are pro basic competence to fly and when that's lacking, then the fault is with the pilots.

I'm not a pilot but that is my position yes. If you crash a perfectly serviceable aircraft because you can't fly it then it's your fault.

It's a legitimate position, and one that has strong support from many pilots on the various forums.

It's an opinion, the flip side of it, and I also agree with this is that they were not trained very well.

With all the information that is in at the moment I do not find fault with the aids that were down nor with ATC.

Of course, that position may change when more information is in.

 

[RGClark]

A surprising and disturbing report:

Asiana 'go-around' rate at SFO raises concern.
By Matier & Ross

Airport Director John Martin has told commissioners that the rate of aborted landings raised concerns about whether Asiana pilots are properly trained. "I believe that John has been pushing with Asiana because there have been previous issues with them not being able to land properly," said Commissioner Eleanor Johns.
She said Martin has "gone above and beyond" what's needed to keep the Federal Aviation Administration briefed about Asiana's problems.
"John is proposing that Asiana no longer allow novice pilots to land and only have experienced pilots," Johns said. The pilot at the controls of Flight 214 had never flown a Boeing 777 into SFO before and was being supervised by a trainer pilot, federal investigators say.
Martin also wants "to have some other experienced pilot - like an FAA official or a United pilot - on board as well," Johns said. United Airlines is a U.S. partner of Asiana under an international grouping called the Star Alliance.
Johns said Asiana's pilots appear to be overly reliant on instrument-guided landings and lack the training to touch down manually. It's unclear how Flight 214's pilots were trying to land.
http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/...around-rate-at-SFO-raises-concern-4691099.php

Also, about the "FLCH trap":

Were Asiana Pilots Caught In The FLCH ‘Trap’?
By John Croft, Guy Norris
Source: Aviation Week & Space Technology
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_07_22_2013_p25-597816.xml&p=1


Bob Clark

 

[kamaz]

Also, about the "FLCH trap":

Were Asiana Pilots Caught In The FLCH ‘Trap’?
By John Croft, Guy Norris
Source: Aviation Week & Space Technology
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_07_22_2013_p25-597816.xml&p=1

Interesting.

What strikes me about modern cockpits is the old-school design used for autopilot controls. I mean, you have a numeric display, and next to the display you have a light showing you which mode is the autopilot in. If you somehow miss the mode indicator, you're toast, because the numbers mean not what you think they do.

It's 21st century, we have glass cockpits. Why not use something which is more obvious?

 

[garyw]

There is a hearing about this crash happening now. Various snippets are going up on twitter, including this gem:

NTSB: Asiana captain who crashed a Boeing 777 at San Francisco International Airport in July was worried about landing plane visually

Now, I'm no pilot but shouldn't a commercial pilot be able to land his or her jet on the runway with the conditions they had in SFO that day?
And why would a pilot be worried about landing in weather that can really only be described as 'superb'?

Too much reliance on the automation?

 

[Urwumpe]

There is a hearing about this crash happening now. Various snippets are going up on twitter, including this gem:

NTSB: Asiana captain who crashed a Boeing 777 at San Francisco International Airport in July was worried about landing plane visually

Now, I'm no pilot but shouldn't a commercial pilot be able to land his or her jet on the runway with the conditions they had in SFO that day?
And why would a pilot be worried about landing in weather that can really only be described as 'superb'?

Too much reliance on the automation?

Well, lets be less mean to the pilot - what reason can you have in a 777 to avoid having to land visually?

First of all, the size of the aircraft is really a problem for pilots - during a visual landing, you are far above and infront of your main landing gear, much more than in other aircraft. This can be a problem, if you have not much experience.

Next, clear sky does not mean lack of turbulence, this could also make landing tougher, if you have to land by visual means alone.


Of course: With proper training, there should be no such fears. You should have gone all what can go wrong so often, that you only fear dying of boredom.

 

[C3PO]

I'm not a pilot, but if I was worried about a landing I would be even more careful to keep an eye on the IAS and PAPI. :2cents:

 

[Andy44]

I'm not a pilot, but if I was worried about a landing I would be even more careful to keep an eye on the IAS and PAPI. :2cents:

Yes, but even more important, as I've stated before, your AIRSPEED INDICATOR.

As long as you keep enough airspeed you at least don't have to worry about stalling.

If you are the captain of a passenger plane, there is no excuse for not knowing how to land by the seat of your pants in clear weather, or even in a crosswind. That's a training problem.

And it makes me want to avoid that airline.

Sullenberger is the kind of skipper I want in the left front seat. Guys like him set the standard for pilot training.

 

[garyw]

Sullenberger is the kind of skipper I want in the left front seat. Guys like him set the standard for pilot training.

Fully agree.

Last year I flew into Heathrow with clear skies and one hell of a crosswind.

I was watching the runway on the IFE system and it was interesting to see the runway off to the right and then just before landing a slight kick with the rudder, beautiful touchdown.

The Captain who did the landing was one of the older pilots and as such, I'm guessing he was a real stick and rudder pilot. I'm glad he was flying that day.

 

[ADSWNJ]

http://independentflightinstructors.com/instructors/2011/11/children-of-the-magenta-line/

The perils of automation dependency have been long known about, at least in some airlines.

 

[C3PO]

Yes, but even more important, as I've stated before, your AIRSPEED INDICATOR.

That's usually where the I(ndicated)A(ir)S(peed) is.... well... indicated.

 

[Andy44]

That's usually where the I(ndicated)A(ir)S(peed) is.... well... indicated.

Sorry, I was focused on the PAPI comment...:tiphat:

 

[n122vu]

San Francisco plane crash caused by pilot's inexperience with onboard computers

 

[Urwumpe]

San Francisco plane crash caused by pilot's inexperience with onboard computers

So, the FLCH problem?

Better have an Airbus which is afraid to land... :shifty:

 

[Evil_Onyx]

Still no NTSB report yet, just press quoting each other.

better article below.

Asiana Pilot Set Throttles He Didn’t Understand to Idle


By the sounds of it, its more a training problem than a design or procedure problem.

 

[MattBaker]

In programming german has the figure of the DAU (Dümmster anzunehmender user/Dumbest expectable user). And you kinda have to program in such a way that even the DAU can't do any damage as far as I understand.

Now the question is if you want to include airplanes into the list of things that might be handled by a DAU but must not crash.

 

[Urwumpe]

Programming DAU-safe software is impossible since nature constantly creates bigger DAUs. You have to cause deadly accidents early to make sure nature gets its ass kicked.

 

[Linguofreak]

In programming german has the figure of the DAU (Dümmster anzunehmender user/Dumbest expectable user). And you kinda have to program in such a way that even the DAU can't do any damage as far as I understand.

"Expectable" is a valid translation here, but "dumbest possible user" flows a bit better.

Now the question is if you want to include airplanes into the list of things that might be handled by a DAU but must not crash.

Your DAU is a two-year old randomly mashing buttons.

 

[RGClark]

So, the FLCH problem?

Better have an Airbus which is afraid to land... :shifty:

Asiana Pilot Set Throttles He Didn’t Understand to Idle
By Alan Levin and Jeff Plungis Dec 12, 2013 10:38 AM ET

Lee Kang Kuk, a veteran with Seoul-based Asiana who was being trained on the Boeing Co. (BA) 777-200ER wide-body, had momentarily adjusted the power without realizing the plane’s computers then assumed he wanted the engines to remain at idle, according to information released yesterday at a U.S. National Transportation Safety Board hearing.
The documents, while showing the pilots made mistakes, raise questions about the design of auto-throttles on Boeing aircraft and whether related training has been adequate. The safety board hasn’t concluded what caused the crash, which killed three teenage girls from China in the first accident in the U.S. with passenger deaths since 2009.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...t-throttles-he-didn-t-understand-to-idle.html

This sounds like that much speculated about FLCH problem. There should be a software fix to remind pilots verbally that automatic speed controls are disabled in such a scenario and to remind them to check airspeed. For experienced pilots though it is surprising that they wouldn't do that automatically.

Bob Clark