July 7, 201313 yr All things considered, that's not bad No, and I am guessing they were not the pilots, just a guess by the video. But, to AF41's comment, they said that the fire started a few minutes after the plane stopped and that is why you see most of the top part of the plane burnt and gone. But as someone mentioned earlier, and I agree, it looks like the pilot came in too low, for whatever reason I don't know, but I am sure that the NTSB will fill us in within the next few days.
July 7, 201313 yr Look like it came in over the water - standard for SFO - and was too low. its a long straight approach over the bay on that runway. This 'appears' to be pilot error or instrument failure and not any type of engine or airframe failure.
July 7, 201313 yr History of flight. Flight Track Log ? AAR214 ? 06-Jul-2013 ? RKSI / ICN - KSFO ? FlightAware Approach speed for 777 is supposed be around 149 kts. This plane was below that on approach at 600 ft. at 141 kts. It dropped to 123 kts at 300 ft. That is getting near the stall speed at 300 ft. The pilot may have simply stalled on approach due to lack of speed. Sad that there were deaths in any case.
July 7, 201313 yr Heard early on in the reports yesterday that there were no distress calls from the aircraft. If that remains true, and given the info BGC provided, I think it was an error by the pilot and not an issue with the plane.
July 7, 201313 yr Pilot error. Lets hope no one was impaired. And maybe some tower instruction error. It was way too high early in the approach and it looks like they tried to correct it aggressively (1,300 ft/min is a sharp drop near the end of final and is not good at all). Probably needed to go around with a new approach. My guess would be the pilot reduced flaps and cut the speed to get rid of the lift and get down fast. But then he did not flaps back down in time and had lost too much speed. The result - basically a classic stall. 100' feet shorter and this would have been a complete disaster. 100' longer and its a non-event. I am not a pilot but I did this landing at SFO over 20 times in 2008 - mostly in 737s. Its usually a very long, smooth approach at constant speed and decent. The only activity during the long final approach is about 3 or so flap extensions on the way down. When you are sitting in the emergency row over the wings, my usual spot, you hear the flap motor every time they adjust them in a 737.
July 7, 201313 yr Here's a cockpit view of an approach and landing at San Fran, for those interested. [video=youtube;k3HKN-FWNq0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3HKN-FWNq0 Edited July 7, 201313 yr by Habib
July 7, 201313 yr Author That video was really cool, toward the end where the computer said something like final call out at 200, was that the last chance they had to pull up and not land if something were to have happened on the runway or something. Also why did the computer call the pilot a retard twice, I thought it looked like a solid approach and landing.
July 7, 201313 yr That video was really cool' date=' toward the end where the computer said something like final call out at 200, was that the last chance they had to pull up and not land if something were to have happened on the runway or something. Also why did the computer call the pilot a retard twice, I thought it looked like a solid approach and landing.[/quote'] It just wanted them to slow down a tad.
July 8, 201313 yr Some eyewitness accounts are saying that there should have only been one death, that the second death was due to a rescue vehicle running over the girl.
July 8, 201313 yr anyone see the video today of the full crash from the other side of the bay. Looks like the plane was just too low and landed to early, pretty wicked spins n such after the tail was sheared off.
July 13, 201313 yr I am betting that someone is going to get fired after confirming these names...[video=youtube_share;hSRnNC5s3Jw]
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.