Asiana Airlines Boeing 777 crashes duing landing at San Francisco International
112 replies, posted
Landing gear made in china.
There's your problem.
[editline]7th July 2013[/editline]
y so srs
[editline]7th July 2013[/editline]
ptsd?
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Shitpost - Last chance" - Craptasket))[/highlight]
[img]http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/51d87796ecad04b801000010-435-326/plane-2.png[/img]
The tail may have hit the ground before the runaway, possibly the cause.
[QUOTE=Egonny;41337940][img]http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/51d87796ecad04b801000010-435-326/plane-2.png[/img]
The tail hit the ground before the runaway, may be the cause.[/QUOTE]
Tailstrike or not.
i don't know what to say
[QUOTE=Egonny;41337940][img]http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/51d87796ecad04b801000010-435-326/plane-2.png[/img]
The tail hit the ground before the runaway, may be the cause.[/QUOTE]
Yes crashing does usually result in a crash.
[QUOTE=Scot;41337981]Yes crashing does usually result in a crash.[/QUOTE]
why dose this happen
Reminds me of the 777 that crashed at London Heathrow a while back now. Just missed the perimeter fence and struck the grass before the runway due to dual engine failure
[IMG]http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/media/galleries/images/53697/500x400/ba-777-crash-lhr-jpg.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=jamzzster;41338140]Reminds me of the 777 that crashed at London Heathrow a while back now. Just missed the perimeter fence and struck the grass before the runway due to dual engine failure
[IMG]http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/media/galleries/images/53697/500x400/ba-777-crash-lhr-jpg.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
cool
at sfo right now and they have shut down all flights for today :suicide:
[QUOTE=Bob The Poster;41338176]at sfo right now and they have shut down all flights for today :suicide:[/QUOTE]
aw man you've got like a bunch of other runways right.
some broken shit on the runway can't stop all the shit from taking off/landing
[QUOTE=Bob The Poster;41338176]at sfo right now and they have shut down all flights for today :suicide:[/QUOTE]
really? that sucks
according to CNN they were planning to open some runways to prevent more congestion
[QUOTE=Egonny;41337940][img]http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/51d87796ecad04b801000010-435-326/plane-2.png[/img]
The tail may have hit the ground before the runaway, possibly the cause.[/QUOTE]
I don't think the cause of the crash was a tail strike. That mark that you see is far off from the center on the runway.
[QUOTE=jamzzster;41338140]Reminds me of the 777 that crashed at London Heathrow a while back now. Just missed the perimeter fence and struck the grass before the runway due to dual engine failure
[IMG]http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/media/galleries/images/53697/500x400/ba-777-crash-lhr-jpg.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Dual engine failure, what are the fucking odds of that, damn. Surely it had to be electrical of some sort for that
It was obviously at least some partial pilot error. It appears obvious that there was way too steep of a glide slope coming in.
But I don't think it could have been pure pilot error. Maybe there was a glitch in the flight control system (as 777's have mostly glass cockpits) that miscalculated the glide slope, or placed the airplane at too steep of a slope
My bet on the actual crash however is that the steep glide slope caused an unexpected stall, possibly a tip stall (not sure if 777's do that, depends on wing shape and chord). The tip stall may have caused one gear to impact before the other (before or after a tail strike), breaking or collapsing the gear. This in turn would have caused it (obviously) to run off the runway
Looks like it was going fast too, both nacelles were ripped off.
[editline]6th July 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=TheTalon;41338530]Dual engine failure, what are the fucking odds of that, damn. Surely it had to be electrical of some sort for that[/QUOTE]
Dual engine stalls are extremely rare. Don't worry too much though, Airliners generally are superb gliders and can coast quite a long way. As long as the pilot isn't an idiot, or something doesn't go wrong AGAIN, it generally is an okay situation if the pilots can find either a runway or flat area to bring the aircraft down on.
Two runways have just been re-opened on SFO - CNN
As of two PM 6 female and 2 Male, in the hospital in critical condition
I kinda want to set up a flight sim scenario at this airport with a 737 and see if I can't replicate the accident, maybe see if i have a valid hypothesis
[editline]6th July 2013[/editline]
my merge damnit
[QUOTE=paindoc;41338586]I kinda want to set up a flight sim scenario at this airport with a 737 and see if I can't replicate the accident, maybe see if i have a valid hypothesis
[editline]6th July 2013[/editline]
my merge damnit[/QUOTE]
Well trying to replicate the scenario wouldn't be as realistic considering you don't know exactly what was wrong with the plane, what it's AoA is and the fact you're using a 737 instead of a Boeing 777-200ER
[QUOTE=gaboer;41338615]Well trying to replicate the scenario wouldn't be as realistic considering you don't know exactly what was wrong with the plane, what it's AoA is and the fact you're using a 737 instead of a Boeing 777-200ER[/QUOTE]
I wasn't going for max realism, just to see if I'm anywhere in the ballpark
I hate how the FBI just has to confirm that there is no terrorism.
In a pilot error case.
[QUOTE=TheTalon;41338530]Dual engine failure, what are the fucking odds of that, damn. Surely it had to be electrical of some sort for that[/QUOTE]
It was something to do with a part of the fuel functions freezing I recall
[QUOTE=Dacheet;41339183]I hate how the FBI just has to confirm that there is no terrorism.
In a pilot error case.[/QUOTE]
Except we don't know its pilot error. There was a report that there was a puff of flame from one of the engines which could mean that something happened to it that made the plane stall on landing.
[QUOTE=darkrei9n;41339207]Except we don't know its pilot error. There was a report that there was a puff of flame from one of the engines which could mean that something happened to it that made the plane stall on landing.[/QUOTE]
Compressor stall? Internal compressor of jet engine fails and stops producing, so hot and explosive air rapidly jets out of both ends of a turbine. Generally recoverable and not at all dangerous though
So uh someone just linked / pasted me a NOTAM that is currently in force and has been for some time.
[quote]
!SFO 06/005 SFO NAV ILS RWY 28L GP OTS WEF 1306011400-1308222359
[/quote]
Which my basic understanding tells me that the ILS on that runway isn't in service between those two periods of time.
Just an interesting little bit of possible background, to go along with all the other speculation in this thread.
[editline]7th July 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=jamzzster;41338140]Reminds me of the 777 that crashed at London Heathrow a while back now. Just missed the perimeter fence and struck the grass before the runway due to dual engine failure
[IMG]http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/media/galleries/images/53697/500x400/ba-777-crash-lhr-jpg.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
That was the first 777 hull loss, so assuming this one was also a hull loss (based on the damage I would guess it is) then three hull losses in ~20 years. Pretty good track record for an aircraft.
Edit: Turns out one was a ground fire, so really its the second caused by a crash.
i rode asiana frequently, it's pretty fucking astounding, korea prides themselves in efficiency and professionalism, to think that they crashed it with a mistake
though, i wont really be surprised if it was captain's error, i've seen the pilots in asiana several time, they're really fucking old
im not talking about 40-50,s more like 60-70's
just arrived in a hotel after the gate agents specifically confirmed no more flights will be made today
o wait sry guys we just opened up 2 runways and people can take off again
shit
Where was this flight coming from? I have a friend returning from Hawaii.
Guessing now: Autoland was on and a number was inputed wrong causing their glide slope to be wrong.
[editline]7th July 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=KommradKommisar;41339605]Where was this flight coming from? I have a friend returning from Hawaii.[/QUOTE]
south korea
[editline]7th July 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=TheTalon;41338530]Dual engine failure, what are the fucking odds of that, damn. Surely it had to be electrical of some sort for that[/QUOTE]
Fuel starvation to the engines due to ice formation over the fuel-oil heat exchangers. When the autoland demanded more thrust, it caused the ice to be released from the fuel line and accumulate on the FOHE, causing the fuel starvation.
[QUOTE=Dacheet;41339183]I hate how the FBI just has to confirm that there is no terrorism.
In a pilot error case.[/QUOTE]
unfortunately, terrorism has to be the first factor to rule out and investigate because they have no idea, give it 3 days and I'm sure the FBI will say there was or wasn't terrorism involved
Flight path moments before crash from FR24 (zooming highly recommended): [url]http://www.flightradar24.com/2013-07-06/18:20/12x/AAR214/173a97f[/url]
[QUOTE=jordguitar;41339654]Guessing now: Autoland was on and a number was inputed wrong causing their glide slope to be wrong.
[/QUOTE]
ILS is apparently inop so I would hope they weren't using autoland..
If anyone here knows anything about airplanes and piloting, you know its not going to be pilot error unless they had a serious malfunction in the navigation equipment or generators. These planes, especially at major airports, use CATIII landing systems which makes for a perfect landing in all cases.
[editline]6th July 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Jsm;41341168]ILS is apparently inop so I would hope they weren't using autoland..[/QUOTE]
No way they'd use that runway for such a flight if ILS was inop. You dont land commercial jets on runways with no ILS unless you absolutely have to.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.