just now ~ 777 crash @ SFO

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

If you don't understand what I mean when I say a Vref for 20% of flaps in an approach configuration is about 124KTS at the weight that a trans-oceanic flight typically should be at when it arrives here, then basically fuck off!

You can't make ANY kind of 'average' speed & setting assumption as there IS no 'typical' trans-oceanic flight.

Winds, altitude, holds, number of passengers & cargo...the weight difference can be tens of thousands of pounds.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[ChrisD 0]

airtwardo

Quote

If you don't understand what I mean when I say a Vref for 20% of flaps in an approach configuration is about 124KTS at the weight that a trans-oceanic flight typically should be at when it arrives here, then basically fuck off!

You can't make ANY kind of 'average' speed & setting assumption as there IS no 'typical' trans-oceanic flight.

Winds, altitude, holds, number of passengers & cargo...the weight difference can be tens of thousands of pounds.

Your right, and I am making some assumptions, but mostly I am absolutely incensed with the NTSB comments of late... what they are leaking as compared with what they are not.

Let's look at this another way:


4 pilots with a combined total of over 60,000 hours, most highly educated and all with recent emergency training.

They forgot to flare???

Don't think so...

C

But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump."

[billvon 3,111]

>4 pilots with a combined total of over 60,000 hours, most highly educated and all with
>recent emergency training.

One of whom had never landed a 777 in SFO before.

>They forgot to flare?

No, they had the opposite problem. They had effectively flared far too early, and thus had no energy remaining.

But yes, pilots do stupid things. The Colgan and Air France crashes come to mind. Every student pilot gets training in how not to do what they did.

(edited to correct landing comment)

[airtwardo 7]

ChrisD

***

Quote

If you don't understand what I mean when I say a Vref for 20% of flaps in an approach configuration is about 124KTS at the weight that a trans-oceanic flight typically should be at when it arrives here, then basically fuck off!

You can't make ANY kind of 'average' speed & setting assumption as there IS no 'typical' trans-oceanic flight.

Winds, altitude, holds, number of passengers & cargo...the weight difference can be tens of thousands of pounds.

Your right, and I am making some assumptions, but mostly I am absolutely incensed with the NTSB comments of late... what they are leaking as compared with what they are not.

Let's look at this another way:


4 pilots with a combined total of over 60,000 hours, most highly educated and all with recent emergency training.

They forgot to flare???

Don't think so...

C

I can't disagree with you there...early on some NTSB talking head said -

"we won't have anything to say for quite some time, our job is to be right not fast"

Seems not to be the case necessarily.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[normiss 893]

Skydivers forget to flare.
Pilots forget landing gear, flaps, fuel.

We're all human.

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

4 pilots with a combined total of over 60,000 hours, most highly educated and all with recent emergency training.

However only two at the controls, and let's not forget the cultural thing regarding the PIC.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[lawrocket 3]

In the link you provided, the pilot overrode the automated systems that were trying to kill him and assumed manual control with the ground giving him speed, altitude, etc. "Since the pilot can override that command, simply by manually adjusting those thrust levers, the plane was able to land safely at Perth."

That said, because they are fly-by-wire, all controls need to go through a computer. So I can agree that "manual" flight is, to that extent, impossible...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 3,111]

>So I can agree that "manual" flight is, to that extent, impossible...

777's have a direct flight mode where a given control deflection results in a given surface deflection. Goes through an electrical _and_ a hydraulic system; lose either and you lose control. Even in normal mode they directly control the surfaces. The computers provide force feedback so the pilots have to "fight" to do something especially stupid (like overspeed.)

The last airliner I know of that allowed true manual control (i.e. direct mechanical linkages to the surfaces) was the 707.

[Remster 30]

airtwardo

Quote

4 pilots with a combined total of over 60,000 hours, most highly educated and all with recent emergency training.

However only two at the controls, and let's not forget the cultural thing regarding the PIC.

Yep... That's the main thing I thought of... What was that flight that crash going to New York a bunch of years ago, the the copilot was completely deferential to the PIC?

Remster

[ChrisD 0]

normiss

Skydivers forget to flare.
Pilots forget landing gear, flaps, fuel.

We're all human.

Ya and who says the software was perfect? Perhaps they upgraded to Windows 8?

All I'm say'n is that there is too much guessing and that's a highly automated aircraft.

It wont let me upload the Landing section here....

But many of you should read it, in its entirety, before you rush to judgment...
C

I want to know this:

"The Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System may be deactivated for
approved non-normal procedures where use of flaps at less than normal landing
flap positions are specified. A logbook entry is required."

Please Director answere that....

This is just one of about 20 things that need an answere...

But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump."

[JohnMitchell 16]

You guys are killing me! No respect, I tell ya, no respect!

[lawrocket 3]

And who'd have ever thunk that an experienced flight crew would stall a perfectly good Airbus 40k feet right to the bottom of the Atlantic.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[ChrisD 0]

lawrocket

And who'd have ever thunk that an experienced flight crew would stall a perfectly good Airbus 40k feet right to the bottom of the Atlantic.

And what ???Getting whacked by lightning didn't have anything to do with that?
C

But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump."

[lawrocket 3]

[Quote]"The Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System may be deactivated for approved non-normal procedures where use of flaps at less than normal landing flap positions are specified. A logbook entry is required."

Like noise abatement landings?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[ChrisD 0]

lawrocket

[Quote]"The Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System may be deactivated for approved non-normal procedures where use of flaps at less than normal landing flap positions are specified. A logbook entry is required."

Like noise abatement landings?

I am going to talk very little about CDA or their OTA approaches your point? Did Soia or the PRM at San Fran have something to do with this? Yes it very well could have...this was the original question with the coupled approach and the runway switch issue...

If your point is that the port authority equipment and procedures exacerbated this mess, this would be a great observation...

I understand there may be some ATC -(retired) personell that visit this site, perhaps they could address the abatement procedures there?

Mostly they try to keep you out at sea at night and over the bay...

If your pointing out that this place requests and places pressure on pilots to fly visual over the bridge, you would also be correct, this may turn out to be the nail in the pilots coffin so to speak. On the other hand this is a long debated point about san Francisco and their shitty distance between runways and parallel operations, combined with their equipment issues ,...this then points us in another direction....this is their issue and not the pilots, combine this with all of the automation and autothrottls if the authority did perform any system tests while that aircraft was on approach, they didn't have a chance!

This is one of the major issues with high traffic airports and safety and has been going on for a long time. The NTSB is well aware of this issue and they have no mandate to make safety reccomondations of this type, the FAA has the mandate but not the authority to effectively make any changes in airport operations....

Same shit exsists in the NY area,..and we have been waiting for exactly this type of incident to happen there!

So it's a lot easier and how fucking convieneint to blame some pilot for shit they have little control over!!!
C

C

But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump."

[billvon 3,111]

>And what ???Getting whacked by lightning didn't have anything to do with that?

No, it didn't. One of the pilots held the stick all the way back, thus stalling the plane. He then held it full back and kept the plane stalled for over 3 minutes until it crashed.

From the transcript:

Copilot 2: What do you think? What do you think? What should we do?
Captain: I don't know!
Copilot 2: Climb... climb... climb... climb...
Copilot 1: But I've had the stick back the whole time!
Captain: No no no! Don't climb! No no!
Copilot 2: Descend, then!
Copilot 2: Give me the controls . . . Give me the controls!

Copilot 2 then held the stick all the way back until impact.

[Heatmiser 0]

ChrisD

http://www.airlinesafety.com/faq/777DataFailure.htm

Same: http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~cmh7p/ietss07-777-4web.pdf



Here is a typical example of the type of information regarding incidents on the internet, not quite accurate but close enough to do the job.

For all of you really stupid people out there, you can not "hand fly" a large jet!

Read the article so that you can get the briefest amount of information to process to get an inkling of the large number of systems that can fail that the pilot can do nothing about before you all start makin the kind of back seat, ill informed, judgments that you are doing!

I chose that particular piece of internet dribble because of the authors reference to sim. training.

It has gone unnoticed, by most, that actual hours was advanced by the NTSB in order to make some sort of public comment, or better said some kind of slander to make their point,... sim time is more important in this regard.

It has not escaped the actual pilot community what the NTSB has leaked as to what they haven't leaked.

There may in fact be pilot error, but until you start to understand the other factors and complexities of how and why including reading the PM for this aircraft your comparisons to your 152, your lack of current procedures and confusion regarding flying in general your not doing anyone any good.

If you don't understand what I mean when I say a Vref for 20% of flaps in an approach configuration is about 124KTS at the weight that a trans-oceanic flight typically should be at when it arrives here, then basically fuck off!

The aircraft didn't stall, the aircraft hit the ground...be precise here folks...it makes a difference...

C

Talk about bad driving: ""One of the deceased did have injuries consistent with those of having been run over by a vehicle," fire department spokeswoman Mindy Talmadge said."

Survive an airline crash only to be run over by the fireman?

Is that what a full on hissy fit looks like?

What you say is reflective of your knowledge...HOW ya say it is reflective of your experience. Airtwardo

Someone's going to be spanked! Hopefully, it will be me. Skymama

[sundevil777 102]

airtwardo

Quote

4 pilots with a combined total of over 60,000 hours, most highly educated and all with recent emergency training.

However only two at the controls, and let's not forget the cultural thing regarding the PIC.

Do we even know that the extra pilots were in the flight deck? I'm not at all sure that it should be assumed they were in there. Maybe it has already been reported?

My 5.5 years at Boeing designing about 40 switch panels (switches, electronic packaging and light plates) for the 777 flight deck make this incident really hit home. I wasn't responsible for the flight mgt computer, autopilot, radios, etc. but all of the system control panels were mine (all of the overhead panel, plus several on the fwd panels and aislestand). I had a lot of time discussing things with the flight operations guys (they represented the interests of the test pilots/airline pilots), and really got to understand a lot about how the systems are used, and the design philosophy that allows 2 people to do so well what decades ago required at least 3.

Regarding the cultural issues of copilots not speaking up against their "superiors", I think it is likely that it had an effect in this incident. That is really sad in that such issues should have been thoroughly trained out of crews by now. It will be interesting to hear how the crew worked/didn't work together.

I think the autopilot/autothrottle mode is key to understanding this - what if any speed did they set. I do not know whether using a speed setting mode is the usual for a good weather approach, and would hope that someone around here could provide some reliable opinion on this issue. Pehaps the pilot wanted to not use any such "aids", and wanted to do a "full manual" type approach. If this was the case, then I would think the other pilot should be paying more attention than usual to the airspeed and altitude, but maybe the other guy forgot? If they had kept the airspeed up to a reasonable number, It would seem they could have stretched out the level flight at the end and nobody else would have known.

I think Billvon said this was the copilot's (the pilot in commad) first 777 landing, but I thought it was just his first at SF with a 777. Is there info that it was his first 777 at any location? Also, I think even the 707 did not "directly" control the flight surfaces, as the cables still gave input to tell hydraulic actuators what to do for the primary flight control surfaces.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[lawrocket 3]

[Reply]Did Soia or the PRM at San Fran have something to do with this? Yes it very well could have...this was the original question with the coupled approach and the runway switch issue...

[quade 4]

lawrocket

Absent some mechanical failure, it appears the pilot simply made some mistakes that resulted in hull loss.

Ahem. Loss of life.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[ChrisD 0]

airtwardo

******

Quote

For all of you really stupid people out there, you can not "hand fly" a large jet!

Oh really?

My wife, who has 33,000 hours in large jets 'hand flys' them all the time...

Yes...she flys the controls manually for all takeoffs and landings that are VFR.

She must be stupid I guess...

That's not what I meant and you know it...
C

Sorry...thought you meant what you said~

In my world, the stupid comes from the number of passengers that have been reported to block the isles of this aircraft whilst they retrieved their overhead luggage! With smoke rapidly filling the cabin????

If that wasn't enough the poor kid gets run over by a fire truck while running from the plane????

That is stupid!

I get really pissed when so many think this thing is a piper cub, it is not.

Would somebody please post their copy of the Boeing 777 FM?

So you can see just how much work is involved in flying on of these things?

Saying that the aircraft stalled is to me, like holding up a sign,...yes I apologize that everyone wants to take short cuts and I did use the word stupid but I am at war with the NTSB, I understand that is not your war, and I am sorry to get all caught up in this , you are ceertianly not stupid!....and again I apologize for the use of the word.

There is so much that has not been talked about and just as much stuff coming out of the NTSB that is so far to the west of reality, that it takes someone who has been thru this in the past to see much of what I'm speaking about.

Airline crashes can be very complex issues, with a multitude of issues, some of which we may never fully understand. I have written at length about the relationship between safety and the ability to handle a certain amount of traffic in a certain time...this means cash for the airports. Nothing more nothing less.

There is a complex relationship between the FAA and a number of airports, where the Authority has the final word on safety, not the FAA. In our governments wisdom they have exacerbated this issue by introducing money and authourity to a realativly new NTSB, they have increased and redefined areas of operation and responsibility, and this has not been for the better.

In the NY area many controllers, pilots, and concerned individuals that work in the aviation field are and have been for many years about the workload of aircraft into certain airspace. The justification the authourities use is that: " We haven't had any accidents, because of this issue, so we are going to continue to do business this way..."

This is not the FAA viewpoint on this subject.

In other words the agency you have trusted to ensure your flying safety, can not do it's job!

The FAA has long said that certain airspace is needlessly and to the detriment of safety being overworked.

But they don't have any power to change this current system.

The approaches have long been a source of controversy in the SAn fran area, for years.

But all you guys see is that one plane has crashed, I see a system wide problem, that is very difficult to fully explain.

Again sorry if anyone took offense to the word stupid...


C

And I can't believe that these idots took the time to get stuff from the overhead bins and blocked the isles of the aircraft...

But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump."

[lawrocket 3]

quade

***Absent some mechanical failure, it appears the pilot simply made some mistakes that resulted in hull loss.

Ahem. Loss of life.

It's possible at this point that first responders killed one or both. So I was intentional in this. (But for the incident they'd prolly still be alive, but I reckoned I'll hold off).

Reminds me of the scene from Hot Shots where Deadmeat walks out of his crater unscathed and is killed by the ambulance.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 3,111]

>I think Billvon said this was the copilot's (the pilot in commad) first 777 landing, but I
>thought it was just his first at SF with a 777. Is there info that it was his first 777 at
>any location?

You are right; it was his first 777 landing in SFO. He had 43 hours in the 777. (Which on that route might have meant 5-6 flights.)

>Also, I think even the 707 did not "directly" control the flight surfaces, as the cables
>still gave input to tell hydraulic actuators what to do for the primary flight control
>surfaces.

From the story I read on its design, the cables were there so that in the case of a complete hydraulic failure the pilots could still fly the plane. As in several other aircraft this was accomplished by driving the trim tabs via the direct linkages; that allowed movement of the control surfaces with pilot strength. With hydraulic power available the entire surface was directly driven.

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

Would somebody please post their copy of the Boeing 777 FM?

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[rwieder 0]

A remark someone made not agreeing with my comments on the condition of a "Stall" contributing to the crash of this aircraft.
Let's see, a "Stall" is nose high, tail low" right? The clowns overrode their autopilot and took manuel control of the aircraft. I've seen the landing, and have landed there a million times myself. Not enough experience in the cock pit, end of deal. If they would have not gassed it up and got the nose up, more than likely not have been such a violent crash. With 7 seconds left to landing, they ask for a "Go Around" before the rest of the bad stuff happened. These 777's aren't even supposed to contact the runway for the first 1,000; They ran out of altitude and speed at the same time and crashed the big old jet.
Not trying to be argumentative, but they stalled the stinking plane.
Best-
Richard