Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
SuseJ772
Posts: 1075
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:13 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sat Jul 06, 2013 11:55 pm

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 147):
Assuming Flightaware is using 29.92 altimeter setting with the 29.82 altimeter noted above in Reply 131 if I did my math right there's your 100 feet and the speed is what ever it was doing sliding down the runway.

I don't think FlightAware is that accurate. My understanding is that speed on FlightAware is mathematically derived from the geo-coordinates and the time between geo-points recording.
 
dashman
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 6:16 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sat Jul 06, 2013 11:55 pm

RNAV approaches have vertical guidance, though not considered precision as in an ILS. They can appear to be as precise as an ILS glide path. VGSI is not coincident with RNAV glideslope for 28l. It ts all part of the puzzle and I'm tired of hearing people spout pilot incompetence. At this point it could be one thing or a multitude of things that put the aircraft where it ended up. So let's wait a day or two and not try beat the NTSB to the final determination before sundown.
 
cvervais
Posts: 551
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 8:38 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sat Jul 06, 2013 11:56 pm

This is kinda interesting though, the accuracy of the data isn't a given.

http://mashable.com/2013/07/06/flightaware/
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 1020
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sat Jul 06, 2013 11:58 pm

Quoting dashman (Reply 152):
RNAV approaches have vertical guidance, though not considered precision as in an ILS. They can appear to be as precise as an ILS glide path. VGSI is not coincident with RNAV glideslope for 28l. It ts all part of the puzzle and I'm tired of hearing people spout pilot incompetence. At this point it could be one thing or a multitude of things that put the aircraft where it ended up. So let's wait a day or two and not try beat the NTSB to the final determination before sundown.

Agreed. I am having a hard time believing two experienced pilots caused this on their own without some external influence, whether NAV related or otherwise. Just does not seem right.
 
jpetekyxmd80
Posts: 4330
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 3:16 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sat Jul 06, 2013 11:59 pm

Wow. Coming from the pictures, I'm really glad some of the lucky ones have their roll aboard luggage... Unbelievable. Blood on their hands.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 6374
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sat Jul 06, 2013 11:59 pm

Quoting suseJ772 (Reply 151):
My understanding is that speed on FlightAware is mathematically derived from the geo-coordinates and the time between geo-points recording.

Then it would be ground speed, not indicated air speed.
 
Fastphilly
Posts: 361
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:32 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sat Jul 06, 2013 11:59 pm

Will these heavies have to fly out severely weight restricted due to having to use the 19s for takeoffs? Or will they use 28R that seems to be a reasonable distance from the wreckage. I was in the Burlingame highlands viewing the damaged plane. The plane is between 200-300 yards beyond the edge of the runway and looks like it's resting just west of 28L between the runway and taxiway.
 
Boeing747_600
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 1999 4:01 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Guys!! unless each of the slats broke off neatly along the hinges on both sides, it *does not look* like the flaps were deployed in the normal landing position! I may be wrong of course, but look at the picture in the NYT article and let me know what you think!

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/us/san-francisco-plane-crash.html?hp

P.S: There's actually a better picture above in the thread.

[Edited 2013-07-06 17:06:33]
 
hivue
Posts: 2152
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:01 am

Quoting tfad2010 (Reply 122):
Could it have run out of fuel?

A possibility? The fire appears to have been significant but not all that severe. What was the response time for the fire crews (sorry if it's been posted already but I didn't see it)?
 
ua777322
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 6:38 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:04 am

Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 155):
Blood on their hands.

If those 60+ unaccounted people were stuck in the airplane and couldn't get out......... I agree

Unfreaking believable. It looks like she got her duty free also
 
YWG747
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 2:19 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:05 am

Sad to see this casualty
RIP
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8139
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:06 am

Quoting Fastphilly (Reply 157):
Will these heavies have to fly out severely weight restricted due to having to use the 19s for takeoffs? Or will they use 28R that seems to be a reasonable distance from the wreckage. I was in the Burlingame highlands viewing the damaged plane. The plane is between 200-300 yards beyond the edge of the runway and looks like it's resting just west of 28L between the runway and taxiway.

If 28R/10L is reasonably clean, they could get that runway back in operation within at most a few days. That right there would allow the biggest planes such as the LH A380 to resume operations in and out of SFO.

I really hope that the FDR and CVR are studied with a "fine tooth comb" in terms of data to determine why the plane ended up being too low.
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 3039
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:11 am

Quoting Boeing747_600 (Reply 158):
Guys!! unless each of the slats broke off neatly along the hinges on both sides, it *does not look* like the flaps were deployed in the normal landing position! I may be wrong of course, but look at the picture in the NYT article and let me know what you think!

Looks like the LE's on the outbd left wing and the TE's came off the airplane during the "rollout". If he was in the process of a go-around the LE's would have retracted to the midrange position -- hard to tell.
 
Stackhouse007
Posts: 377
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 4:07 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:11 am

Are there no security cameras at SFO aimed at the approach end of the 28's? I remember when the FedEx MD-11 crashed and the only video we had available to actually see what happened was a security camera.
 
Fastphilly
Posts: 361
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:32 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:12 am

Now we are hearing about 60 ppl unaccounted? I've been watching local affiliate KTVU and they have been good vetting their info. That's a concerning number.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 6374
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:13 am

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 162):
they could get that runway back in operation within at most a few days.

I suspect the right runway will be in operation late Sunday, and the left runway in operation by sunset on Monday.

SFO has plenty of capability and facilities to move the wreckage to a safe location to study.

Quoting hivue (Reply 159):
The fire appears to have been significant but not all that severe. What was the response time for the fire crews

First - it is obvious that the SFO / San Francisco Fire Department did an EXCELLENT job in responding, evacuation and fire fighting. Well done !!

The ATC tapes have a comment from another aircraft that people are out of the aircraft moving around before the fire crews get there. The evacuation started quickly.

This is pure speculation - but the fire appears to be only the combustible components of the cabin. Likely started by an electrical short failure. Hey the plane crashed - stuff breaks.
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 1020
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:13 am

Quoting cvervais (Reply 153):
This is kinda interesting though, the accuracy of the data isn't a given.

http://mashable.com/2013/07/06/fligh...ware/

While I doubt how accurate that is, it would appear that they were initially a bit high on the glidepath, possibly with engines at low poweridle and this caught up with them by the time they got to the runway. With a dirty (flaps+gear) config, speed can reduce pretty quick if you are not careful, especially when beginning to flare.
 
pilotaydin
Posts: 2100
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2004 12:30 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:14 am

Fuel starvation in my opinion on this route with this aircraft seems unlikely...Some sort of ATC communication would have happened


btw "let's join Richard Quest the authority on aviation" is something I would rethink as CNN....
 
xdlx
Posts: 978
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:29 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:15 am

Quoting 77West (Reply 154):

Is too early to forget BA
 
bristolflyer
Posts: 2103
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 1:35 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:15 am

Quoting RDUDDJI (Reply 142):
CNN's Wolf Blitzer just said: "67 people are unaccounted for, maybe they got sucked out with the tail when it came off". It's obvious to anyone with an IQ over 60, that people didn't get sucked through the bulkhead (which is visible in the video). Not to mention, so far I haven't seen any bodies on the RWY.

He'll probably get a pat on the back from management for this speculation. Pathetic - someone at CNN must have an ounce of scientific aptitude surely?

[Edited 2013-07-06 17:23:48]
 
MesaFlyGuy
Posts: 3919
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:36 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:16 am

I love how they are asking the British guy about his experiences with the 777 because he had apparently flown it before. Apparently this is relevant. He is also going through the different types of the 777 and saying that he only difference between the variants is that Boeing "kept putting bigger and bigger tanks" in them. CNN is usually my first resource for news but they are really dropping the ball on this one.
 
Gatorman96
Posts: 841
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:22 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:18 am

Quoting suseJ772 (Reply 144):
That's valid. Now I am all the more curious as to where the left engine is.

Assumptions on my part, but the left side of the aircraft slammed down after the tail strike, causing the left engine, all flaps (except for the flaperon) and the tip of the left wing to shear off (see the image in reply 53). The engine is probably somewhere in the grass between the taxiway and 28L.

[Edited 2013-07-06 17:20:00]
 
User avatar
NZ107
Posts: 4946
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 6:51 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:18 am

Quoting pilotaydin (Reply 168):

Passenger who CNN spoke to suggests an attempt at a go around before hitting the ground..

And this 'expert'.. Well.. Maybe time to turn the tv off..
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 1020
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:21 am

Quoting xdlx (Reply 169):
Quoting 77West (Reply 154):

Is too early to forget BA

Yes it is, I wonder if the fueloil heat exchangers were modified on all of the 777 versions or just 'inspected'. If this is another ice related event, it would look pretty bad.
 
hivue
Posts: 2152
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:21 am

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 166):
Quoting hivue (Reply 159):The fire appears to have been significant but not all that severe. What was the response time for the fire crews
First - it is obvious that the SFO / San Francisco Fire Department did an EXCELLENT job in responding, evacuation and fire fighting. Well done !!

I wasn't questioning the competence of the SFFD. I was wondering if the relative lack of fire damage to the aircraft might be due to little/no fuel to burn.
 
AApilot2b
Posts: 481
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 12:38 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:21 am

The media reporting of this crash is absolutely stupid. The sensationalism and jumping to conclusions is ridiculous. It seems that at some point they would get an aviation expert to discuss this rather than some twit who knows nothing more than how to apply makeup properly.....
 
User avatar
SuseJ772
Posts: 1075
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:13 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:22 am

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 156):
Then it would be ground speed, not indicated air speed.

Yes. That was always my understanding with the speed on FlightAware was that it was ground speed.
 
pilotaydin
Posts: 2100
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2004 12:30 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:22 am

Quoting 77West (Reply 174):

i agree BUT, if we take into account the passenger who claimed the engines spooled up, then that would mean the aircraft was functioning properly
 
N243NW
Posts: 1599
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 4:29 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:23 am

Quoting 77West (Reply 167):
While I doubt how accurate that is, it would appear that they were initially a bit high on the glidepath, possibly with engines at low poweridle and this caught up with them by the time they got to the runway. With a dirty (flaps+gear) config, speed can reduce pretty quick if you are not careful, especially when beginning to flare.

I think this possibility can't be ruled out. Many landing accidents and incidents are preceded by an unstable approach, and this data (although FlightAware's reliability isn't perfect) seems to suggest that the aircraft approached higher than in previous flights. And with the ILS out, the crew may not have been using any vertical guidance during the visual approach.
 
seat1a
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 7:52 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:23 am

Richard Quest just said Qantas flies the 777 to Australia. Does he know something we don't? Gawd, he's awful.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16357
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:24 am

I think the "hot topic" icon is inappropriate for this sort of event.

Quoting 77West (Reply 154):

Looks like due to the displaced threshold they had no in aircraft pseudo glide slope, and no external visual glide slope like a papi. ILS also out due to works.

Before making comments about Korean pilots and visual approaches, some of the more challenging circling approaches I have done were in Korea, an the locals handle them very professionally. With weather conditions being so benign they may have let their guard down rather than doing a circling approach in bad weather.

It is possible they thought tey were above the visual slope and increased their rate of descent, in doing so autothrottle reducing their thrust back to idle, at a low altitude realising they were now low on profile raising the nose, reducing speed, increasing drag, and the engines spooling up from idle. Not enough time for the thrust to recover, the higher angle of attack now resulting in a tail strike on the sea wall.

No down force from the tail as it shears off, cg change, heavy nose gear contact, heavy main gear contact, possible slight thrust asymettry as the engines spool up.

Elements from the Air France Flight 296 at Mulhouse–Habsheim, and Turkish Airlines Flight 1951, low and slow with idle thrust is not recoverable at low altitude, and FedEx Express Flight 80 where a heavy landing will result in structural failure.
 
milestones787
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:28 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:24 am

I live is San Francisco and I must say that the local news coverage (KTVU) is amazingly rational and informative compared to the ridiculous, sensationalism that is being broadcast on CNN.
 
iowaman
Posts: 3864
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 2:29 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:25 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 143):
AA - Cancelled all SFO departures rest of the day.
DL - Several cancels and some major reschedules till later in evening.
WN - Cancelled all SFO departures rest of the day
UA - 69 cancels to far. Will attempt to operate 3/4 of redeye bank
US - All departures cancelled except 2 red-eyes
VX - Cancelled SFO departures through 6pm

F9 has also cancelled the rest of their flights for the day. According to their Facebook post the earliest passengers who were scheduled to fly to/from SFO today will be able to get out is Wednesday morning.
 
PHX Flyer
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 9:52 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:25 am

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 162):
I really hope that the FDR and CVR are studied with a "fine tooth comb" in terms of data to determine why the plane ended up being too low.

I really hope that the recorders did not get smashed to smithereens upon impact given that essentially he entire empennage was ground to rubble.
 
MesaFlyGuy
Posts: 3919
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:36 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:26 am

Now the SF Dept. of Emergency Managment is reporting that they have only 4 unaccounted for. This is better than 60.
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 1020
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:27 am

Quoting pilotaydin (Reply 178):
Quoting 77West (Reply 174):

i agree BUT, if we take into account the passenger who claimed the engines spooled up, then that would mean the aircraft was functioning properly

The issue here is how much they might have spooled up. If there was a restriction, rather than an outright blockage, in the fuel flow, it could still result in a partial spoolup but not to a level that would provide enough speed to go around. I still think ice is unlikely, and the unstable approach seems more likely.
 
Boeing747_600
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 1999 4:01 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:29 am

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 163):
Looks like the LE's on the outbd left wing and the TE's came off the airplane during the "rollout".

Cannot rule that out, but the debris field in the NYT article (while not by any means authoritative) did not indicate any TE/LE
 
atomsareenough
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:42 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:31 am

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 66):
Fox is interviewing Representative Swalwell and he said the runway is 3000 feet long  . Nobody is expecting him to be an aviation expert, but don't present wrong facts.
Pat

Swalwell is a congressman in the East Bay. Neither San Francisco nor the airport, SFO, is in his district (nor OAK for that matter), so I don't know what he thinks he's doing going on TV to talk about it, when he has no expertise or no direct or indirect connection to this incident. Looks like he's just getting his face on TV.

Quoting PITrules (Reply 75):
Comparing the current video footage to Google Earth, looks like SFO recently displaced the 28 thresholds slightly (about 200'). Combined with the blast pad, it looks like total Runway End Safety Area (RESA) is no more than 500'. This is well short of the recommended 1,000', which may have made a difference here if available?

I believe it's 623'. I think the recently displaced threshold added about 300' of additional safety area. I believe the FAA requirement on the arrival end is 600'.

Quoting windshear (Reply 91):

Could this be a stall or too high angle of attack incident? I know this is speculation, but come on we are amateurs, this is what we do for a living  

Boaz.

He may have had a too-high angle of attack, but the main issue seems to be that he was way short and hit the seawall.

[Edited 2013-07-06 17:32:20]
 
pilotaydin
Posts: 2100
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2004 12:30 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:32 am

Quoting zeke (Reply 181):

I have no access to any NOTAMS now but is there any information about WIP on the runway, a shift in threshold for a few days or anything along those lines....

I thought about LION AIR with the 737NG that also landed short into the water....
 
rfields5421
Posts: 6374
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:35 am

My comment about SF FD was general, not any reflection on your post.

Quoting hivue (Reply 175):
I was wondering if the relative lack of fire damage to the aircraft might be due to little/no fuel to burn.

There have been several crashes with cabin fires but no fuel fire, and plenty of fuel still aboard the aircraft.

I was at one crash about 20 minutes after the plane hit the ground (a Convair 880) and despite a small fire, there was four or five inches of fuel pooling on the ground around the aircraft.

Despite the fireball we saw on 9/11 - thousands of pounds of unburned fuel had to be cleaned up from the WTC site.

At this point, all I am willing to say about the fire is that the wing fuel tanks do not appear to have been breached in a manner which creates lots of sparks. There might be a lot of fuel on the ground aroun the aircraft, and under the aircraft and all the foam SF FD has put on the wreckage.

Quoting PHX Flyer (Reply 184):
given that essentially he entire empennage was ground to rubble.

That colored piece of vertical stabilizer is close to 20 feet tall, the two pieces of horizontal stabilizer are close to 15 feet long.

Though the debris looks very 'shredded' - if you can find a picture with people in the picture to add a reference - you will see most of the debris near the impact point is 3 to 5 feet across in size. Much bigger than a DFDR or DCVR.

However, I think based on comments from the Baghram B744 crash threads that the recorders on the aircraft would be located inside the pressure vessel - i.e. forward of the fractured rear pressure bulkhead we see in the images of the remaining fuselage.

[Edited 2013-07-06 17:39:59]
 
FirstClass
Posts: 110
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 1:04 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:35 am

I can't help to think that this incident is similar to BAs 777 crash landing. The weather conditions were too good for a pilot error of this magnitude. In both cases the plane came down short of the runway, though the BA flight didn't loose its tail, which indicates a completely different angle at impact.
 
pilotaydin
Posts: 2100
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2004 12:30 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:38 am

Quoting FirstClass (Reply 191):
The weather conditions were too good for a pilot error of this magnitude.

I've investigated many accidents where CAVOK conditions prevailed but the crew made big mistakes...

remember complacency settles in when conditions are easy and favorable...

The Atlasjet aircraft that crashed in NOV 2007 (MD 82) was CFIT in cavok weather...

It's a VERY dangerous assumption to make that weather is too good to make mistakes...that's not how it works...
 
User avatar
FedExFlyerPHL
Posts: 111
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 11:15 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:38 am

I'm kind of surprised in this day and age, that no one has a video of the actual event (not the aftermath). That would be really interesting to see.

Anyway, here is a shot I got of HL7742 during better days on approach to LAX in May.

Jeff

 
hivue
Posts: 2152
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:40 am

Quoting zeke (Reply 181):
Looks like due to the displaced threshold they had no in aircraft pseudo glide slope, and no external visual glide slope like a papi. ILS also out due to works.

How common is it for airports the size of SFO to provide no external glideslope guidance at all on busy runways?
 
ozark1
Posts: 909
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 4:38 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:40 am

Quoting 802flyguy (Reply 60):
Hello everyone,
Let's PLEASE stop the idle speculation and irrelevant comments. Idle speculation and irrelevant comments are for TV "journalists" to make.

I just had to turn off Wolf Blitzer and CNN. Disgustingly sensationalistic, badgering the police and fire department about the number of unaccounted for, and then "experts" like Mary Schiavo! One term he used that really got to me was "Well you have 190 who self-evacuated".....sorry Wolf, but as is usually the case the flight attendants aren't even mentioned. John Nance on ABC did give great credit to flight attendants and the training they go through. Granted, we don't know who opened the doors, but I would expect it to be crew members. CNN has become like the National Enquirer--it's truly appalling. I guess it's just that everyone now feels they have to have to right to know RIGHT NOW.
 
802flyguy
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 1:56 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:40 am

Folks,

Again PLEASE stop the silly speculation!



As for silly speculation, CNN just interviewed "aviation expert" Mary Schiavo. Yes, "Scary Mary" is back! Of course, she said some scary things to Wold Blizter. What happened to Patrick Smith or John Nance? Sure, Nance has written some rather implausible novels, but his commentary is good.

The SF Chron (sfgate.com) has been doing a fairly decent, job. So has KGO Newsradio.
 
Tan Flyr
Posts: 1749
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2000 11:07 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:40 am

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 173):
And this 'expert'.. Well.. Maybe time to turn the tv off..

yeah..some of the inane statements being made by "news" folks on several "news" channels is incredible. Make you wonder about all the other stuff they report on!

They all ought to stick to the Dragnet motto.."just the facts"..
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 1020
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:41 am

Quoting FedExFlyerPHL (Reply 193):
It's a VERY dangerous assumption to make that weather is too good to make mistakes...that's not how it works...

+1 to that. The "oh sh%$" factor usually comes to late in these conditions, whereas in a CAT3 zero vis, you tend to be a bit more alert and a bit more focused.
 
PHX Flyer
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 9:52 pm

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:41 am

Quoting FirstClass (Reply 191):
I can't help to think that this incident is similar to BAs 777 crash landing.

The only similarity is that in both cases a B777 came down short of the runway. BA 38 had problems with fuel flow 2 miles out, whereas here the entire final descent was unremarkable.
 
Asiaflyer
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:50 am

RE: OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2

Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:42 am

Quoting 77West (Reply 186):

One engine could have went out, resulting in loss of altitude and plane not responding enough with power from only one engine when spooling up. Could also explain why it was off center of runway. Just speculating though.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos