• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
moderators
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 362
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 6:33 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:52 am

Hello all,
Part 2 became long so Part 3 is being created in order to make it easier for members to find new information and to continue the conversation.
Part 1 Can be found here OZ 777 Crashes At SFO (by FlyDeltaJets Jul 6 2013 in Civil Aviation)
Part 2 Can be found here OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 2 (by moderators Jul 6 2013 in Civil Aviation)

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ben Wang


Our thoughts go out to all of those involved in this horrible accident,
Regards,
The Moderator Crew

[Edited 2013-07-06 20:09:09]
Please use [email protected] to contact us.
 
Fastphilly
Posts: 361
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:32 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:56 am

There must be some kind of video footage of this crash. I can't believe a major airport like SFO wouldn't have security cameras covering most angles of the property.
 
gulfstream650
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 6:58 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:58 am

There is a photo on the local SFO media - it is a dust cloud so hard to make out anything. I'm sure something will pop up.

Edit for:



[Edited 2013-07-06 19:02:16]
I don't proclaim to be the best pilot in the world but I'm safe
 
Gatorman96
Posts: 840
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:22 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:58 am

Quoting srbmod (Reply 40):
It looks to be in the water right before the seawall, as based on the images being shown on TV, there is something in the water there that looks a lot like the top of the engine pylon. If so, perhaps it hit the jetty/seawall first, sheared off and fell into the water as the rest of the plane moved forward. The debris field starts right at the end of the runway, so it seems likely that the #1 engine impacted the jetty.[/quote]

If the left engine was sheared off by the sea wall, the outcome would've been much worse. Again, the left engine and flaps sheared off when the aircraft slammed down after the tailstrike. CNN has an image of the left engine on land
 
atomsareenough
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:42 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:59 am

Quoting Fastphilly (Reply 256):
That only applied to Rolls Royce Trent 895s. GE and PW engines 777s were not affected by the mandated redesign.

Right. Presumably their heat exchangers didn't have the same design flaw as the RR engines, where ice could be trapped and interrupt the fuel flow.
 
A388
Posts: 7910
Joined: Mon May 21, 2001 3:48 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:01 am

Have those UA 744 pilots been interviewed who saw this accident happen before there eyes? Surely they must be very important witnesses...?

A388
 
atomsareenough
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:42 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:01 am

Quoting Fastphilly (Reply 1):
There must be some kind of video footage of this crash. I can't believe a major airport like SFO wouldn't have security cameras covering most angles of the property.

It's quite likely that there's some video. As I said in the other thread though, the cameras would have to have been pointed in the right direction at the time of the crash, and even if they were, they would probably be nearly a mile and a half away from the crash site.
 
747WanSui
Posts: 180
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:06 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:01 am

This accident reminds me of Korean Air Lines flight 015, which, on November 19, 1980, struck an embankment while on approach to a runway at Seoul, broke up and caught fire, killing 15 of the 226 people on board. The cause of that accident was determined to be pilot error.
Long live the Boeing 747!
 
atomsareenough
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:42 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:02 am

Quoting A388 (Reply 5):
Have those UA 744 pilots been interviewed who saw this accident happen before there eyes? Surely they must be very important witnesses...

If they haven't, they surely will be. We wouldn't know about it either way at this point.
 
User avatar
cjg225
Posts: 1811
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:59 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:03 am

Thanks to Cubsrule in the last topic for providing a rough transcript of the ATC feed. I am trying to learn to decipher these better, but sometimes it is way too hard for someone like me...
Restoring Penn State's transportation heritage...
 
User avatar
chrisnh
Posts: 4135
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 3:59 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:03 am

I really hope one or both of the crew in that UA 744 were looking at that 777 coming at them. However, I fear that they might have been engaged in their checklists and might have missed it   
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 943
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:04 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 250):
Not quite. The fuel was not contaminated. There was icing in the fuel lines and due to the design of the heat exchanger some of the ice got into the engine.

Sorry I meant contaminated by excess water, more than normal, in the tanks, leading to excess ice, more than the heat exchanger could handle.
77West - AW109S - BE90 - JS31 - B1900 - Q300 - ATR72 - DC9-30 - MD80 - B733 - A320 - B738 - A300-B4 - B773 - B77W
 
gulfstream650
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 6:58 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:05 am

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 10):

And passengers.
I don't proclaim to be the best pilot in the world but I'm safe
 
nwadeicer
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:17 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:06 am

As I mentioned before. That close to the water, without a doubt a seagull strike.
I miss the Red Tail
 
User avatar
cjg225
Posts: 1811
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:59 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:07 am

Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 10):
I really hope one or both of the crew in that UA 744 were looking at that 777 coming at them. However, I fear that they might have been engaged in their checklists and might have missed it

We'll find out soon enough. Obviously, other pilots on the ground did a good job of keeping off the air until they knew that other flights were taken care of and only then started communicating with the tower to report what they saw.
Restoring Penn State's transportation heritage...
 
User avatar
DesertFlyer
Posts: 377
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 2:05 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:09 am

Here is flightaware data from the last few days on one graph. Seems to not be all that accurate.

http://i.imgur.com/AG4UFzQ.jpg
 
atomsareenough
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:42 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:09 am

Quoting NWAdeicer (Reply 13):
As I mentioned before. That close to the water, without a doubt a seagull strike.

"Without a doubt"??? Couldn't have been ANY number of other things, from pilot error to mechanical failure, eh? I guess NTSB should just give you a call and close the book on it. Save themselves a trip from DC to SF.  
 
flyabr
Posts: 854
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:42 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:18 am

Question: would the MLG have punctured through the wings if the plane had landed too hard? Didn't that happen on some other 777 in the past few years?? Reason for asking is I don't see any punctures holes through the wings...or any sign of the MLG in the pictures. Did the MLG get sheared off and is in the water??
 
atomsareenough
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:42 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:19 am

Quoting flyabr (Reply 17):
I don't see any punctures holes through the wings...or any sign of the MLG in the pictures. Did the MLG get sheared off and is in the water??

Here's one of them way back by the tail (seems to point to the "sheared off" theory):



[Edited 2013-07-06 19:20:02]

[Edited 2013-07-06 19:20:15]
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 943
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:20 am

Quoting flyabr (Reply 17):
Question: would the MLG have punctured through the wings if the plane had landed too hard? Didn't that happen on some other 777 in the past few years?? Reason for asking is I don't see any punctures holes through the wings...or any sign of the MLG in the pictures. Did the MLG get sheared off and is in the water??

Depends on the direction of the forces. BA38 was a high rate of descent with minimal rearward 'dragging' forces, hence a punctured wing. This accident seems both vertical and horizontal forces, which would lead to the gear shearing off, especially the sea wall impact.
77West - AW109S - BE90 - JS31 - B1900 - Q300 - ATR72 - DC9-30 - MD80 - B733 - A320 - B738 - A300-B4 - B773 - B77W
 
User avatar
Gonzalo
Posts: 1831
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:43 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:20 am

This accident was much worse than BA038 and AF358, it was much more violent, the G forces involved were greater. The 2 deaths, and almost 60 injured, 10 of them in critical or very serious condition are the hardest proof. From the ATC transcript it seems they had an uneventful flight all the way until the very last moment, the pilots were calm and talking normally 7 miles away from the runway and only a couple of minutes later they crashed. Very intriguing situation....

Rgds.
G.
Gear Up!!: DC-3 / EMB-110 / FH-227 / A318-19-20-21 / B732 / B763 / B789 / B788 / A343 / ATR72-600
 
A388
Posts: 7910
Joined: Mon May 21, 2001 3:48 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:22 am

One of those UA 744 pilots must have been looking outside because when you compare that posted photo to the CNN footage you will see that the aircraft was taxiing at the time of the tail strike. The CNN footage shows the UA 744 holding at the turning point of the runway while the posted photo shows that aircraft at an earlier position when the 777 passed by with several smoke puffs indicating the moments when the 777 bounced hard while parts broke off.

A388
 
hivue
Posts: 1954
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:26 am

Quoting 77West (Reply 11):
Sorry I meant contaminated by excess water, more than normal, in the tanks, leading to excess ice

IIRC the amount of water in the fuel was WNL. The problem was that the aircraft passed through some particularly cold air at altitude and had a very smooth ride. As a result the normal little bits of ice that formed did not break up but rather grew to the point that, when they got shaken loose during landing, were big enough to clog the heat exchangers.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
a380900
Posts: 805
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 11:26 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:28 am

In these times of surveillance cameras at every street corner, I can't imagine that major airports do not have several high quality cams for each runway.

Also I wonder in a case like SFO, if the airplane can't make it to the runway, wouldn't it be more reasonable to try to ditch the airplane in water. The Hudson river langing shows it can work out well. Or maybe the bigger theplane, the bigger the likelihood that it will break on impact with water?
 
corey07850
Posts: 2335
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 4:33 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:29 am

Regarding the UA pilot holding short, here is some info from a user on reddit that is supposedly her nephew

http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/co...777_has_crashed_at_the_san/caxb1q9
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 943
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:30 am

Quoting hivue (Reply 22):
Quoting 77West (Reply 11):
Sorry I meant contaminated by excess water, more than normal, in the tanks, leading to excess ice

IIRC the amount of water in the fuel was WNL. The problem was that the aircraft passed through some particularly cold air at altitude and had a very smooth ride. As a result the normal little bits of ice that formed did not break up but rather grew to the point that, when they got shaken loose during landing, were big enough to clog the heat exchangers.

Either way the cold area was the biggest factor, one which was particularly unusual and has not been repeated. I was sure that excess water in the tanks at Beijing airport played a part. But if it was within limits of the aircraft, it should not have been an issue, only the cold air.
77West - AW109S - BE90 - JS31 - B1900 - Q300 - ATR72 - DC9-30 - MD80 - B733 - A320 - B738 - A300-B4 - B773 - B77W
 
Fastphilly
Posts: 361
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:32 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:33 am

I'm wondering if the SFO officials are combing 28R for any related debris to the crash to possibly get that runway open if nothing turns up. An 8000 ft runway for fully fueled heavies with most passengers checking in 50lb cargo boxes/luggage (two per passenger) on trans-pacific flights makes for a "To The Cusp" take off.
 
codc10
Posts: 2559
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:34 am

Re: temperatures over the Pacific Ocean, word is they were not cold enough today to result in freezing of Jet-A. OZ214 did not go polar and the temperatures en route were not unusually cold. Would be surprised if a BA038 situation was involved.
 
PHX787
Posts: 7892
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:36 am

Ok I'm late to the party and trying to sift through 3 threads is very difficult...what happened here? Such a sad day to see an OZ 777 in such a state   RIP to the 2 on board who perished
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
MrBuzzcut
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:25 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:37 am

Quoting 747WanSui (Reply 7):
This accident reminds me of Korean Air Lines flight 015, which, on November 19, 1980, struck an embankment while on approach to a runway at Seoul, broke up and caught fire, killing 15 of the 226 people on board. The cause of that accident was determined to be pilot error.

Also similar to Korean Air 801, which struck Nimitz Hill on approach to GUM in 1997. ILS was OTS that day, they were flying a non-precision approach (though 801 was landing in some nasty weather, unlike this flight) and undershot the runway. At least this one had a better outcome.
 
AA94
Posts: 723
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:37 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:37 am

Quoting A380900 (Reply 23):
Also I wonder in a case like SFO, if the airplane can't make it to the runway, wouldn't it be more reasonable to try to ditch the airplane in water. The Hudson river langing shows it can work out well. Or maybe the bigger theplane, the bigger the likelihood that it will break on impact with water?

I would say that the landing of US1549 in the Hudson was a one-off. I think that Capt. Sullenberger did an excellent job, keeping a cool head, and doing things by the book. I'd argue that this is the exception, not the rule. It's my (layman) opinion that a water landing that was generally as "perfect" as that of US1549 isn't something that can be replicated on a re-occuring basis.

I'd assume that the larger the plane, the harder it is to control.
 
flyabr
Posts: 854
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:42 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:37 am

Quoting atomsareenough (Reply 18):

thanks for the pic...i do see some landing gear in that photo.
 
Fastphilly
Posts: 361
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:32 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:39 am

Quoting hivue (Reply 22):
As a result the normal little bits of ice that formed did not break up but rather grew to the point that, when they got shaken loose during landing, were big enough to clog the heat exchangers.

I believe it was the sudden rise in temperature on decent that released the ice into the FOHEs when it re-solidified.
 
atomsareenough
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:42 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:42 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 28):
Ok I'm late to the party and trying to sift through 3 threads is very difficult...what happened here? Such a sad day to see an OZ 777 in such a state   RIP to the 2 on board who perished

Cliff's notes version:

Flight 214 evidently came in slow and steep to 28L at SFO, landed VERY short, and the tail and/or the landing gear struck the seawall at the edge of the airfield. The pilot may or may not have been trying to do a late go-around, which could explain a high angle of attack and the tail striking. The tail snapped off and the main fuselage slammed into the pavement and skidded to a stop off the left side of the runway within 2000 feet. So far, of the 307 passengers and crew, only 2 are confirmed dead and 1 is unaccounted for. Many dozens in serious or critical condition, though. Plane caught fire soon after it crashed, but almost everyone seems to have gotten off the plane before it was engulfed.
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:42 am

Quoting A380900 (Reply 23):
Also I wonder in a case like SFO, if the airplane can't make it to the runway, wouldn't it be more reasonable to try to ditch the airplane in water. The Hudson river langing shows it can work out well. Or maybe the bigger theplane, the bigger the likelihood that it will break on impact with water?

You'd have to know that you wouldn't make it early enough, which it doesn't seem was the case here. Also, you'd have to be wary of the approach light system, which extends well into the bay and would be a very bad thing to land on - likely worse than this outcome.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:42 am

A bit of extra information. Our ABC radio got an interview with an 'eye-witness' passenger:-

"Benjamin Levy, who was on board the plane when it crashed, said he believed the plane had been flying too low as it came in to land.

"I know the airport pretty well, so I realised the guy was a bit too low, too fast, and somehow he was not going to hit the runway on time," he told a local NBC station.

"He was too low ... he put some gas and tried to go up again ... but it was too late, so we hit the runway pretty bad.

"Then we started going up in the air again, and then landed again, pretty hard."

He said he opened an emergency door and ushered people out.

"We got pretty much everyone in the back section of the plane out," he said.

"When we got out there was some smoke. There was no fire then, the fire came afterward."


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-0...s-at-san-francisco-airport/4804038

[Edited 2013-07-06 19:45:47]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
aviators99
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 6:41 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:42 am

Quoting AA94 (Reply 30):
I would say that the landing of US1549 in the Hudson was a one-off. I think that Capt. Sullenberger did an excellent job, keeping a cool head, and doing things by the book. I'd argue that this is the exception, not the rule

I can't find the exact statistics, but a controlled water landing has a very high survivability rate (somewhere in the 90+ percent range), while a controlled off-runway non-water landing has a materially lower rate. Sullenberger and crew of course did an excellent job.

I was upset to see people evacuating this plane with luggage. This could have resulted in many more people dying.
 
User avatar
chrisnh
Posts: 4135
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 3:59 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:44 am

Somehow they managed to turn the 747 around on that taxiway and point it in the opposite direction. Talk about your 'Three-Point Turn.'
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5907
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:46 am

Quoting A380900 (Reply 23):
I can't imagine that major airports do not have several high quality cams for each runway.

Why should they go to that expense?

It's not like an aircraft carrier where every landing is evaluated.

Yes, it would have been useful in this instance. But in the vast majority of aircraft accidents - a runway camera is of no use. Probably $100-200 thousand for a system at SFO. $10-15 thousand a year for maintenance.

It has been 42 years since in incident at SFO where a runway camera would have captured a crash.
 
atomsareenough
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:42 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:47 am

Now all 307 pax+crew are accounted for, and still only 2 confirmed fatalities, according to SF Mayor Ed Lee at the live SFO press conference.
 
KirkSeattle
Posts: 322
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 4:32 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:48 am

CNN just showed a video from a passenger. It's amazing how many people took time to get their bags. That's so scary that people would take time for material things that could be replaced where life cannot.
 
AirlineBrat
Posts: 503
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 7:40 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:49 am

Not much analysis from me. Been following media reports, the threads on Airliners, listening to the ATC recordings and everything else. To see that most of the passengers and crew survived is a blessing. I am humbled by how the SFO ATC handled this event, how the emergency crews responded and how Boeing engineering designed an aircraft to hold up to an event such as this. My thoughts are with those who passed away, those injured and those who were able to walk away.
I'm leavin on a jet plane. Don't know when I'll be back again....
 
KBUF
Posts: 460
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 1:12 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:49 am

All souls now accounted for according to San Francisco's mayor.
"Starting today, the Buffalo Sabres' reason for existence will be to win a Stanley Cup."-Terry Pegula, February 22, 2011
 
aviators99
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 6:41 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:49 am

Quoting Kirkseattle (Reply 40):
CNN just showed a video from a passenger. It's amazing how many people took time to get their bags. That's so scary that people would take time for material things that could be replaced where life cannot.

Including the lives of others they are impeding.
 
User avatar
Gonzalo
Posts: 1831
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:43 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:53 am

Quoting corey07850 (Reply 24):
Regarding the UA pilot holding short, here is some info from a user on reddit that is supposedly her nephew

He says his aunt was flight crew on the UA 744, and I quote :

"She witnessed the entire thing"..."she's pretty shook up and I don't think has time to communicate any information, she has some photos though I may be able to upload soon.."

Let's see if this lady has some good reliable information to share with the investigators....

Rgds.
G.-
Gear Up!!: DC-3 / EMB-110 / FH-227 / A318-19-20-21 / B732 / B763 / B789 / B788 / A343 / ATR72-600
 
AirKorea
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:18 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:54 am

Latest Information or spelucations

OZ 214 was manufactured in 2006 and is 7 years old.
2 passengers are in death while arounf 60~70 in hospitalised. among them around 10 got seriously injured.
The possibilitiy that tails hit seawall and the around getting high. Passengers told that the plane flew too low, and suddenly the plane rotated and then felt the rear part hit somewhere.
 
Slcpilot
Posts: 613
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 3:32 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:56 am

I don't think this has been brought up.

It doesn't matter what METAR or ATIS you have, I know what the winds were doing at the accident site just afterwards! Look at the smoke plume! It suggests a wind from the south east. Now the wind is obviously not strong, but a descent through a shear can leave a crew on the back side of the power curve if they're not paying attention.

Thoughts?

SLCPilot
I don't like to be fueled by anger, I don't like to be fooled by lust...
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5907
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:58 am

Reviewed thread two and saw this one at the end

Quote:
Korean media is reporting that OZ214 landed on 28L, which was "closed" due to navigational equipment (Presumably ILS) issues. Was 28L in use at the time of the accident?

28L was in use. Both 28L and 28R did not have the ILS operational. This was known to pilots via NOTAMs.

The runways were fully operational.

In the weather at SFO Saturday local time - if a pilot can't make a visual landing - he/she has no business flying anythin bigger than a C-172 - certainly not a B777.

Quoting A380900 (Reply 23):
Also I wonder in a case like SFO, if the airplane can't make it to the runway, wouldn't it be more reasonable to try to ditch the airplane in water.

You have to ditch soon enough to know your aircraft is not going to hit that seawall embankment. The Lion Air landing short of the runway at Bali recently hit the water about a thousand feet short of the runway.

A bigger issue at SFO is that airport has long approach light structures extending 3,150 feet out into the water. Those structures to hold the lights are strong enough to rip apart an aircraft (see PanAm 1971 takeoff incident info on Wikipedia).

At SFO, the pilot would have had to make the decision to ditch and come down into the water a mile to three-quarters of a mile from the end of the runway.

Quoting aviators99 (Reply 36):
but a controlled water landing has a very high survivability rate

I'd love to see the statistics, because my understanding is that water landings have a very low survival percentage compared to off runway setdowns.
 
fpetrutiu
Posts: 730
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 11:28 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:59 am

Latest info from press conference:

2 dead > R.I.P.
182 transported to area hospitals if which 5 in critical condition > wishing them speedy recovery
123 with no reported injuries or very minor > buy a lottery ticket, seems to be your lucky day

This seems to account for all 307 passengers.
Florin
Orlando, FL
 
mark2fly1034
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:38 pm

OZ 777 Crash At SFO Part 3

Sun Jul 07, 2013 3:00 am

Quoting Gonzalo (Reply 44):

I don't know much about the 747 but on most planes they don't have a great view of the outside and she should of been seated as they were about to take off. Here is ATC recording if no one has posted it yet

http://soberbuildengineer-com.s3.amazonaws.com/AAR214-KSFO-Crash.mp3
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

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