How would the crew know if the engines were there and running? They can't see them from the cockpit and the engine instrument lines were severed.

Quoting zeke (Reply 96): Quoting thaiflyer (Reply 93): I'm sorry but in this case it was obvious that an evacuation was required. If the plane lost it engines etc you don't have to wait until the engines are switched of. Nothing is obvious at all in these sort of situations, think about this in real time where the crew are not expecting an evacuation, not with the benefit of hindsight.

As Zeke says, hindsight is 20/20. Yes, we now know that evacuation could have started immediately. However they did not know that.

Following the checklist is in the vast majority of cases the right course of action. In aviation if you make the wrong call based on your gut in an emergency you are likely to end up dead. If you follow the appropriate procedure you are likely to make it.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 68): Swedish tabloid (not quite as bad as The Daily Mail but close) r

I'd say anything that's written by them is unverified information from other papers at its best. They haven't got a clue about most things they write about, seldom verifies information it seems and their spelling and grammar is easily matched by any teen blogger. Until other sources say the same I'd take that information as less accurate speculation than most entries in this thread. Far less.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 99): Quoting zeke (Reply 94):it would follow we are talking about 30 seconds from the crash, aircraft coming to rest, to the start of the evacuation. While the NTSB says 90 seconds.

Enough time for some of the pax to gather their hand baggage and duty-free bags! These people (the pax who did this) should be court-martialled for putting others' lives at risk!

Quoting moriarty (Reply 101): Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 68): Swedish tabloid (not quite as bad as The Daily Mail but close) r I'd say anything that's written by them is unverified information from other papers at its best. They haven't got a clue about most things they write about, seldom verifies information it seems and their spelling and grammar is easily matched by any teen blogger. Until other sources say the same I'd take that information as less accurate speculation than most entries in this thread. Far less.

Still not as bad as The Daily Mail. 

Quoting sankaps (Reply 102): Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 99): Quoting zeke (Reply 94):it would follow we are talking about 30 seconds from the crash, aircraft coming to rest, to the start of the evacuation. While the NTSB says 90 seconds. Enough time for some of the pax to gather their hand baggage and duty-free bags! These people (the pax who did this) should be court-martialled for putting others' lives at risk!

First off, court martials are for military personnel. Secondly, they were likely in shock. The fault is more with lack of knowledge and less than incisive safety briefings than admittedly clueless passengers.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 103): Still not as bad as The Daily Mail.

Other source.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...ht-214-ntsb-pilot-blinded/2507059/

Personally I think the most important question is, no matter what automation and/or other factors (sun) contributed, why the pilots did airspeed get that low. As with the AF447, I guess there won't be a single, simple answer.

[Edited 2013-07-11 02:36:35]

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 103): First off, court martials are for military personnel

Yes, I know that, it is just an expression.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 103): The fault is more with lack of knowledge and less than incisive safety briefings than admittedly clueless passengers

Don't know if any amount of safety briefings would help such clueless or self-centered passengers.

Quoting zeke (Reply 94): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WczPnDDipKw&feature=player_embedded

Wow - this and its Part 2 are pretty amazing, quite apart from the "real life" audio overlay. Well done PWNDTROLL! It shows a full 12 minutes of time without major cabin fire, very fortunately giving a lot of time for the evac. It is clear that there are two fire sequences: The first is the right engine burning next to the fuselage starting at final impact which was seen by cc and drove evac order. This was burning throughout the evac, while being fought by first firetrucks to arrive, and NTSB said this was visible and maybe partially impacting into cabin and may have been fought by cc as reported in some way along the hull or through the 2R door. Smoke probably entering through 2R too, and final exits by fire/police/Lee talked about increasing smoke. But the main cabin does not appear to be significantly on fire at that point. Sometime later a fire reignites or expands significantly or was already cooking within the cargo areas below and it is this second fire sequence that consumes the cabin and burns out the roof. Whether the fire service should have contained this is an interesting question - but the evac was complete at that point.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 99): The more info we get from the NTSB, the more confusing the timeline and what was going on inside the aircraft it becomes.

The time sequence remains confusing but I am not seeing all this inconsistency you have with the limited statements of fact briefed by NTSB, which they don't claim is complete.

Quoting shrike (Reply 106): The time sequence remains confusing but I am not seeing all this inconsistency you have with the limited statements of fact briefed by NTSB

Is the timeline becoming more clear to you with each release?

Quoting keegd76 (Reply 95): If the fire didn't reach the cabin then what were the crew members fighting with extinguishers?

The NTSB briefing in the 30/31 min mark said fire did get in the cabin, cabin crew, pilots, and the ARFF were fighting it internally. Then later when describing the removal of the pinned cabin crew at R2 at the 32 min mark makes a slightly different statement.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 99): While the NTSB says 90 seconds

The NTSB briefing in the 25-30 min mark describes this, they said around 90 seconds for the slides L1/L2 to deploy, the video I linked in reply 94 shows passengers off the aircraft before that time on the RHS. They also said the times are preliminary.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 100):

The NTSB in their briefing at the 44 min mark talks about this, and not to judge the evacuation based upon hindsight.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 105):

The NTSB briefing did say the PF did convey to them he was temporarily blinded at approximately the 500 ft point by a flash of light. A question was asked if this light was a laser, they did not want to confirm or deny that, they are still looking into it.

They also said each interview with each pilot lasted about 4 hours, and they all were cooperative.

Quoting thaiflyer (Reply 93): I'm sorry but in this case it was obvious that an evacuation was required.

Once the fire was visible yes it was required period. That said before it was spotted the crew would have been irresponsible not to assess the situation. They could have evacuated people right in front of an engine stuck at full thrust they had no control over. (Or evacuate passengers into the path of emergency vehicles.) If there was no fire that is not a risk you want to take. Of course once the fire was spotted anywhere else was likely safer.

I call BS on this evac as well. What was really going on in that cockpit?!

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 74): You surely wouldn't want about 300 people swarming around in the open anyway, given that the airport was in full operation? I'm sure that normal practice is to keep people in their seats until rescue crews and ambulances arrive?

Yes let's all sit in our seats like good little boys and girls.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 74): Also, the pilots on the flight deck didn't know about the fire at that stage? I believe that, in any case, as soon as the cabin crew told them about that - within a couple of minutes, I gather - evacuation was authorised, so it's a bit of a 'non-issue' really?

Huh, a few more minutes and they could have all been dead.

Quoting flood (Reply 73): They never announced "there was no need to evacuate". As far as I'm aware, a pilot told the FA "not yet" - there's a big difference as they may very well have seen the need but were trying to ascertain the state of the engines (as Zeke pointed out) or other external hazards. Not defending their actions, we just don't know the circumstances or their reasoning behind the decision.

I'm wondering how the cockpit crew is supposed to assess the outside conditions, when they can't even see the engines from their position anyway...

Quoting airtechy (Reply 76): I'm sorry....I just find that hard to believe. One engine is laying beside the plane smoldering and another is across the runway in full view of the cockpit which itself was almost on the ground. Plus....only a small part of the cockpit should have been powered as it was running on batteries. Surely it should have been obvious that the engines were dead/gone. Remains me of the L1011 where everyone died because the pilot did not stop and evacuate the airplane.

  

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 78): I find it hard to believe that people listened to the request to stay in your seats. Not sure if a plane full of people from another culture would obey this authority in the same way. I would assume at least some people would start to open the emergency doors as soon as the plane came to stop regardless of there being an announcement to do so. But then again I take off my 'seat belt before coming to a complete stop at the gate'. I understand the risks but I just don't think many people think in these situations, they just react. Tough to say for sure though.

As they say, I would have been ghost.

Quoting thaiflyer (Reply 93): I'm sorry but in this case it was obvious that an evacuation was required. If the plane lost it engines etc you don't have to wait until the engines are switched of. I can understand completely that the passengers did not wait until the captain gave the evacuate command. If i was in this plane and had those kind of experience i also would be eager to get of the plane regardless what the captain says.

   This might not be PC on such a forum as this... But if I were a passenger on that plane, forget flight crew and cabin crew, I would have commenced evacuation myself. After the landing gear collapse and a half somersault, there was no other way to get off the plane...

Quoting shrike (Reply 106): Wow - this and its Part 2 are pretty amazing, quite apart from the "real life" audio overlay. Well done PWNDTROLL! It shows a full 12 minutes of time without major cabin fire, very fortunately giving a lot of time for the evac. It is clear that there are two fire sequences: The first is the right engine burning next to the fuselage starting at final impact which was seen by cc and drove evac order. This was burning throughout the evac, while being fought by first firetrucks to arrive, and NTSB said this was visible and maybe partially impacting into cabin and may have been fought by cc as reported in some way along the hull or through the 2R door. Smoke probably entering through 2R too, and final exits by fire/police/Lee talked about increasing smoke. But the main cabin does not appear to be significantly on fire at that point. Sometime later a fire reignites or expands significantly or was already cooking within the cargo areas below and it is this second fire sequence that consumes the cabin and burns out the roof. Whether the fire service should have contained this is an interesting question - but the evac was complete at that point.

To me, the fire department seems horribly slow to do anything. They could have had foam and water into the right engine much earlier. But they didnt even do anything...they just sat there for a time before any sort of action.

What if there were more people paralyzed as a result of the crash in their seats, or trapped under debris.

Doesn't look all that good to me.

So... The experienced pilots are saying that evaluating the situation before an evacuation is the right call, while non-pilots are saying they should have just gone for it immediately, and basing that judgment on information the pilots did not actually have at the time...

As so often the case on this forum, a gap in understanding between the layman and the experienced professional.

[Edited 2013-07-11 03:27:18]

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 111):

I love how you disagree with several Pilots and First officers. I hope for your sake if you ever get stuck in an emercency that you dont evacuate into an engine stuck at full thrust ala QF32.

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 111): But if I were a passenger on that plane, forget flight crew and cabin crew, I would have commenced evacuation myself. After the landing gear collapse and a half somersault, there was no other way to get off the plane...

Emergency evacuations are something that crew do not do consider lightly, people almost always get hurt during the process. My guess is that the crew were following procedures not being able to assess the outside condition of the aircraft to contact ATC to see if they could tell them what they could see.

Once they received news from D2 that they saw an external fire around row 10, I think the evacuation was ordered.

Please do not forget, that the slides in R1/R2 both inflated inside the cabin after the second major impact. It is also apparent from the NTSB briefing that no crew were available at the rear of the aircraft to open the doors, 3 out of the 4 being ejected from the aircraft during the impact, the 4th being injured.

Crew are trained on how to evaluate the aircraft outside to determine if it is safe to open a door (fire, engine running, aerobridge etc), door R3 looks to have had debris right outside the door in the scene photos. Crews are also trained on how to manually inflate the slide if the automatic mechanism does not work, and how to direct passengers to the available exits.

There has been a lot of talk on here about poor CRM being a cultural issue in airlines in Korea. I have heard the exact opposite from the NTSB todays briefing. It would appear the relief FO did speak up and called the sink rate on final, as well as for a go-around. It would also appear the door primary at L2 after hearing the order not to evacuate, sent their assistant at L2 to the cockpit to inform the cockpit of the external fire. Both are examples of GOOD CRM.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 74): You surely wouldn't want about 300 people swarming around in the open anyway, given that the airport was in full operation? I'm sure that normal practice is to keep people in their seats until rescue crews and ambulances arrive?

How many passengers have ever been run over by a rescue crew compared to the number who have died of smoke inhalation in the cabin ?

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 74): Also, the pilots on the flight deck didn't know about the fire at that stage? I believe that, in any case, as soon as the cabin crew told them about that - within a couple of minutes, I gather - evacuation was authorised, so it's a bit of a 'non-issue' really?

Its only a bit of a "non issue" due to the fire not penetrating the cabin until after the passengers evacuated. If the fire had took hold whilst they were still inside it would have been a major issue.

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 111): To me, the fire department seems horribly slow to do anything. They could have had foam and water into the right engine much earlier. But they didnt even do anything...they just sat there for a time before any sort of action.

To me it usually seems that the fire crews have 5 years supply of foam to use up, I clearly remember BA 38 being doused in the stuff even with no fire. On this occasion however the fire seems to have took them by surprise.

Some have said that the flight crew need to ascertain of the engines are still running before authorising the evacuation. As the plane was sitting on its belly they couldn't possibly still be attached   

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 111): This might not be PC on such a forum as this... But if I were a passenger on that plane, forget flight crew and cabin crew, I would have commenced evacuation myself. After the landing gear collapse and a half somersault, there was no other way to get off the plane...

And in doing so, possibly create panic and cause people to run in front of a running engine perhaps?
Dear god man, you're sitting in front of a PC in calm surroundings with 20/20 hindsight and you are still being irrational and irresponsible?!
I sincerely hope I am never on an emergency craft with you on board. And I also hope that if you ever were to ignore instructions and cause deaths, that you are prosecuted to the full extent the law will allow.

[Edited 2013-07-11 04:47:32]

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 115): Some have said that the flight crew need to ascertain of the engines are still running before authorising the evacuation. As the plane was sitting on its belly they couldn't possibly still be attached

The fact that the center of the plane is sitting on its belly might not be obvious to the crew at the pointy end.

It's not only running engines. It is fire, debris, etc...

Again, easy to say what they should have done with 20/20 hindsight.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 23): > After crash, #Asiana214 attendant asked crew whether an evacuation should start. Crew said no; announcement made over PA to stay in seats.

Funny this pops up again....

I mentioned this several thread iterations ago and even provided a news story link but everyone said "Naw, couldn't be, it was only the automated recording playing, forget it, it didn't happen."

Well, here is yet another story that indicates it DID happen and the pilots are credited with telling the f/a's to keep people in their seats.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50150631n

What ya' say now? .. Naw, didn't happen, couldn't have happened, we at a.net know better than this!!!

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 112): So... The experienced pilots are saying that evaluating the situation before an evacuation is the right call, while non-pilots are saying they should have just gone for it immediately, and basing that judgment on information the pilots did not actually have at the time... As so often the case on this forum, a gap in understanding between the layman and the experienced professional.

How were the experienced pilots supposed to evaluate the situation?

There is a gap, if you the pilot can't see what's going on in the cabin or outside, and I the passenger can...I would GTFO. You know as well as I do that you can't see the engines from a 777's flight deck. So what's next to know? The flight crew is possibly incapacitated? The pilots could have very well been dead...crushed. Yes, let me wait for their instruction.

Quoting zkokq (Reply 113): I love how you disagree with several Pilots and First officers. I hope for your sake if you ever get stuck in an emercency that you dont evacuate into an engine stuck at full thrust ala QF32.

I kind of do disagree. QF32 didn't lose the landing gear, crash land, do a half somersault in the air, and crush the whole lower fuselage. Flame me all you want. Yes I am saying what I would have done, take the lead and GTFO.

It actually looks like some of the pax and cabin crew did just that. And I would have been one of them, kicking your ass down that damn chute.

Quoting garpd (Reply 116): And in doing so, possibly create panic and cause people to run in front of a running engine perhaps? Dear god man, you're sitting in front of a PC in calm surroundings with 20/20 hindsight and you are still being irrational and irresponsible?! I sincerely hope I am never on an emergency crash with you on board. And I also hope that if you ever were to ignore instructions and cause deaths, that you are prosecuted to the full extent the law will allow.

Now now, I'd never run in front of the engine. I might be brash but I ain't stupid.  

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 119): There is a gap, if you the pilot can't see what's going on in the cabin or outside, and I the passenger can...I would GTFO. You know as well as I do that you can't see the engines from a 777's flight deck. So what's next to know? The flight crew is possibly incapacitated? The pilots could have very well been dead...crushed. Yes, let me wait for their instruction.

The flight and cabin crew have extensive training in emergency procedures. The pax do not. Who do you think knows better?

Yes, certainly the flight crew could have been dead or some other special circumstance. There are tons of different possibilities. However the crew is following procedures developed on the basis of dozens of accidents, computer models, human behavior models. They won't always be the best thing, but most likely they are.

If you want to GTFO, so be it. There have been accidents where cabin crew have tried to stop people using exits with a fire outside and been shoved aside. The people who exited didn't make it. Who was right in that case?

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 120): Now now, I'd never run in front of the engine. I might be brash but I ain't stupid.

Fair enough, but lots of people might. Group think leads to people doing irrational things all the time, especially when panicked.

[Edited 2013-07-11 04:00:12]

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 120): Now now, I'd never run in front of the engine. I might be brash but I ain't stupid.

You might not, but the people who you just drew into a panic by ignoring instructions and as you put it "GTFO", might just do that.

People do silly things in a panic.
That is why it is important to assert authority in an emergency situation. Panicked people will tend to listen to someone who sounds like they are in charge.

Having someone then run past saying they're going anyway and opening a door will just make them all rush for that door.
Cue crush injuries, injuries from falling, injuries from sliding down a chute into fire or sharp debris, etc.
All because YOU decided to ignore instructions.

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 119): How were the experienced pilots supposed to evaluate the situation?

By using all available resources, internal and external. Instruments, front window, smell, sounds, ATC, and then they had the crew from D2.

Don't forget, R1/R2 slides inflated inside the cabin pinning crew down, and 3 out of the 4 crew in the back were ejected during the impact. By my simple maths, only 6 crew were in a position to get the passengers off.

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 119): There is a gap, if you the pilot can't see what's going on in the cabin or outside, and I the passenger can...I would GTFO. You know as well as I do that you can't see the engines from a 777's flight deck. So what's next to know? The flight crew is possibly incapacitated? The pilots could have very well been dead...crushed. Yes, let me wait for their instruction.

Very soon after coming to rest the cabin crew established face to face communications with the cockpit, this is good CRM. If the cabin crew could not establish communication with the cockpit, we call this a catastrophic event, and they are then trained to make their own assessment to commence a evacuation or not.

Quoting shrike (Reply 91): http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...ash-probe-20130711,0,1307277.story Shame on you OZ for putting these heroes through this for your supposed PR benefit.

Even more shameful is CNN who has a *video* of that exhibition of the cabin crew.

Asian cabin crew in particular seem to take extreme pride in their appearance. Have you ever noticed them in the airport after a flight? Perfect posture and comport, not a hair out of place and makeup is perfect. Can you imagine the discomfort these six F/As felt being forced to pose in somewhat sloppy casual clothes, still in their roles as cabin crew professionals? Two of them, including the male F/A, are in flip flops. I wonder if they still had no access to even their cabin luggage and what they were wearing was provided by Good Samaritan efforts of the teams supporting the crash survivors?

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 119):

it's interesting... The bbc interviewed one of the passengers as they came off, an indian looking guy.

he amazed me by saying he didn't realise how bad it was, that it just felt like a hard landing...

I'm just relaying what was said- any one else see that interview?

if the passenger was that oblivious, it may be down to seating plan... The rear would've known, but the front?

a good call yo assess things first IMO. The fire was obviously a red line however.

If the timing of the video is correct, the evacuation began well within 1 minute of the plane coming to rest.

It also seems that the pilots must be able to see that one of their engines is across the runway in front of them.

I notice that the slides are almost a hindrance with the fuselage so close to the ground. People are having to walk/run on the slides.

Quoting liquidair (Reply 125): he amazed me by saying he didn't realise how bad it was, that it just felt like a hard landing... I'm just relaying what was said- any one else see that interview? if the passenger was that oblivious, it may be down to seating plan... The rear would've known, but the front?

If that's his idea of a hard landing...   

Not matter where you were sitting on that plane, that was a crash.

He could be a Brit, we have a knack for understatement  

I think the lack of enough medics in crash response teams and plans is more significant than whether the ~90 second situation assessment prior to evac order was too long or not. These 911 calls report waiting around for any medical attention for 20+ minutes on the tarmac. If crashes are now much more survivable then more medics and ambulances are needed in the response teams, not just fire trucks.

http://news.kron4.com/video/raw-vide...-tapes-of-asiana-flight-214-crash/

Quoting garpd (Reply 116): And in doing so, possibly create panic and cause people to run in front of a running engine perhaps? Dear god man, you're sitting in front of a PC in calm surroundings with 20/20 hindsight and you are still being irrational and irresponsible?!I sincerely hope I am never on an emergency crash with you on board. And I also hope that if you ever were to ignore instructions and cause deaths, that you are prosecuted to the full extent the law will allow.

Say your a passenger that has just endured a similar event...are you going to sit there till all the blood in your head gets flowing normally again a wait to be told what to do by the crew. If your all the way in the rear, you have no way of knowing if the cockpit is still intact. In a "perfect crash", should you survive, the entire roster of passengers and crew has 90 seconds...you just wasted 60...Of course there will be panic, confusion...the alternative is not acceptable.

Quoting keegd76 (Reply 127):

it seems incredible to me too...

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 120): Now now, I'd never run in front of the engine. I might be brash but I ain't stupid.

People usually somehow involved with aircraft know this, but the general public at large hasn't a clue. Has there ever been a case of a passenger running into a running engine after a crash?

Quoting type-rated (Reply 131): Has there ever been a case of a passenger running into a running engine after a crash?

No, probably because most listen to the crew.  

[Edited 2013-07-11 05:04:41]

Quoting zkokq (Reply 113): I hope for your sake if you ever get stuck in an emercency that you dont evacuate into an engine stuck at full thrust ala QF32.

QF32 was very different, as Pellegrine notes below

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 119): I kind of do disagree. QF32 didn't lose the landing gear, crash land, do a half somersault in the air, and crush the whole lower fuselage. Flame me all you want. Yes I am saying what I would have done, take the lead and GTFO.

Fully agree with Bongodog as well:

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 115): How many passengers have ever been run over by a rescue crew compared to the number who have died of smoke inhalation in the cabin ?

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 115): Its only a bit of a "non issue" due to the fire not penetrating the cabin until after the passengers evacuated. If the fire had took hold whilst they were still inside it would have been a major issue.

As to Starlion's comment below: this training did not prevent the Saudia L1011 or the British Airtours 737 Flight 28M on-the-ground fire catastrophes from occurring. Both occurred because evacuation was delayed because the cockpit crew did not realize the seriousness of the situation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airtours_Flight_28M

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 121): The flight and cabin crew have extensive training in emergency procedures. The pax do not. Who do you think knows better?

Bottom-line: In a crash situation (as opposed to an emergency landing), the difference between 30 seconds and 90 seconds is huge, and can make the difference between life and death. 90 seconds is an eternity to wait for evacuation clearance for a crashed aircraft. The Indian pax may have not realized how serious it was, the cockpit crew would or should have known by just seeing the debris (including a detached engine) around them.

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 111): I'm wondering how the cockpit crew is supposed to assess the outside conditions, when they can't even see the engines from their position anyway...

Umm, you open the cockpit side window and look out???

Quoting Norcal773 (Reply 84): I agree with you 100%. The more facts that we know, the more it looks like they dropped the ball on this one big time. having gone to flight school myself, I just don't understand how one can miss altitude and airspeed indications for so long to the point where it was too late when one of the pilots did something about it, especially the PNF. Having flown OZ 6 times on this particular route, I've been a huge advocate of the airline over the years but this worries me. BTW- Long time no 'see' on this forum! Hope you're doing alright.

It wasn't just the airspeed and altitude indications they missed. How about the aural warnings and relief pilot call put for sink rate? And how about the visual cues like the PAPI and the deteriorating visual cue of the runway while sinking further and further below the glidepath? Or how about the state of their AP/AT settings? Or the unusually high pitch angle they were coming in at? And they were nearly 35kts below vref at one point shortly before impact.

They missed everything on this approach. I don't even know that there was a CRM issue...from what we know now, this looks like unbridled incompetence. Pure and simple. There are experienced flight simulator pilots that would be able to assess this situation more competently. And I don't care if the AT wasn't behaving like they expected. You just don't bleed nearly 60 kts off the speedtape after Flaps 30 and are sporting a 10 degree pitch angle a few hundred feet out with vs rates over -1000 and the stick shaker going off before you notice that something is off.

And once you let that marinate for a little, the bit that Mach92 posted becomes believable (as unbelievable as it sounds). And while I get that ROK is on paper the safest country in the world for aviation, it wouldn't be the first time that an international body/entity would have been fooled into thinking more highly of a country's level of proficiency than was really true.

For the record...as incompetent as the landing was handled, it seems that post crash, the pilots functioned very professionally by assessing the situation before ordering evac and then helping the pax get out of the aircraft before it burnt out.

Unfortunately, I would rather my pilots were skilled airmen first so I don't have to worry about how good they are at assessing damage before orring evac....

It is pretty hard to fault the flight crew and their call to evacuation when 99.3% of the passengers survived a major accident.

Quoting Gatorman96 (Reply 136): It is pretty hard to fault the flight crew and their call to evacuation when 99.3% of the passengers survived a major accident.

Yes.

The two fatalities had already been ejected, apparently. One may have been hit by a vehicle.

Plus, several F/A's had also been ejected or were unable to do their job due to the crash.

Basically we had a 100% successful evacuation of the pax that could be evacuated, with less than a full complement of F/A's.

Quoting upperdeck (Reply 134):

Was that done in this case?

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 138): Was that done in this case?

Pictures from pax show the windows as closed.
I would imagine the reports of fire came in before the pilots got as far as opening the windows.

Quoting zeke (Reply 109): The NTSB briefing did say the PF did convey to them he was temporarily blinded at approximately the 500 ft point by a flash of light. A question was asked if this light was a laser, they did not want to confirm or deny that, they are still looking into it.

Was it a "blinding flash of light of culture"?
This needs to be looked at and is more pertinent to the investigations than the talk of the alleged "obedient/autocratic cockpit serfdom of Korea" culture.

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 115): Some have said that the flight crew need to ascertain of the engines are still running before authorising the evacuation. As the plane was sitting on its belly they couldn't possibly still be attached

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 119): How were the experienced pilots supposed to evaluate the situation?

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 119): So what's next to know? The flight crew is possibly incapacitated? The pilots could have very well been dead...crushed. Yes, let me wait for their instruction.

The procedure is there for a reason. It's not made up for no reason. The procedure also allow for a common flow with adequate flexibility to meet the situation requirements.

I have seen the crew emergency procedures (some for FAs, some for flight crew, and some on a common documentation) for various airlines in various countries. All, have a common procedure flow:

1. After a crash, PA for everyone to remain in seats. (Alert Phase)
2. Flight Crew to assess situation, complete checklist and QRH as applicable (to allow for a safe evacuation).
3. Cabin crew immediately standby their exits, ready to act immediately upon next PA, and also to allow for their own assessment (see obstacles outside, fire risk, presence/absence of crew at other station, visibility of damage).
4. Flight Crew will announce alert cancellation, precautionary disembarkation or evacuation.

Alert Phase:
This provides a common procedure to prevent evacuation until engines are shut down and/or to allow time to assess situation.
Cabin crew is to immediately standby their exits, check outside the aircraft, control passengers, and be ready to act in response to further PA.
(Note: Alert Phase can take several minutes).
Cabin crew are to report information about abnormal condition in the cabin and outside the aircraft which is essential information to the Flight Crew during this phase.
All information are to be relayed immediately to the flight deck, and only ONE communication attempt to be made.
Alert can be cancelled, or phase move on to precautionary disembarkation, or evacuation.

Emergency Considerations:
Captain has prime responsibility for initiating evacuation.
If Cabin Crew consider that an evacuation is necessary they must attempt to advise the captain of the situation and await instructions.
Cabin crew must not initiate an evacuation without attempting this communication.
If it is obvious that evacuation is imperative and contact with flight crew is not possible, only then will cabin crew assume responsibility for initiating an evacuation.
Captain should attempt to keep the cabin crew and passengers fully informed of his/her intention when any situation develops which may require an emergency evacuation or precautionary disembarkation.

Note:
Unprepared emergency evacuation is more common than a prepared evacuation. It requires extreme urgency.
Whenever possible, if contact with flight deck cannot be established then report to next in command according to the cabin chain of command (first point of contact would be Cabin Services Manager/Purser), and CSM (or next in cabin command) shall coordinate the evacuation.
If a cabin call in Alert Phase is unanswered due to more pertinent duties, flight crew must call CSM as soon as workload permits to obtain the information.

Pellegrine, do note the procedure require cabin crew to act as extra eyes to monitor the situation inside and outside the aircraft. It is not just the cockpit crew trying to determine the situation. If the cabin crew sees an immediate need to evacuate, they tell the cockpit. If the cockpit seems to unable to comprehend the situation, the cabin crew CAN initiate the evacuation themselves.

The flow above is applied to airlines around the world, from the good to the bad.
Feel free to GTFO when you feel you need to and screw what the crew says... but you may say you won't walk in front of a running engine... but you may jump into fuel awaiting to burn, or maybe forced to jump from a door at some height because the slide didn't work and you were pushed by panicked passangers who are also in the same mindset as you (the GTFO mentality), who'd then jump off pushed by others behind them... so you land break your foot or something unable to walk, and others land on top of you... next to a growing fire... Sure... FEEL FREE TO DO THAT and kill yourself.

So you won't walk in front of the engine... sure, walk to the back and open the door and deploy the slide... behind a running engine perhaps? Do you know how much damage has "GTFO I'm outta here" pax have caused ? In the past 5 years alone I recall half a dozen slides, several beaten/punched up cabin crew, etc.
One incident here there was a runway overrun, airplane was undamaged, but one GTFO passenger wants to GTFO fearing it had crashed. Cabin crew told them to sit down... the guy just ran to the CSM, screaming 'you wanna kill us all?', punched the CSM and knocked her out for a few minutes, opened the front left door and jumped, LUCKILY just as the engines were being shut down. Result? Total mess of an evacuation, numerous injuries, the CSM was "thrown out" by the flow of the pax, etc... Cockpit crew saw the evacuation, and unable to contact the cabin crew thought there was a fire with immediate danger to the aircraft and so that they won't disturb the pax evacuation flow, exited through the cockpit windows only to see there was no damage. A dozen pax injured needing hospitalized, 1 knocked out CSM (which messed up the post evac command and control in coordinating with rescue services), and the elderly and disabled left in the aircraft with a panic attack one of which needed treatment in hospital for a suspected heart attack.

If you say "No, that case was a silly one...", my question is, where do you draw the line?
Sorry, but "GTFO am outta here" panic passengers are just as bad as those pax who evacuated with their big backpacks! They cause UNNECESSARY RISK!

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 119): QF32 didn't lose the landing gear, crash land, do a half somersault in the air, and crush the whole lower fuselage. Flame me all you want. Yes I am saying what I would have done, take the lead and GTFO.

Enjoy some countries' prisons if you do that!   

By the way, do you think that the above procedure is just limited to 'bad/incompetent airlines'?

Quoting garpd (Reply 122): You might not, but the people who you just drew into a panic by ignoring instructions and as you put it "GTFO", might just do that.

I guess he's gonna say, "their fault! There is NO way I am liable for that, if I am charged, then the legal system sucks!"

Quoting zeke (Reply 114): It is also apparent from the NTSB briefing that no crew were available at the rear of the aircraft to open the doors, 3 out of the 4 being ejected from the aircraft during the impact, the 4th being injured.

Quoting zeke (Reply 114): Crews are also trained on how to manually inflate the slide if the automatic mechanism does not work, and how to direct passengers to the available exits.

Quoting zeke (Reply 114): There has been a lot of talk on here about poor CRM being a cultural issue in airlines in Korea. I have heard the exact opposite from the NTSB todays briefing. It would appear the relief FO did speak up and called the sink rate on final, as well as for a go-around. It would also appear the door primary at L2 after hearing the order not to evacuate, sent their assistant at L2 to the cockpit to inform the cockpit of the external fire. Both are examples of GOOD CRM.

Quoting zeke (Reply 123): Very soon after coming to rest the cabin crew established face to face communications with the cockpit, this is good CRM. If the cabin crew could not establish communication with the cockpit, we call this a catastrophic event, and they are then trained to make their own assessment to commence a evacuation or not.

Pellegrine may not realize that the procedure is part of the lessons learnt from past cases of aircraft fire resulting in fatalities. The accidents he or others mentioned, actually resulted in the above procedure flow.

Part of the assessment in the alert phase is also to determine amongst the crew, who's there, who's not there, who's able, who's not able. I guess some will forever think that this phase is used by the FAs to redo their make-ups and forget the emergency at hand.

Oh, Good CRM, on a Korean carrier? (insert picture of disbelief by some)...

Quoting quiet1 (Reply 124): Can you imagine the discomfort these six F/As felt being forced to pose in somewhat sloppy casual clothes, still in their roles as cabin crew professionals?

Naaah! they know they're in America... the land where grandmothers and the ugly works as flight attendants, so they'll still look better than a lot of American FAs...    And yes... I AM JOKING!

Quoting liquidair (Reply 125): The bbc interviewed one of the passengers as they came off, an indian looking guy. he amazed me by saying he didn't realise how bad it was, that it just felt like a hard landing...

This is what "I'd GFTO and to hell with hindsight" proponents forgot... they have no idea!.

Mandala499

I can't understand why they didn't immediately evacuate and just sat there in the burning wreckage for a minute and a half before it occured to them that it was probably a good idea to get out. I also saw that Indian guy say something like "it was quite a hard landing". No kidding! I saw the video of the plane spinning around in a cloud of debris and losing it's tail, engines and wings.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 133): this training did not prevent the Saudia L1011 or the British Airtours 737 Flight 28M on-the-ground fire catastrophes from occurring. Both occurred because evacuation was delayed because the cockpit crew did not realize the seriousness of the situation.

The procedure I mentioned in the preceding reply, which is in use in Asiana, was the result of evacuaton studies into evacuation improvements based on those two accidents (plus others).
Those two accidents were crucial in introducing flightdeck-cabin CRM that is prevalent today, and resulted in the procedure stated in the previous reply.
Prior to BA028M, there were a lot of airlines who did not allow cabin crew to initiate evacuation regardless of the circumstances... and the carriers that had those old procedures/policies, were... errr... shocking (but unsurprisingly, included north Asian carriers, before they changed to the current procedures).

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 140):

Thank you for bringing some sense into the thread Mandala!



Sorry if it was already mentioned, but was it confirmed that the relief pilot called "sink rate" 54 seconds before impact?

You have a landing hard enough that it causes the emergency slides to inflate INSIDE, but let's wait here for a bit, anyway, we'll be fine!!

What incompetence.

Quoting jreuschl (Reply 144): What incompetence

You'd rather have an uncontrolled evacuation into possible fire hazards?

Quoting aaexecplat (Reply 135): It wasn't just the airspeed and altitude indications they missed. How about the aural warnings and relief pilot call put for sink rate? And how about the visual cues like the PAPI and the deteriorating visual cue of the runway while sinking further and further below the glidepath? Or how about the state of their AP/AT settings? Or the unusually high pitch angle they were coming in at? And they were nearly 35kts below vref at one point shortly before impact. They missed everything on this approach. I don't even know that there was a CRM issue...from what we know now, this looks like unbridled incompetence. Pure and simple.

Thanks for another post 'on topic,' talking about the crash, aaexecplat. I guess the thread is averaging about one post about the crash to thirty or so about the evacuation?  

I think the point you make about the effect of the extremely-low airspeed causing a nose-high attitude is very important/relevant. It's entirely possible - even probable - that, late on in the approach, the pilots couldn't even see the runway - or the PAPI - because the instrument panel was blocking their view............

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 137): The two fatalities had already been ejected, apparently. One may have been hit by a vehicle.

All we know there have been two fatalities, and the NTSB confirming today that all passengers remained in the aircraft during the crash. No passengers were ejected, 3 crew were from the rear of the fuselage.

The NTSB have been very careful not to say the cause or time of death, they have said that is a matter for the coroner.

For all we know all passengers and crew survived the event, and it was other related circumstance which resulted in loss of life.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 146): Thanks for another post 'on topic,' talking about the crash, aaexecplat. I guess the thread is averaging about one post about the crash to thirty or so about the evacuation?

The NTSB is investigating the circumstances surrounding the evacuation. That alone should make it fair game for a thread on the crash.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 140):

Do you really think a passenger did not realize that they had just done some unbelievable pitching, half somersault, lost passengers out the back, and ended up lying at an unconventional angle on the ground and not realized there was a crash? Do people from India not understand the concept of sarcasm?

I understand your concern about an orderly evacuation and not getting in front of engines. But how much risk are you also taking by not recognizing a dangerous cabin fire? in this case you were lucky that it didn't consume the cabin for some time - but in most cases you are going to have a cabin fire much more quickly. I would rather run the risk of getting hurt on a slide then perishing in flames in a cabin because the evacuation started too early and no one was able to get out in time. Once that fire breaks loose there IS no orderly evacuation. If the engines are a major concern, then one of the answers may be to look at how the evacuation routes function in reference to the engines.