News Asiana 777-200 Crash on landing at SFO

[Athena]

Strange... did the plane land with too much pitch and have a hard tailstrike?

That could be possible since some witnesses said they saw the plane approach at a "odd angle".

Maybe at approach its pitch was too high and it's tail hit ground-first? There were reports that the plane started shaking just before touching down

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Shaking? Hmmm... maybe the buffet before a stall?

Looks like this is shaping up to be a case of pilot error...

 

[garyw]

There were reports that the plane started shaking just before touching down

Could be a stall. Too slow for some reason, a stall, nose pitches up, plane comes down tail first.

Looks like this is shaping up to be a case of pilot error...

Agreed - unless it's another [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_38"]BA038[/ame]?

 

[Urwumpe]

Maybe at approach its pitch was too high and it's tail hit ground-first? There were reports that the plane started shaking just before touching down

That would be possible, the 777 has (Boeing-style) FBW, it should not pitch up accidentally by wind gusts, but also land at a bad angle, if the pilot says so. (But I would have to read the manual again for being sure about the involved subsystems)

 

[Quick_Nick]

Seems like nice weather anyhow.

 

[Athena]

Could be a stall. Too slow for some reason, a stall, nose pitches up, plane comes down tail first.

Hold on, the article at RT says:

The plane "started violently shaking" after it hit the runway at San Francisco airport, and then "rolled over," a witness told local channel KTVU.

A stall is a highly unlikely after touching down, right? Unless it bounces up again and "rolls over"

The only thing is - what caused that shaking after touching down?

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Huh... anyone happen to catch the tail number of this bird? Maybe it had the RR engines... Doesn't have them anymore.

 

[garyw]

A stall is a highly unlikely after touching down, right? Unless it bounces up again and "rolls over"

The only thing is - what caused that shaking after touching down?

A stall after landing is impossible. you're on the ground, you want to lose the speed and stop the wing flying. The shaking on touchdown would just be vibration from the runway surface transiting through the airframe. All normal.

That plane didn't roll over - it's upright and the right engine is next to the wing. It went off the runway yes but there was no rollover.

 

[Urwumpe]

Could be a stall.

Stall would mean nose down by FBW aircraft, but I am not sure if it would also react so during landing. I suspect not, but also not a worse reaction.

Agreed - unless it's another BA038?

Unlikely, since the problem in this specific engine type was already fixed.

 

[garyw]

The plane had Pratt and Witney engines. Very unlikely to be an engine rollback.

this on twitter -> At this time, we have no fatalities, one critical already airlifted and at San Fran General.

 

[Screamer7]

It looks like the 777 clipped the edge where the runway start.
There are some debris in the water.
There is clearly markings on the breakwater edge of runway 28L
For me it looks like it had difficulty maintaining power to land safely.
And it nearly made it to the runway!!!
It reminded me of a similar accident in the UK a few years back.
Icing in the fuel lines was the culprit.....or so they think

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Aha! That's the BA038 reference from Gary's earlier post.

Interesting... that impact would certainly explain the shaking: the landing gear grinding itself to pieces after making the runway.

Hate to be the ramp agents selected to do the FOD Walk after this one. :uhh:

 

[Screamer7]

Aha! That's the BA038 reference from Gary's earlier post.

Interesting... that impact would certainly explain the shaking: the landing gear grinding itself to pieces after making the runway.

Hate to be the ramp agents selected to do the FOD Walk after this one. :uhh:

Yes, BA038 that was. Thanks.
There are a lot of similarities to that crash.
But it is pure speculation at this time.
Maybe we will get more info later on.
Anyway, I am glad everyone got out without casualties.
It looks like a miracle.

---------- Post added at 08:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:36 PM ----------

Here is the ATC of the incident.
Quite hectic as the controller divert other aircraft due for landing.
http://wandr.me/Audio/AAR214-KSFO-Crash.mp3

 

[Mojave]

This is so bad. I can't stand it when these things happen. So, so bad.

 

[garyw]

Lots of talk now about the nose being at a 45 degree angle during approach. some rumours that the approach speed was 98 knots. this is way below normal approach speed which is around the 135knots mark (depending on weight). they must have had stall alarms going on - questions as to why they didn't do a go around.....

 

[Urwumpe]

Lots of talk now about the nose being at a 45 degree angle during approach. some rumours that the approach speed was 98 knots. this is way below normal approach speed which is around the 135knots mark (depending on weight). they must have had stall alarms going on - questions as to why they didn't do a go around.....

Well, it is very hard for a witness to tell the pitch angle accurately ... it could also be just 25° and still appear like 45°

But still, even 25° is WAY too much, especially for such a long cigar like the 777.

 

[garyw]

Fully agreed, a airplane flying away from you looks like it's flying downward. Perspective is a very odd thing. It'll be interesting to see the FDR output from this - assuming it's intact. Also be interesting to see where the tail and left engine ended up.

 

[Screamer7]

Lots of talk now about the nose being at a 45 degree angle during approach. some rumours that the approach speed was 98 knots. this is way below normal approach speed which is around the 135knots mark (depending on weight). they must have had stall alarms going on - questions as to why they didn't do a go around.....

Maybe they was unable to make a go around?

 

[garyw]

Maybe - but why? Did they try?

If they tried and were unable to do so we are back to a BA038 style incident or other engine rollback.

If they didn't try then we are looking at crew factors - did they not see the speed decrease? What about the stall warnings? - There may not have been a stall warning due to the gear being down and it being in landing phase but there should have been a 'sink rate' call out at least.....

Lots of questions....

the tail fin is on the ground and not on the water so could easily have been ripped off with a very heavy tail impact.

 

[N_Molson]

At this time, we have no fatalities, one critical already airlifted and at San Fran General.

Anyway, that's already a very positive thing, given the harshness of the crash-landing.