Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

777 Crash and Fire at SFO

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Proof that spoilers, and quite a bit of it, can be used with flaps (I think it's 5).


    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

    Comment


    • For the record, after more consideration I believe there is much merit in Gabriel's method of solving vertical offsets. Its a technique that I have certainly been taught in the past, but I have not used extensively.

      It is a case of horses for courses, and the method I mentioned works well in the aircraft type I fly, but the 'Gabriel' method has real benefits in aircraft that are harder to slow down, such as the 777.

      3 bonus points to Gabriel

      Comment


      • I remember my first flight in an Air France 777, arriving into LAX (as in the photo Gabriel posted), there was some degree of spoilers up from about 14,000ft all the way down to the outer marker. It seems they are pretty good gliders on approach when most of their fuel is gone.

        Comment


        • Last spring I flew on this very same Asiana flight from Seoul to San Francisco.
          Same flight (on a 777), but they changed the flight number.

          It was on a clear day, good weather.

          I can tell you one thing: The pilots were actually manually piloting the plane during the entire approach.
          No Auto pilot, no Auto-throttle. I could tell (I am a private pilot). The guy had his hand on the Throttle and stick.

          I am pretty sure that Asiana pilots were instructed to never use the Auto pilot on SFO approach by good weather, after that crash.

          Comment


          • loupiote

            "I can tell you one thing: The pilots were actually manually piloting the plane during the entire approach.
            No Auto pilot, no Auto-throttle. I could tell (I am a private pilot). The guy had his hand on the Throttle and stick.

            I am pretty sure that Asiana pilots were instructed to never use the Auto pilot on SFO approach by good weather, after that crash.
            And you could tell this from sitting in the back in a passenger seat? "Because you are a private pilot"

            I would bet my next years pay check that Asiana has not "instructed" their flight crews not to use the auto-pilot during approaches at any airports.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
              And you could tell this from sitting in the back in a passenger seat?
              well, i had a window seat and i could see the ailerons, they were moving way too much and too fast
              compared to what they typically do when controlled by an automatism.
              I fly a lot, so yes, usually you can tell when there is an actual pilot at the helm.

              Also the pilot increased the power quite abruptly at some point during the final approach.
              Auto-throttle would have been more progressive.

              Of course, maybe they did not "instruct" the pilots, and maybe the Asiana pilots are just nervous
              and don't want the same shit to happen again in SFO.

              In any case, I was glad the pilot was (apparently) actually piloting that big plane, to a perfect landing.

              Comment


              • The ATR72 does have an isolated flight deck so it would have to be by subjective interpretation of flight control movements.
                Live, from a grassy knoll somewhere near you.

                Comment


                • We are talking 777 here, not ATR 72.

                  And yes, it is subjective, but usually the autopilot aileron motions are not jerky but rather smooth, and the automate
                  rarely overcompensates (unlike humans).

                  Comment


                  • Several years ago, I was riding in on a reasonably nice night and clear night and it seemed the pilots were really being throttle jockeys on a good, healthy ~10 mile final....heavy power...lay off, heavy power, lay off.

                    My private pilot brain said, wow, the pilots are doing a sloppy job on visually flying a nice smooth approach.

                    Later I discovered that an LDA approach existed for this runway with multiple step downs. This was the early 1990's and it was a 727 and I don't think they were doing "calculated glideslopes" back then. Who knows, maybe they were hand flying, but it became clear that what I THOUGHT I saw, may not have been what I REALLY saw.

                    After a few more years paying attention to power inputs, it became even more clear to me that there was a distinct possibility that these guys were "feeding the autopilot" commands and the big power fluctuations were probably the auto-throttles doing a very nice job managing speed.

                    Two weeks ago during cruise, there was a bunch of fairly abrubt power changes and during the middle parts of the descent we were maneuvering in the clouds and the control surfaces were very active. And, I'd bet Bobby's salary that those guys were using the autopilot.

                    And yeah, no way in hell are you told to NEVER use autopilot on an approach...Sure, I hope they are encouraged to hand fly sometimes but as a PPL myself, I don't think I can tell hand flying from autopiolot....maybe the hand flying is more gentle?
                    Les rčgles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by loupiote View Post
                      Of course, maybe they did not "instruct" the pilots, and maybe the Asiana pilots are just nervous and don't want the same shit to happen again in SFO.
                      I'm not sure if you meant that
                      - the Asiana pilots are ok with the same shit happening in an airport other than SFO, or that
                      - the Asiana pilots find the SFO approach like the one of the day of the accident particularly challenging and a contributing factor to said accident (long straight-in over the water with no obstacles whatsoever, to a long and wide runway with a localizer and VASI available, in daylight with perfect visibility and nearly no wind, in what's arguably the safest plane ever).

                      Could you please clarify? Thanks.

                      --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                      --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                        as a PPL myself, I don't think I can tell hand flying from autopiolot....maybe the hand flying is more gentle?
                        Well, sometimes during the approach (especially if there is some turbulence or unsteady sind) I say "aha, autopilot off". I can't be sure, but it's when the plane stops making quick corrections to keep the wins level and the pitch nailed and it starts to make slightly larger pitch and bank excursions and corrections.

                        --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                        --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                        Comment


                        • The VASI was not functioning the day of the crash.

                          Of course, I am sure they don't want the same shit happening on any airport

                          In any case, it totally felt like the plane was being actually piloted, given the roll / ailerons motions and throttle action in the final.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by loupiote View Post
                            The VASI was not functioning the day of the crash.
                            Yes it was. Read the report.

                            What was not working was the glide slope of the ILS.

                            As I said, they had the localizer for track and the VASI for slope, es external help. They also had a plane with a FMS capable of producing a virtual ILS based on airport database and current INS position.

                            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                              Yes it was. Read the report.

                              What was not working was the glide slope of the ILS.
                              oops, sorry, yes, you are right.

                              Comment


                              • Also, they were hand-flying the approach. So if they want to avoid te same mistake maybe they should enforce autoland at SFO rather than hand flying the approach.

                                Sorry for the brutal honesty, but I canīt find any meaning to your comment from any perspective that I try. Neither that you know for fact that they were on manual flight because you are a PPL, nor that the company enforced or the pilots self-imposed hand flying the approaches at SFO, nor that that would be of any help to avoid a similar mistake.

                                --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                                --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X