Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2013 20:18:22 GMT -5
The Talking Heads are having an organism over the Plane Crash in SF killing two people the rest of the passengers and crew I believe 139 people escaped , the heads have been talking anywhere from terrorism to wind shear to UFOs , the people that know about these things are being ignored , too boring .
|
|
|
|
Post by Swampy on Jul 6, 2013 20:37:38 GMT -5
No information as of yet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2013 20:47:34 GMT -5
Aye no real information yet , but from the looks of things the Pilot was excellent in handling the thing and there was a lot of luck floating around .
|
|
|
|
Post by mcnoch on Jul 7, 2013 0:58:17 GMT -5
As this is the fourth time that an aircraft landed short of this runway I guess the NTSB will look into this too.
|
|
|
|
Post by dontom on Jul 7, 2013 0:58:51 GMT -5
We are just a couple of miles north of SFO. We're up higher than SFO. We can see the planes lined up from our house here. That is very unusual that there are so many planes ready to take off on the runway that they back up to the point that we can see them from our home here. It's a real mess at SFO. Hotels / motels are packed normally here and no rooms available all the way from SF to San Jose the last I heard. So nobody can wait it out in a hotel or anything.
-Don- SSF, CA
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir John on Jul 7, 2013 1:38:00 GMT -5
Back in '82 I was having a quiet ale at SFO, and waiting to board my flight back to SYD.
It was about 10PM and i was watching the planes on final approach. The alnding lights were all stacked up and about 8 or nine in a line. As they neared touchdown they disappeared behind a building, and there were TWENTY TWO seconds between each one.
This was in the middle of the ATC strike.
SJ
|
|
|
|
Post by mcnoch on Jul 7, 2013 22:57:31 GMT -5
Seems the pilot flying had only 43 hours of experience with the B 777-200. While being an experienced pilot else, it might be an answer. But the NTSB will run of course a full investigation, as pilot errors are all too often claimed early by the media.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir John on Jul 7, 2013 22:59:12 GMT -5
...and it is claimed that the approach speed was way below minimum.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcnoch on Jul 7, 2013 23:10:06 GMT -5
Too slow and too deep. It was his first landing at SFO with the 777.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir John on Jul 7, 2013 23:22:44 GMT -5
That makes it pilot error!
|
|
|
|
Post by mcnoch on Jul 7, 2013 23:47:09 GMT -5
But it seems that a number of important landing aids are disabled since weeks: ILS, PAPI and parts of the landing lights. As the approach is over water, it is extremely difficult to make a good judgment about the current altitude.
Another new fact is that the aircraft was approaching at first too fast then the pilot corrected this but had reduced the altitude too much. It seems also that the air traffic controller ask the pilots for very rapid descends close to the allowed maximum to reduce the noisy phase in lower altitudes.
Seems there were multiple problems, most of them well known to the aviation community.
|
|
|
|
Post by jerryfmcompushaft on Jul 8, 2013 0:47:32 GMT -5
Sorry, Mathias, but nothing you said above makes any sense. Where are you getting your info?
|
|
|
|
Post by mcnoch on Jul 8, 2013 1:08:07 GMT -5
The info are from a press conference of the NTSB some hours ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir John on Jul 8, 2013 1:57:12 GMT -5
Just saw a clip of this, and it was FAR too low and too slow and was doomed as soon as it hit the 'end 'of the runway.
SJ
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2013 9:02:18 GMT -5
The info are from a press conference of the NTSB some hours ago. Me, too plus it was on the ABC Evening News last night. SF was not nearly a fully operational airport. |
|
