Boing 777 crash in San Francisco

[mapuc]

Got no link yet. Have it from the danish news that a Boeing 777 crashed during landing in San Francisco

The plane should be in fire and they don't know if there's any dead or wounded

Markus

[Platapus]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/06/us/california-plane-incident/index.html
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/06/boeing-777-crashes-at-san-francisco-international-airport/

Does not appear to be too many details yet.

Best wishes for the passengers, crew, and people on the ground. :yep:

[mapuc]

^ thank you Platapus

[Oberon]

As strange as it may sound, if you're going to have an unintended interaction with terrain anywhere, the best place to do it is at an airport, the emergency services are top notch and drilled regularly. Here's hoping for no casualties and a swift resolution to the situation.

[Platapus]

There are reports of "Evacuation slides could be seen extending from one side of the aircraft". That might be a good sign that at least some were able to get out.

[CaptainHaplo]

From what I can see, it looks like he was too low and slow, he dragged the tail and it broke the arse end off. May all be safe.

[Oberon]

ATC recording:
http://wandr.me/Audio/AAR214-KSFO-Crash.mp3

[TarJak]

This report says 291 people accounted for according to a radio scanner who posted on Twitter what they heard on firefighter radio.

http://m.smh.com.au/travel/travel-incidents/plane-crash-lands-at-san-francisco-international-airport-20130707-2pjm8.html

Hope everyone is safe and uninjured.

[Tchocky]

ATC recording:
http://wandr.me/Audio/AAR214-KSFO-Crash.mp3


Everything here is after the inital hit, which supports the tailstrike hypothesis. AAR214 only comes on after reaching the ground. Normally after being cleared to land there's no radio contact until rollout. Sounds like the controller spotted the impact and was quick to reassure the pilot that EMS were on the way.

In most of these events 90% of radio comms is getting other traffic out of the way, creating space and time for the flight crew to do whatever they have to do, and clear the runway/taxiways for emergency vehicles. THat's why you don't hear much from 214.

[Oberon]

Everything here is after the inital hit, which supports the tailstrike hypothesis. AAR214 only comes on after reaching the ground. Normally after being cleared to land there's no radio contact until rollout. Sounds like the controller spotted the impact and was quick to reassure the pilot that EMS were on the way.

In most of these events 90% of radio comms is getting other traffic out of the way, creating space and time for the flight crew to do whatever they have to do, and clear the runway/taxiways for emergency vehicles. THat's why you don't hear much from 214.

Yeah, you can hear the very quick instruction to go around, and the climb and maintain altitude given immediately after what I presume is the impact time approximately 40 seconds in, you hear a few raised voices and Skyhawk 737 immediately announces or is told to go around. United 85 asks 'for a few more minutes' and is told to hold short of 28L which is where the 777 crashed.

[Oberon]

More data, not sure how accurate it is:

http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/855/mxb4.jpg

(original at - https://twitter.com/sbaker/status/353611787750494208/photo/1 )


Midnight news on Radio Four just announced 2 dead and 70 injured, some seriously.

[TarJak]

smh is reporting 2 dead with 60 unaccounted for.

[BossMark]

Boeing Plane Crash Lands In San Francisco

http://news.sky.com/story/1112466/boeing-plane-crash-lands-in-san-francisco
Two people have been killed and more than 150 others injured.

Latest update at 5.46 am GMT

[TarJak]

Press release on Asiana's website: http://flyasiana.com/notice/notice_en.asp

Having worked in the industry I'm always interested to see who different airlines handle these sorts of incidents. The way it is done can make a real difference to whether they stay in business or not.

[Catfish]

Terrible accident, but from the number of survivors it could have been much worse .. not that this adds any solace.
I read some accounts and it seems sure by now, that the plane came in too low and the tail touched the shoreline, then breaking off. The forward part was virtually uncontrollable with the steering end missing ..
So it was either an automatic landing failure, or a pilot error. Not a plane design fault.

[Jimbuna]

Been following this sporadically whilst away and looking at the aftermath wreckage I think it's amazing only two were killed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23216587

[vienna]

This isn't the first unusual landing at San Francisco International. In 1968, a JAL airliner landed in the Bay after a pilot error caused the plane to come in just short of the runway. The plane actually had a rather soft landing and was fully upright and, with the landing gear alreday down, the fuselage was just above the water line:


http://blog.sfgate.com/thebigevent/2013/07/06/the-japan-air-lines-miracle-water-landing-of-1968-reprinted/

SFO has long been a thorn in pilot's sides. Landing there means dealing with fast, thick fog, strong winds, and what amounts to landing on a static carrier deck...

<O>

[Oberon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBi8zR44OsU

[Herr-Berbunch]

Here is CNN's video, slightly better than the one on YT - despite it being the same footage!

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/us/2013/07/07/vo-plane-sf-plane-crash-on-cam.courtesy-fred-hayes.html

A lot of the injuries appear to be from being at the back, going to make for an interesting inquiry.

[CaptainHaplo]

Initial data confirms the guy was too low and too slow. They tried to power out but it was way to late, they needed 8-10 seconds more at least. The poc was in training with 43 hrs in the 777. However, he had multiple, highly experienced pilots onboard (and likely in the cockpit with him).