54 replies to this topic

[LA_PHX]

Independence76, on 07 July 2013 - 11:38 PM, said:

IThat's still unconfirmed.

Hence, "it appears." I never said that is for sure what happened. Based on her injuries, initial indications are that she was run over. Whether that was an emergency vehicle or say, a piece of the airplane that went over her (unlikely due to where her body was found), or even that she wasn't run over and she sustained the injuries another way, is something that remains to be seen. But even if she was run over, that doesn't mean that was the cause of death. But again..."it appears."

Edited by LA_PHX, 07 July 2013 - 11:45 PM.

[Independence76]

Pics are up from the investigation.

LA_PHX, on 07 July 2013 - 11:44 PM, said:

Hence, "it appears." I never said that is for sure what happened.

I didn't say that it was what you said, it was what the article said.

Anyway, if it ends up being true, then it'll be an embarrassment for US airport emergency responders (at least for SFO, that is).

Edited by Independence76, 08 July 2013 - 01:52 AM.

[LA_PHX]

The thing is, officials stated she was found near one of the emergency slides. I would find it hard to believe they would drive a vehicle up to a slide being actively used, unless it was really dire. I'm wondering if she perhaps collapsed by the slide and as the smoke starting filling the scene and the responders didn't see anymore people exiting via the slide, they drove up closer to help in the extinguishing efforts and inadvertently drove over her collapsed body...

That final ME report is going to be crucial over who is ultimately responsible.

[Cactus]

LA_PHX, on 08 July 2013 - 03:11 AM, said:

I would find it hard to believe they would drive a vehicle up to a slide being actively used, unless it was really dire

Are you familiar with snozzle operations? You'd need to be maybe ~50 to 60 ft from a fuselage to deploy a snozzle. One can imagine the congestion around the fuselage with 300 people attempting to evacuate simultaneously.

Edited by Cactus, 08 July 2013 - 08:33 AM.

[89-LX]

LA_PHX, on 07 July 2013 - 01:09 AM, said:

It appears as if that NOTAM was issued after the accident, though. I could be mistaken...not the best at decoding NOTAMs. Question for 89-LX, would landings be allowed if the glidepath and the PAPI were OTS?

Saw that you already answered yourself, but we do it a lot. Its called being a pilot and looking outside and knowing the plane. A lot of times in DTW, we will transition from 21L to 21R at 1700' AGL and have no VGSI or GS to aid us in landing, and the runway threadholds are at different locations, so we must adjust our altitude for the closer runway now.

Now with that being said, and not knowing their OPSPEC, FAR part 121.445 from what I've been told would apply to SFO. I fly into quite a bit of special airports and I've never once had an issue. But then again, I don't rely on automation. I would say about 75% of my landings are hand flown raw data, 90% of my take offs are hand flown raw data, and I would say 2 times a month, I will hand fly raw data to cruise FL300+. This keeps me proficient and able to fly the aircraft.

[LA_PHX]

Thanks for the answer! I knew there were many types of approaches but wasn't sure what the specific requirements were...nothing a little Googling can't solve.

Cactus, on 08 July 2013 - 08:29 AM, said:

Are you familiar with snozzle operations? You'd need to be maybe ~50 to 60 ft from a fuselage to deploy a snozzle. One can imagine the congestion around the fuselage with 300 people attempting to evacuate simultaneously.

Somewhat. I know those things have quite a bit of reach and I would imagine they wouldn't be actively spraying where they see people evacuating as that just has the potential to cause harm directly to the people. Besides 50 to 60 feet surely is far enough away from where the emergency slide would extend from...no?

Maybe their definition of "found near the emergency slider" differs from mine...

[Cactus]

LA_PHX, on 08 July 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

Somewhat. I know those things have quite a bit of reach and I would imagine they wouldn't be actively spraying where they see people evacuating as that just has the potential to cause harm directly to the people. Besides 50 to 60 feet surely is far enough away from where the emergency slide would extend from...no?

Maybe their definition of "found near the emergency slider" differs from mine...

From my understanding of ARFF operations, yes, the would very likely foam the egress routes of the airplane. That's how you protect the escape routes of the occupants. The 777 door height is approx 15 to 16 feet above ground. I know that the ramp safety area around an A320 door extends to about 40 feet, I imagine it's similar on the 777.

[LA_PHX]

Wow, didn't realize how far those slides extended. That certainly explains how it could happen then. My firefighting knowledge is not so much ARFF but regular street firefighting and some wildland.

Anyway, the latest info. from the NTSB states the aircraft reached as low as 103 kts a few seconds before impact. They increased at the last second to 106 kts and all indications so far are that the engines were responding to inputs as they should. Doesn't look good for the pilots.

[_TW_]

Unbelievable...I'm really at a loss for words.

[Independence76]

Apparently, my ex-air force grandfather and I used the exact same words to describe the accident:

"He just completely lost the airplane."

[Aharon]

http://www.curacaoch...777-approached/

[davie18]

https://www.youtube....h?v=shF_2neUyFM

[Iain_]

For those of you who haven't seen it (i.e don't have Facebook):

https://www.youtube....h?v=mfhGwUlIttw

[Independence76]

davie18, on 13 July 2013 - 05:39 AM, said:

https://www.youtube....h?v=shF_2neUyFM

Very good crash animation.

[Cactus]

Some footage that I found interesting and worth sharing (two parts)

https://www.youtube....h?v=WczPnDDipKw
https://www.youtube....h?v=DDR6DO3WnZ8