B777 accident at SFO July 6, 2013

[WallyB]

Only problem - any "slam dunk" approach was crew-initiated. I listened to the ATC recording on LiveATC and watched the radar track on FlightRadar24 and they were put in the sequence at the same spot as everyone else at the same altitude.

That just means all (or most) of those approaches are what's referred to as the "slam dunk", officially the Quiet Bridge Visual or Tip Toe Visual.

It's a noise abatement imposition to keep planes high over populated areas followed by a (relatively) steep descent over the Bay from the Menlo intersection.

[CAPFlyer]

Those are not "slam dunk" approaches.

http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1307/00375 ... IS28LR.PDF

http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1307/00375 ... VIS28L.PDF

On both approaches, you have 7 miles to descend 2100 feet to be at 1900 over the San Mateo bridge, and then 6 more miles to the threshold. That's a maximum descent rate of 300 feet per mile to the bridge to stay on the floor of the approach. Sorry, that's barely a descent. A 200 foot difference at 6DME between the ILS/3* glidepath and visual approach minimum altitudes is not sufficient to call it a "slam dunk".

These approaches are designed to keep the airplanes OVER THE WATER for noise abatement, not high. Sorry, but wherever you got the information that those approaches are "slam dunk" approaches has never actually flown (in a sim or real life) the approaches or even looked at the charts.

[bdk]

What does any of this have to do with the fact that nobody bothered to look at the airspeed indicator on final? Isn't this part of your scan? Were there VASI lights?

[WallyB]

Sorry, but wherever you got the information that those approaches are "slam dunk" approaches has never actually flown (in a sim or real life) the approaches or even looked at the charts.

Perhaps you should look at this PPRuNe thread http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5185 ... cisco.html and search for "slam dunk" and/or "quiet bridge". Of course many of the posts there are from ATPLs who regularly fly those approaches, so perhaps they are all mistaken.

[CAPFlyer]

Wally, I've browsed over a large amount of that thread, and I see no US pilots or pilots who've actually flown the approach. In fact, I see more panning of the approach by ATCO-types, not pilots.

That approach is flown EVERY DAY the weather is above VMC and the winds are below 10 knots or favorable to the 28's. Those approaches have been in existence for at least 30 years. They don't ask for anything like what say the RIVER VISUAL 19 at KDCA does. That approach does require special training to fly. The SFO approach does not. I'll also throw the ROARING FORK VISUAL 15 at KASE in the mix as well as an example of what a "slam dunk" approach is. That approach DOES require training because of it having a steep approach path and narrow approach corridor.

I'm sorry, but anyone who says those approaches are "slam dunk" approaches, don't know what that is and haven't flown it. Go listen to the LiveATC recordings and watch FlightRadar24. There were 30 aircraft before the Asiana flight who made that approach without a single problem. You can watch external and internal videos of that approach flown on other 777s and other aircraft all over YouTube if you look. There's never any chopping of the throttle, there's never spoiler deployment, nothing that suggests this to be a "slam dunk" approach.

Bottom line - the crew botched what should've been an uneventful published VMC approach and even the ATPL's on the PPrune thread say as much. No one with 9000+ hours in an airplane should be unable to do the most basic thing in aviation - land a plane in fair weather by hand.

[WallyB]

Wally, I've browsed over a large amount of that thread, and I see no US pilots or pilots who've actually flown the approach. In fact, I see more panning of the approach by ATCO-types, not pilots.

Yes, it's long thread but I'm sure there's pilots' posts, certainly about "slam dunks" and also the Quiet Bridge since I'd never heard of it before. Whether they are talking about a different approach (why?) or the slam dunk occurs prior to Quiet Bridge - ie. over the peninsular before the turn to Menlo I couldn't say.
Either way maintain 180kts to 5DME at 1800ft

If this wasn't a slam dunk why is that getting so much attention?

Last edited by WallyB on Sat Jul 13, 2013 8:45 pm, edited 2 times in total.

[K5DH]

No one with 9000+ hours in an airplane should be unable to do the most basic thing in aviation - land a plane in fair weather by hand.

That seems like a true statement to me.

This whole occurrance makes me wonder: Are today's professional pilots becoming too reliant on automation, perhaps even to the point where they're no longer ready to do things by hand if they have to? I don't mean to imply that they're not capable of hand-flying their planes, just that they may not be ready to do so because they don't have to do it much any more. Not being a pilot, I really don't know how much hand-flying the crews get to do these days, or how much hand-flying time they get in the simulator. Gawd, I hate to even bring this up, but it just seems like that's the way the industry is going. Cockpits are much more automated than ever before. I know we have many commercial pilots among us. Please understand that I don't mean to offend anyone with these comments, and if I have, please accept my apologies and chalk it up to me not being a pilot and not knowing what the heck I'm talking about. Feel free to correct me (I'm a big boy, and I can take criticism without getting my knickers in a knot).

The three glasses of sweet red wine I had at dinner probably aggravates that problem...

[RyanShort1]

Bottom line - the crew botched what should've been an uneventful published VMC approach and even the ATPL's on the PPrune thread say as much. No one with 9000+ hours in an airplane should be unable to do the most basic thing in aviation - land a plane in fair weather by hand.

Very true, and yet, it seems a fairly high percentage of the headline accidents in recent years are a result of a deterioration in hand-flying skills.

Ryan

[CAPFlyer]

Wally, I've browsed over a large amount of that thread, and I see no US pilots or pilots who've actually flown the approach. In fact, I see more panning of the approach by ATCO-types, not pilots.

Yes, it's long thread but I'm sure there's pilots' posts, certainly about "slam dunks" and also the Quiet Bridge since I'd never heard of it before. Whether they are talking about a different approach (why?) or the slam dunk occurs prior to Quiet Bridge - ie. over the peninsular before the turn to Menlo I couldn't say.
Either way maintain 160kts to 5DME at 1800ft

If this wasn't a slam dunk why is that getting so much attention?

Because they're trying to CYA instead of being honest. There is a narrative by certain pilot unions that the pilots are always blamed even when it's not their fault and thus there are some whom will automatically look for any and all reason beside the crew as to why the crash happened and ignore when they're being beaten in the face with a large, dead fish. The only place I've seen any attention paid to the approach is PPrune. If it's being discussed elsewhere, it's more in the realm of "how is it different between a 777 and 747 on this approach" since the Captain had flown into SFO many times in a 747 without any incident (at least that we know of).

Here's a few videos of the approach -

1) In a Citation (time accelerated) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SUH-JzQA_U

2) From the left wing of a 737 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuWOmR_tuGE

3) From the right wing of an A320 (with ATC audio) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPvPdXW038

4) Visual Approach 28L, sidestep 28R from a 747 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0Y6GTI9pg4

5) A320 28R (from over the San Maeto Bridge) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niWFm_HpHgY

6) B747-400 approach - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXl_4SbbpLs

7) 737-800 approach - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6tP8--smoU

Finally - the Asiana flight transcript and graphic overlay - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7iuFv2_kn4

"Slam Dunk" implies that they have to do something unusual to meet the requirements. On approach, that would suggest needing to use the speed brakes. None of these approaches use the speedbrakes. Thus, it's not a "slam dunk" approach.

[WallyB]

The only place I've seen any attention paid to the approach is PPrune.

Try google.

[bdk]

Approach animations:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhoAfgYhhs0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lj-Etq3H4Eo

What gets me is how far to the right they had to be to not hit the approach lights. On the first one the ghost plane had to be slowed down or it would have flown ahead out of the picture, but it does reflect the correct glideslope. On the second one you can see the VASI lights to the left indicating that they were significantly below the glideslope.