A Boeing 777 Has Crash-Landed At San Francisco International

[RB211]

...

So, what shall we call these guys and gals? Cat's suggestion is a bit too wordy for me, we need something a little more catchy, two words max, or possibly an acronym? I'm drawing a blank so far. Come on, this could be fun...

Maybe we should leave the term pilot as is, but we could just call you 'super-hero'.

[sky's the limit]

...

So, what shall we call these guys and gals? Cat's suggestion is a bit too wordy for me, we need something a little more catchy, two words max, or possibly an acronym? I'm drawing a blank so far. Come on, this could be fun...

Maybe we should leave the term pilot as is, but we could just call you 'super-hero'.

Naw, just a working stiff and no starched white shirt or anywhere near enough hair gel for that...

I'm sorry you're so threatened.

[Flying Nutcracker]

It's true what they told me... Airline-flying is 99% boredom, 1% Ho-Lee-Fuk. It is a problem that, for a profession where everything depends on proficiency for that 1%, there is not enough emphasis on training on "what's it doing now?". It's all about what it's doing when we pilots do it right...

I don't necessarily see this accident as solely lack of skill. I find it hard to believe that 3 pilots combined didn't have the skill to complete this flight safely. I think for anyone who have flown a swept-wing jet above a glidepath and with excess energy can attest to the fact that automation will not always produce the result necessary to accomplish what you want the airplane to do. As a result it is easier to level down the automation and do it yourself. But, in doing so you make yourself vulnerable to certain traps. It is my belief that this crew had to get down and slowed down. Vertical Speed is a way to manage this, but not necessarily the best one. As you get close to your target speed, but still above path, you don't want any thrust to reduce your rate of descend. Level Change is a good one. Although, F/D will target your set speed on the MCP so if you are fast it will give you a pitch up command.

As I see it, they where getting close to target path and speed around 1000-500'. PAPI's looking good, start pitching up, still with excess speed, thrust at idle. Start trimming as the airplane slows. Get below path, pitch up some more. Start drifting laterally, takes away attention to speed combined with a "bright light" distraction, and potentially still believing they were a little fast. It snowballs so quick. What happened below 500 feet is beyond me, but I firmly believe that they were focused on what was in front of them and not what was going on with the airplane. Just my belief. Not facts, just belief. Seen it unravel myself, but at a higher altitude.

When they realized what was going on, they did the correct thing. But, it was too late.

As to Helicopter flying... Flying helicopters in a versatile operation is by far the hardest flying from a perspective of constantly assessing what you are doing. Having said that, a helicopter pilot will use, lets say, 75% of his/her skills 100% of the time. An airline pilot will use 75% of said skills, 1% of the time. So you can flip it around and say that for an airline pilot it could be just as hard to actually do what is asked of him/her based on the overall proficiency level. Most of the time, an airline pilot gets everything delivered. Controlled environment. It's when the delivery-man doesn't show up and one has to figure things out yourself that things get really challenging. It's just not what we do. Stopping 100000+++ pounds of airplane on a contaminated runway, crappy weather, strong winds, low vis ops, CAT, Thunderstorms, fuel management, visual approaches... yes, I put it in there, visual approaches. We don't do it everyday, and everyday is a different challenge we probably haven't seen since last year...

So what can we do to mitigate this equation?

I am really curios to see the report when it's done. I hope it's not just lack of skills.

As far as a new name for "pilots" goes... I guess they sent a chimp to space...

[sky's the limit]

Having said that, a helicopter pilot will use, lets say, 75% of his/her skills 100% of the time. An airline pilot will use 75% of said skills, 1% of the time. So you can flip it around and say that for an airline pilot it could be just as hard to actually do what is asked of him/her based on the overall proficiency level. Most of the time, an airline pilot gets everything delivered. Controlled environment. It's when the delivery-man doesn't show up and one has to figure things out yourself that things get really challenging.

Very good point. Never really thought of it that way. Great post.

(I still think the name game could be fun... care to lob one in there? Can't take all this too seriously you know..!)

[bezerker]

I might disagree with you STL.

What if you had a copilot in the helicopter with you for your last 9,000 hours (and your helicopter is an IFR type, such as S92 or AW139).

You never let him touch the controls. Ever. OK, once or twice a year on a calm wind VFR day you may let him manage the autopilot all the way to a hover above the landing spot and maybe even let him put it down by himself the last 50 feet.

So, 15-20 years go by and your monkey has his required 400 landings and 9,000 hours. He is ready to go Captain on paper so the company gives him his chance.

If in his first month he has to land at the top of the mountain at the ski lodge (which he has seen you do 100 times), there could be trouble.

I don't think getting from A to B is all that hard on a daily basis. I've flown with some guys that make it look easy, and others that seem to require multiple miracles to pull it off each time, yet continually manage to do so.

Same thing driving a car.

I don't know if "anyone" could manage to get in a wide body and safely fly from A to B. Even on a nice day. Sitting in the cockpit is the easy bit. There is a skill set there with regards to managing several hundred thousand pounds of airplane, passing a PPC, managing 30 crew members, complying with the reams of paperwork and regulations required to get an aircraft airborne, required knowledge of complex aircraft systems, etc.

There is a skill set required. This guy just didn't seem to have it.

[sky's the limit]

I might disagree with you STL.

There is a skill set required. This guy just didn't seem to have it.

Never said there wasn't a skill set required. What I said was, that skill set is dramatically different to the traditional pilot's skill set. You AB139 example is perfect, as it DOES wonderfully highlight an issue in rotary operations now that automation has made its way into helicopters.

However, your example is simply transposing this FW issue into rotary - it's the same problem exactly except that in the rotary side that guy or girl may be asked after many thousands of hours of mundane flying, to land in a confined area, possibly at night, possibly in terrain, and they have just the bare minimum of ability and knowledge to do it. Same issue.

I think NutCracker's post was excellent, my only real comment on it is that there seems to be less and less emphasis put on certain skill sets in these automated machines in lieu of other skills that are required to simply operate or even just monitor them. Ergo how a visual approach was buggered so completely on the Asiana flight. One only needs to cruise YouTube these days to see endless loops of horrendous landings in crosswinds or even just normal conditions. Yes, we tend to be better here in Canada, but I have flown with some pretty suspect guys back in my FW days who are now Capt's at WJ or AC... And yes, you are right, we ARE seeing the same thing in rotary now too.

In fact, there has been a major move into more "operational control" of heli flights because of the Alberta Oil patch requirements (Data recorders, Cameras in the cockpit, microphones, alarms sent to the Boss based on arbitrary parameters). It is breeding an entire generation on pilots who never run rivers, never fly low, never play around and most importantly, never learn what their machine can, and cannot do. They are lost without GPS, and are not allowed to build skills that should be second nature by a few hundred hours. It is very frightening to see this trend. I believe it's similar but more extreme in the FW environment.

It's an interesting discussion for sure, and while some will get their knickers in a knot over it, I do believe it's worth while.

[RB211]

...

So, what shall we call these guys and gals? Cat's suggestion is a bit too wordy for me, we need something a little more catchy, two words max, or possibly an acronym? I'm drawing a blank so far. Come on, this could be fun...

Maybe we should leave the term pilot as is, but we could just call you 'super-hero'.

Naw, just a working stiff and no starched white shirt or anywhere near enough hair gel for that...

I'm sorry you're so threatened.

Not at all threatened.

A little surprised at the attitude that anyone flying a modern airliner should not be considered a pilot because you have unilaterally decided they can't fly.

When I hear of a helicopter crash that involves pilot error, labeling all chopper pilots incompetent doesn't enter my mind.

At all levels of this industry there are great pilots and below average pilots. Most, however, do a safe, professional job, confirmed by the thousands of flights a day that don't make the news.

[bezerker]

STL,

You had stated that the guy had pulled off this task many times in a row in the past, so that meant with his skill set he was either lucky, or the task was easy.

I just wanted to point out that from what I know of the event (100% reliable 2nd hand Internet information), the pilot was not experienced or skilled in the task he was asked to perform.

I believe that companies have been putting guys at the bottom of the experience/skill tree in positions that they are not ready for yet for years.

My experience has been that it was guys put in the left seat of a Navajo before they were quite ready or going left seat on the Lear with a few hours less than Contrail requirements. CP knows that first few trips will be a real $hit show but hopefully the issues are things like "flooded the engine when starting" or "put the red wine in the fridge instead of the white wine" and not "forgot to put the gear down" or "CFIT".

It is sad to see that this has progressed to 777's and that companies are upgrading guys now that they hope will keep it together for the first year and only make minor mistakes.

It is a hell of a gamble in my opinion. (And by that I mean for both PA31 and 777 pilots upgraded before they are competent).

[pdw]

As I see it, they where getting close to target path and speed around 1000-500'. PAPI's looking good, start pitching up, still with excess speed, thrust at idle. Start trimming as the airplane slows. Get below path, pitch up some more. Start drifting laterally, takes away attention to speed combined with a "bright light" distraction, and potentially still believing they were a little fast. It snowballs so quick. What happened below 500 feet is beyond me, but I firmly believe that they were focused on what was in front of them and not what was going on with the airplane. Just my belief. Not facts, just belief. Seen it unravel myself, but at a higher altitude.

When they realized what was going on, they did the correct thing. But, it was too late.

This is correct. (thrust obviously no longer set to maintain "137kts" of airspeed automatically)

The way it sounded ... after being too high ... it was "drifting laterally" that became the distraction, before the (sun) light distraction.

[BTD]

Do people not watch the ntsb briefings.

The captain had been a captain on the a320 for the previous 5 years. If that person does not have the experience to be a 777 captain they shouldn't be a 320 captain either.

Pinning it on his lack of experience is foolish since he was one of 3 pilots in the flight deck. The instructor pilot had by his estimate 13000 hrs and and 3000 on the 777 and the relief first officer had 4700 hrs and 1000 approx on the 777.

What ever this accident was, it wasn't due to an inexperienced crew. Incompetent perhaps, I don't know but not inexperienced in the operation.

Watch the ntsb briefings on YouTube.

[sky's the limit]

RB, take some time to read this thread, it's your cohort here who has labelled most heavy jet pilots from a very large region of the planet as, "incompetent," not to mention emasculating the Air France crews who crashed in the Atlantic and overran YYZ a few years back... Nothing unilateral in it, sorry. And yes, there are many incompetent helicopter pilots too, poorly trained, and lacking in experience for the task at hand. It is a big issue, and one that is growing by the year. The only problem is they don't tend to live as long, or they get weeded out much earlier in the process, and they certainly don't end up in the mountains for very long, if at all... there aren't the places to hide that there are in airplanes, although there are a few.

Let's turn this around then, just to show I am not set in my thinking: It's apparent that airline folk are the real pilots, I get it... so let's come up with a name for people like me, or maybe the career float crowd on the West Coast, maybe the crop dusters too, because what we do has nothing in common with what you do, besides being above the ground. If you can't poke a little fun at yourself, then what's the point? Seriously, what's it take to loosen anyone up on here anymore???

Bezerker,

You're telling me that this fellow had neither the skills nor the experience to land that airplane on a visual approach, despite 9000hrs sitting in one after flying other heavy jets (from what I gather) and countless sim sessions? There were also two other pilots on that flight deck, were none of them qualified to be there? Should that be the case, then we have a more serious problem than a goofy nomenclature game suggested in jest... They sent him over an ocean with a couple hundred people because "companies have been putting guys at the bottom of the experience/skill tree in positions that they are not ready for yet for years." Really? This isn't the northern bush we're discussing here, the stakes are somewhat higher.

Q: How many of the Flt Instructor to King Air F/O's, to King Air Capt's, to career WJ or AC F/O's who get so thoroughly lambasted on here almost daily by the Avcan experts are "qualified" in your opinion? I'm interested as my shift is nearly over and I have to fly home tomorrow. Or is this just another case of something that "only happens to them," and there's nothing to take from this here?


-------------------------------------------

Fine, fine, I see my naming game has gone over like a lead balloon despite Beef and Cat giving it a valiant stab.... So now that I've stirred up the nest, can someone please tell me exactly who IS qualified, skilled, doing the job they are trained for, and safe across the board? I fly a LOT to get to work in everything from the biggest airliners to Navaho's and float plans, and yes, even a Comanche recently - who is safe and why? I'm am asking in all seriousness as a customer now.

[CID]

CRM and SOP,s were in use in 1970 for sure because I flew for Mobil Oil then and we flew every flight under that system using multi crew.

I didn't state they weren't in use. Read about that DC-8 crash. No respect for SOPs. And CRM concepts today are much different. There have been a few major shifts in CRM ideologies over the years.

[CID]

Three pilots also watched Air France 447 fall about 37000 feet stalled......

MUCH different story.

[pdw]

The last 5 hits on flightaware reveal speed (not airspeed), all made with-in that last minute of "11:27" not including the actual impact, late 11:27. Not sure about accurracy there ...

The first 2 hits of those 5 show speed only 145kts to 141kts while down 200ft in the interval. The next few seconds that speed drops like a rock, in relation. IMO an elite surface WX analysis would show it's where the aircraft enters the colder air moving very slowly off the ocean from the south, exiting the dryer layer above (very little cloud / little moisture) and from another direction. Previously the descent is going well as airspeed is dropping with a sensible amount of altitude lost, after having been high and fast on speed (energy) and airspeed.

[Flying Nutcracker]

The last 5 hits on flightaware reveal speed (not airspeed), all made with-in that last minute of "11:27" not including the actual impact, late 11:27. Not sure about accurracy there ...

The first 2 hits of those 5 show speed only 145kts to 141kts while down 200ft in the interval. The next few seconds that speed drops like a rock, in relation. IMO an elite surface WX analysis would show it's where the aircraft enters the colder air moving very slowly off the ocean from the south, exiting the dryer layer above (very little cloud / little moisture) and from another direction. Previously the descent is going well as airspeed is dropping with a sensible amount of altitude lost, after having been high and fast on speed (energy) and airspeed.

With all due respect, I believe what you are referring to is what happens when a swept-wing jet gets on the back side of the power-curve. It rises sharply below L/D max and you really don't want to be there!

[Cat Driver]

There have been a few major shifts in CRM ideologies over the years.

It would stand to reason that aviation would evolve as time passes and the learning curve goes up.

I comment on this subject from the position of having actually experienced the evolution of flying over the last half century actually flying these aircraft....

......how much PIC time do you have in transport category aircraft CID?

[CID]

Cat Driver, how much PIC time do you have on wide bodied aircraft? Or transport jets? Or FBW? What's the minimum experience you recommend before people can comment? On an anonymous forum? On the internet?

[Cat Driver]

CID you are free to comment all you want on this anonymous forum because with anonymity one can say anything they wish within the rules of the forum.

As to my understanding of fly by wire aircraft I worked with Airbus Industries for two years and received training on their technology from five of their factory instructors at their facility in Toulouse...and I am confident enough with who I am that I post using my real name..... ..

You and I have a long history starting from the Air Play days and I am quite aware of your anonymity phobia, but every once in a while I get some pleasure from reminding you we are very different.

[bobcaygeon]

I wonder what the conversation would be if we turned our attention to another accident on a much less automated aircraft. The L1011.
Look up the Eastern 401 accident in the Everglades.

Don't have to look it up, I remember it quite clearly - including the alleged apparitions and the disembodied head in the galley oven. 401 happened at night over a blacked out Everglades while 214 was at high noon on a clear day but the results were the same, a flyable aircraft crashed with fatal consequences. In either case, nobody was minding the store. The Eastern guys were so concerned with troubleshooting a burnt out gear light no one noticed the a/p altitude hold had been disconnected while on the 777, three pilots were unaware of their airspeed trend. FTFA.

Eastern culture is mentioned many times in this thread but do we all forget that this used to happen here too.
Eastern 401 had a well trained ATC controller that did not clearly challenge the crew when the a/c was descending into the everglades. Why was that?? Was the old school military culture at play? The end result was the same when the controller took his own life. Sound familiar. The shame is that other cultures are not learning from our mistakes but just repeating them. Not surprising as we continue to repaet our own mistakes over and over again. Just not in airplanes.

[SheriffPatGarrett]

It's really very simple.

Operating out of Miami to South America, I found weather to be severely CAVU 95% of the times(opposed to mostly the reverse in Canada)

Well, half of the guys pulled their ball caps down and acted as if a check airman was on the jump seat, hand flying the whole procedure
all the times, just to be ready for the other 5% when the crap hit the fan(or the simulator)...while the other half sleepily glided on with the auto-pilot
and on visual.
Guess who usually got in trouble!

As for Cali, Colombia, I've been there several hundred times, I knew that procedure was on the book, but I never heard of anybody ever using it.
Fact I even asked ATC and they did say that nobody did...the way to go was go over the airport then turn around back north in the very wide and flat valley.
To go down in that gut with close by vertical walls...Beside, it was a VOR approach, not an NDB!!! NDB are notorious for steering planes into mountains!

The proper one:


The bad, bad suicidal one:


Well AA had just bought in these routes from Pan Am or Eastern, I forgot which and it was a newbie's mistake, newbies
on IT and no situational awareness...These American Airlines guys used lots of over-the-road trucker CB linguo,
which left the latinos ATC completely in the dark.

It was also a perfect example of automation run amok.

Or maybe it was just a case(for us) of: "Just say no to Mach Eight-Oh"...(we were paid by the hour!)