Asiana Vs AC.

[Rookie Pilot]

Interesting reading the reaction differences.


Asiana?  Hang EM high.  20 years hard labour, would be too good for those guys, per the comments,  for admittedly an ugly incident.


In SFO, AC's near miss?  Beyond lucky. Under 30 feet -- generously -- from what might have been the worst disaster in history -- don't think that's really that  exaggerated, do you guys? -- and the reactions range from "it's a learning experience" to it's a  -- "non event -- nothing to see here". 


Seriously. NTSB didn't think so.


This home team bias, like a hockey team, mark my words, will bite us one day. 


No, I'm aware I know zip about airline ops -- but  I can read.  We think we're immune.   


Scary.

[David MacRay]

Well, the Asiana guys did make contact. So there's that.

As for AC...
I don't know much but I know if I'm looking at planes parked on the strip of pavement I've lined up with, I'm hoping I figure somethings wrong before I get that close.

I believe they called the tower and asked, "Uh, are there planes on the runway?" The confused controller, "No."

Not much fun posting that here though.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Here is something from Avcanada, I wouldn't even think of commenting on this on Avcanada.


[code]


Did you read the Captains interview to get his perspective at all, he thought he initiated the go around at about 400’. For what it’s worth, according to the Captain, he initiated the go around before the FO and the tower, so in all likelihood if not for his actions the two second delay could very well have been a different outcome.[/code]


How is it possible he " thought " he initiated the go around at about 400 feet?


Unless he was so tired it took almost 400 feet to go from the approach path to the go around path.


The whole thing is real hard to believe.


If he he lost almost 400 feet in the go around that another two seconds would have had him land on those airplanes his actions need a little bit of improvement.

[Rookie Pilot]

[quote author=David MacRay link=topic=8400.msg23212#msg23212 date=1525741784]
Well, the Asiana guys did make contact. So there's that.

[/quote]


Yeah that's what everyone says.  Clearly it's a game of feet.


AC was extremely lucky, or blessed.  Extremely. A fraction of a fraction of a second, and upwards of 1000 people would have been BBQ'd. 


This is nothing to say "nothing to see here" -- and posters have.

[Nark1]

That avCanada quote is absolute bullshit.


I am a G-D Airbus captain.  A go-around doesn't take 370'.  TOGA, Push to level off, Open Climb... Any number intermediate go-around techniques.
They fucked up royally, but alas, the Queens colonial airline.  God Forbid we judge thee.


I'm having a few Mooseheads and Labatt Blue's, in honor of playoff season.


Carry-on Air Canada.  I'll just ask for delay vectors when I here you on the radio down here.

[Eric Janson]

Well Asiana did try to blame the accident on Boeing. Disgraceful.

Not clear what happened to the crew - they may very well still be working there.

The 400' comment from the AC Capt. makes no sense to me. All the airbus I have flown have auto altitude callouts. They should have had the "One Hundred" call just before they started the go-around. Radio altimeter display is easily readable on the lower part of the Primary Flight display.

The video shows just how close this was - very disturbing.

[Rookie Pilot]

I am not excusing the Asiana incident. 

I am comparing the reactions to the 2 incidents. 

At least half the comments I've read defend the crew with the attitude - "nothing to see,  routine go - around".

5 feet or 1000 feet is irrelevant I suppose as long as nothing was hit. 

[Liquid Charlie]

First - I doubt if the captain actually spoke directly to the media. It's a strict no no and the quote was likely from spin doctor at AC - Second it was a good catch but past the point of acceptable lucky no one died. Professionally I hope the information and the finding become, at least, industry wide. It very important that this type of potential catastrophe, which is so preventable be addressed. The ultimate CFIT. No one in their right mind would ever think it were possible under VFR and runway in sight, on profile but displaced centre line. 

[JW Scud]

While the AC thing was a screw-up, it was mainly due to them being fooled by a visual illusion. Sure, there are things that they could have done to prevent this but visual illusions can catch any one of us and don't think that it can't.


The Asiana pilots demonstrated what can happen if you don't follow a basic flying skill, a skill required to be allowed to do your first solo, monitor your airspeed.

[Colonel]

[quote]visual illusions can catch any one of us[/quote]

Too bad that runway doesn't have an ILS or any other
instrument approach to help with lateral guidance.  I
understand AC only equips their Airbus for VFR flight
only  ::)