orvil

No. Boeing only uses the Law of Physics.

WTFover

When conducting a non-ILS, CDA approach with a Pegasus FMS...

"If the E/D waypoint altitude is below the DA/MDA, flight director guidance will be provided below the DA/MDA; however, the descent path may not be coincident with the VASI/PAPI. Below minimums, the pilot should always use visual references to ensure obstacle clearance."

Relying solely on FD commands with VNAV could lead to exactly this type of situation.

the turtle

I don't know anything about airbii laws....are you referring to shaker/pusher or autothottle wakeup? I'm trying to wrack my brain to come up with a scenario where stall protection is not available, it isn't if the primary flight computers are disconnected, and if I recall correctly disengaging the autopilot command bar on the mcp eliminates bank angle protection and autothrottle wakeup, but not the pusher/shaker(but why open the bar? just disconnect on the yoke)

don't make me go in the manuals!!

Timbo

The 777 auto-throttles work just like the 75/76, that is, they chase speed only, either the speed you have put in the FMS on the legs page if you are in VNAV, or the speed you set in the speed window, if you are coupled to a Glide slope, or in FLCH, or Vert speed.

Now, they are supposed to 'wake up' if you have clicked the auto-throttles off, and you have gone below your set speed, towards stall, you can still get stick shaker, but the throttles should come alive and hold the airspeed just above stick shaker. If you have instead, turned off both A/T switches, (one for L, one for R) then you are 'on your own', so to speak. But who says they stalled, or even got stick shaker? If the tail hadn't hit the rocks, they might have made a go-around out of it.

If there were no engine issues, or flight control issues, or other distractions from the cabin, my guess is they both went heads down trying to load 28L in the box, so they would have a VNAV path to use as a glide slope, and maybe when they started loading the FMS, they'd had the boards up, threw the gear out, etc. trying to get down, but forgot to stow the boards and throw the flaps and get stabilized. I've seen this happen many times on every airplane with an FMS. That's why we now train for ONE pilot only, to load the box in the approach arena, usually the pilot NOT FLYING. But I don't know what they train in Asia, as far as who does what, and when.

They other guy should be looking out the window (on a visual) and flying the jet. Obviously they lost SA if there were no other distractions from the back or from the airplane systems they might have both been looking at, vs. looking out the window and flying the jet manually, but as CE said above, you get tired, you do stupid things or get distracted more easily. Maybe they had it on autopilot, in Vertical Speed -1000, and never got caught up until it was obvious they were short.

I'm glad most made it out alive, sad to hear about the two 16yr. old girls. Once the NTSB gets to see what's on the FDR and CVR we'll know what really happened. Until then, it's all guess work. Only 2 guys know what really happened, and they aren't talking...yet.

JCortes

Sadly this incident resulted in loss of life. It's cause as well as how and if it could have been prevented will be sorted out by no less than a ton of entities with an equal amount of initials in their names.

Reflect on the following: Luck or not, it seems like this could have been quite a bit worse. Unless, I am mistaken, I understand that there was a United Airlines 747-400 holding short of the runway. Many have said they could offer the NTSB excellent vantage points as to what occurred as they had a front row seat. Looking at the picture below and understanding that United 885 was fueled for a flight to Osaka (About 10:30 @ FL320 plus reserves) it could just have very quickly turned into a horror movie for the two (or three, or four) ladies and gentlemen at the pointy end of it had flight 214 been 200 feet to the left of the initial point of impact. It seems that this would have changed all the numbers of casualties drastically.

CRM114

Couldn't you say the same thing for every single flight that attempts a landing?

Pavedickey

"Looking at the picture below and understanding that United 885 was fueled for a flight to Osaka (About 10:30 @ FL320 plus reserves) it could just have very quickly turned into a horror movie for the two (or three, or four) ladies and gentlemen at the pointy end of it had flight 214 been 200 feet to the left of the initial point of impact. It seems that this would have changed all the numbers of casualties."

From other videos and still pics I've seen, UA was still on the parallel taxiway and had not made it to the hold short line yet. They probably saw the initial impact, but doubtful much of the final slide and evacuation. Asiana would have had to have been much more than 200' left of center to cause a disaster on this one, however if UA had been there, you are spot on.

Larry in TN

If you're driving down the highway and pass a large, full, school bus parking lot which would you say?

"Wow, look at all the school bii!", or

"Wow, loos at all the school buses?"

80ktsClamp

I'm not sure. I always say "boy, I can't wait until those girls turn 18."

TonyC

Neither.






.