Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 01, 2014, 05:54:33 AM
Home Help Login Register      
News: LiveATC.net Flyers Released!  Please click here to download & print a copy and be sure to post at an airport near you!


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Air Traffic Monitoring
| |-+  Aviation Audio Clips (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  Asiana 214 Crash at KSFO
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Asiana 214 Crash at KSFO  (Read 51451 times)
phil-s
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


« Reply #15 on: July 07, 2013, 12:44:42 AM »

Except for maybe "I have a problem" and when he gives his call sign, utterly unintelligible to my ear. Seemed like tower couldn't salvage anything useful out of the coms either and just kept responding "emergency vehicles are on the way".  What a mess.
Logged
ryannayr140
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #16 on: July 07, 2013, 12:52:17 AM »

Doing my best to change all voice to text.  Notice that most of the pilots are professional and read everything very fast except for the important parts.  I'm not from the area so forgive me for botching the names of locations on non relevant traffic.  

0:00 Asiana 214 heavy San Francisco tower, runway 28L (you are) cleared to land.  
0:03 Alright cleared to land 28L Asiana 214.  (Inaudible)  

0:05 Skywest 5427, fly runway heading, and contact norcal departures.  
0:09 Fly runway heading go over to departures Skywest 5427, good day.  

0:12 Tower, United 85?.  
0:15 United 85 go ahead.  
0:17 United 85 at the end (of the taxiway) we might need a few more minutes, just a heads up.  
0:22 United 85, Rodger, hold short of runway 28 left let me know when you're ready.  
0:26 Hold short of 28 left united 85.  

0:28 San Fransisco tower, Skywest 5452, quiet bridge visual 28 Right.  
0:32 5452 San Fransisco tower, runway 28 right cleared to land.  
0:37 Cleared to land 28 right, Skywest 5452.  

0:39 (N7)30F...600
0:40 (Cut off by inaudable man yelling in background)
0:41 (Silence)
0:43 San Fransisco tower, Skyhawk 737 (non important transmition said slowly by foreign pilot)
0:46 Go around (tower steps on pilot)
0:48 ...500 feet over San Carlos.  

He was slow, and should have asked for permission to talk on a busy frequency like United 85 did at 0:12. Let me be clear, this pilot, nor a lack of communication were the cause of this accident.

0:50 Skywest 6389 maintain 3000!
0:53 280 3000 Skywest 6389. (said very quickly)

0:55 Hello? Asiana 214 (Inaudible)
0:57 (step on tone)
0:58 (Asiana 214) heavy, emergency vehicles are responding.  
1:01 Asiana 214!
1:03 Emergency (vehicles repond)ing.  
1:04 Okay tower, uh... uh... (very inaudible).  

1:11 Cesna 737ZD, San Francisco tower remain clear of the San Fransisco class bravo airspace, contact San Carlos tower.  
1:17 7ZD contacting San Carlos tower, and remain clear (of class bravo airspace).  

1:22 Helicopter 3SF leaving the bravo airspace in 2 miles, radar services terminated, squawk (and) maintain VFR, frequency change approved.  (not read back)

1:28 (inaudable) San Fransisco tower?

1:31 Horizon 6... (beep)

1:35 Asiana 214 heavy, San Fransisco tower.  

1:37 (Inaudible Korean with uhs)

1:42 (Horizon)635 is going around.  
1:43 Horizon 635, fly heading 265, maintain 3100.  
1:47 265 3100 Horizon 635.  
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 01:15:10 AM by ryannayr140 » Logged
Gawtti
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #17 on: July 07, 2013, 02:14:23 AM »

This clip went Worldwide ... Amazing, good job!
Logged
AntiguaJim
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #18 on: July 07, 2013, 02:29:18 AM »

As we now know, the ILS and "Poppy lights" were out of service for 28L for some time before this incident.
Maybe the pilots were not aware of this. When they became aware of the problem it was too late to achieve a safe glide slope and landing. They should have initiated a go around much sooner.
One would think the pilots of the Friday flight, who made a successful landing would have notified the Asiana company of the ILS problem.  
I have experienced ILS problems when the course part was working. but the glide slope was not.
Or, was this a poorly trained pilot, which Asiana has been criticised for in the past, who was attempting a visual approach?
It will be interesting to see the final report.
Thankfully the loss of life was minimal. Prayers to their families and those injured.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 03:03:15 AM by AntiguaJim » Logged
phil-s
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


« Reply #19 on: July 07, 2013, 02:40:12 AM »

That might make more sense to many written PAPI lights. 
Logged
AntiguaJim
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #20 on: July 07, 2013, 03:07:50 AM »

My reference to the "Poppy Lights" is from my flight instructor many years ago. She said if I saw 4 "red poppy flowers" on final I would be pushing up poppies from my grave. I never have forgotten that, and never will.
Logged
tyketto
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 912


« Reply #21 on: July 07, 2013, 03:19:16 AM »

As we now know, the ILS and "Poppy lights" were out of service for 28L for some time before this incident.
Maybe the pilots were not aware of this. When they became aware of the problem it was too late to achieve a safe glide slope and landing. They should have initiated a go around much sooner.
One would think the pilots of the Friday flight, who made a successful landing would have notified the Asiana company of the ILS problem.

Any notice of the ILS being out of service for either runway would have been added to the list of NOTAMs and broadcast over the ATIS. This means that ALL pilots would have been aware of the problem well before reaching the TRACON area. Saying that this is a company problem really has nothing to do with it.

Quote
I have experienced ILS problems when the course part was working. but the glide slope was not.
Or, was this a poorly trained pilot, which Asiana has been criticised for in the past, who was attempting a visual approach?
It will be interesting to see the final report.
Thankfully the loss of life was minimal. Prayers to their families and those injured.

this is assuming that they were on the ILS. According to the METAR, the field was VMC, so they could have been on either the Quiet Bridge or Tip Toe visual to 28L or 28R, or just the straight visual approach. My guess was the Quiet Bridge Visual, all of which would have been given clearance to by NCT.

In fact, they couldn't be on the ILS, because according to the NOTAMs, the glide paths for both 28R an 28L were unusable until mid-August, and both Cat II and Cat III ILS were not available at all until mid August, and those NOTAMs went into effect last week. So the only ILS approach available would have been to 19L, which normally would be used with East Ops.

So it was a visual approach, a CVFP, or nothing at all. BTW. Check https://www.notams.faa.gov for the NOTAMs in question. Either way, I don't think this is a 'not knowing the procedure' issue.

BL.
Logged
AntiguaJim
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #22 on: July 07, 2013, 03:41:54 AM »

I agree that is was an intentional visual approach.
 So now the question is why did the pilot in command misjudge his final approach so badly? According to "FlightAware" his descent was radically different than normal. Maybe his Barometric Pressure was not set correctly? It would be good to hear his landing approval from the tower and his read back.
I suppose my main question is why, upon realizing he was far above the normal glide scope, the pilot didn't declare a missed approach.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 03:52:46 AM by AntiguaJim » Logged
LIIT
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #23 on: July 07, 2013, 05:12:28 AM »

Over the last minute of flight:
time                                                                                  k      mph AGL  
02:27PM    37.5988    -122.3270    299°    West    145    167    800    -1,380 Descending    FlightAware
02:27PM    37.6016    -122.3340    297°    West    141    162    600    -1,320 Descending    FlightAware
02:27PM    37.6045    -122.3410    298°    West    134    154    400    -900 Descending    FlightAware
02:27PM    37.6073    -122.3480    297°    West    123    142    300    -840 Descending    FlightAware
02:27PM    37.6103    -122.3550    298°    West    109    125    100    -120 Descending    FlightAware
02:28PM    37.6170    -122.3740    294°    West    85      98      200    120 Climbing    FlightAware

Looks good on speed and descent on approach.
Till till 3500 ft before at 123k
Then at 1000 ft at 109k - stalling.
Then 85k just before the rocks - climbing, no doubt at full throttle, but not soon enough.

It appears from those numbers, that the plane succeeded in climbing, but still hit the ground. Could this be because of an incorrect pressure setting?
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 05:15:15 AM by LIIT » Logged
oktalist
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« Reply #24 on: July 07, 2013, 09:36:41 AM »

He was slow, and should have asked for permission to talk on a busy frequency like United 85 did at 0:12. Let me be clear, this pilot, nor a lack of communication were the cause of this accident.
"Let me be clear" should usually be followed by something that is clear. huh
Logged
sykocus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 349



« Reply #25 on: July 07, 2013, 09:58:33 AM »

I am always dubious of the accuracy of flightaware's numbers in the track log especially when looking at such moment in time. However I was curious as to see what they looked like so I plotted them on google earth.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/152429/AAR214.kmz The square markers are AAR214. The round ones are ANA8 which landed just before AAR214. The last data plot on flightaware that shows AAR climbing plots out to be further down the runway then AAR ever came so I think it's safe to throw that one out completely. Google earth doesn't have an MSL setting for the altitude of the makers so they aren't 100% accurate relative to the map. It's best to simply compare the height to the others. In general take it all with a grain of salt.

Also I found the flight on planefinder.net. Unfortunately the altitude in the playback doesn't update very often and the tracking ends a few miles short of the runway so not much info can be gleaned from it either.
http://planefinder.net/flight/AAR214/time/2013-07-06T18:15:00%20UTC
Logged

Yesterday I couldn't spell air traffic controller. Today I R one.
fholbert
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 144



WWW
« Reply #26 on: July 07, 2013, 11:14:32 AM »

Except for maybe "I have a problem" and when he gives his call sign, utterly unintelligible to my ear. Seemed like tower couldn't salvage anything useful out of the coms either and just kept responding "emergency vehicles are on the way".  What a mess.

To me it sounds like Asiana 214 is saying trouble.
Logged

Frank Holbert
http://160knots.com
ryannayr140
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #27 on: July 07, 2013, 11:48:59 AM »

He was slow, and should have asked for permission to talk on a busy frequency like United 85 did at 0:12. Let me be clear, this pilot, nor a lack of communication were the cause of this accident.
"Let me be clear" should usually be followed by something that is clear. huh
Sorry I just wanted to clarify that I'm not blaming this poor man for what happened.  He was trying his best, and his English was far better than the pilot of Asiana 214. 
Logged
vectorboy
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #28 on: July 07, 2013, 02:07:56 PM »

Is there a clip of NORCAL issuing the visual approach? Would be curious to hear how far out they turned him, whether or not he was instructed to follow another aircraft and any speed restrictions that may have been issued.
Logged
tyketto
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 912


« Reply #29 on: July 07, 2013, 02:18:04 PM »

Is there a clip of NORCAL issuing the visual approach? Would be curious to hear how far out they turned him, whether or not he was instructed to follow another aircraft and any speed restrictions that may have been issued.

Pretty sure there is. Should be somewhere in the 1800Z-1900Z clips in the archives. Obviously, unabridged for this would be better.

BL.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!