Exclusive: SFO near miss might have triggered ‘greatest aviation disaster in history’

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Jul 23, 2017, 9:00 am

#526

After Burner

Join Date: Sep 2000

Location: OGG, YYC

Programs: AA, AC

Posts: 3,697

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dad to Rei

KenHamer - I have been following this chain pretty closely, this post is great. Awesome explanation and dissection of the incident, and that there is a fantastic question.

The answer to that question is the usual one: It costs money. Perhaps these systems should be mandated.

Quote:

I do wonder if the full story will ever really come out, especially CVR over written.

I'm inclined to bet that it will.

Jul 23, 2017, 9:08 am

#527

After Burner

Join Date: Sep 2000

Location: OGG, YYC

Programs: AA, AC

Posts: 3,697

Quote:

Originally Posted by KenHamer

Which brings us full circle back to AC759. Is there any possible circumstance, any, at all, whereby a plane could be in this position at an altitude of a few hundred feet:

Unfortunately, in the case of SFO, the answer is yes. It's a perfectly normal 28R approach and happens frequently.

There is an ILS parallel to and to the right of 28R. Aircraft on this ILS will often do a very last minute sidestep maneuver to the left to line up with 28R.

Jul 23, 2017, 10:38 am

#528

canadiancow

A FlyerTalk Posting Legend

Join Date: Sep 2012

Location: SFO

Programs: AC SE MM, BA Gold, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond

Posts: 44,347

Quote:

Originally Posted by After Burner

There is an ILS parallel to and to the right of 28R. Aircraft on this ILS will often do a very last minute sidestep maneuver to the left to line up with 28R.

I mentioned that upthread (the "sidestep"). It's VERY noticable as a passenger if you're even remotely paying attention.

I can't recall any other regular harsh last minute manoeuvres right before landing anywhere else.

Jul 23, 2017, 10:57 am

#529

Jagboi

Join Date: Feb 2009

Location: YYC

Programs: BA bronze, Aeroplan peon

Posts: 4,746

Reading the description of the approach almost makes it sound like the old Kai Tak approach in Hong Kong, where you can't pick up a localizer until the last moment. Or am I way off base?

Jul 23, 2017, 11:13 am

#530

yyz_atc_qq

Join Date: Dec 2005

Location: YYZ most of the time

Programs: AC SE100K MM, Princess Elite

Posts: 3,921

Quote:

Originally Posted by After Burner

That's not an accurate representation of the facts.

If an aircraft is on the LDA/DME 28R, RNAV (GPS) X 28R or the RNAV (GPS) PRM X 28R then yes.... you are not aligned with the runway. If you are on the ILS or LOC 28R, ILS (SA Cat 1) 28R, ILS (Cat II or Cat III) 28R, RNAV (RNP) Y 28R, or the RNAV (GPS) Z 28R then you are aligned with the runway.

Do we know with 100% certainty which approach was being flown by this particular aircraft????

Jul 23, 2017, 11:28 am

#531

The Lev

FlyerTalk Evangelist

Join Date: Mar 2005

Location: YYZ

Programs: AC*SE 2MM

Posts: 16,655

Quote:

Originally Posted by capedreamer

Sorry for the bump, but am I really the only one confused by this??

quite simple really... the AC aircraft Passed about 50 feet above the tail of the PAL A340 - first quote.

At at its lowest point, the AC aircraft was at about 80 feet, placing it 20 odd feet higher than the tail of the UA aircraft assuming straight and level flight (a silly assumption). By the time the AC aircraft flew over the next aircraft , it had already begun to climb, so the actual separation at that point was higher, but that doesn't make the story as sexy.

Jul 23, 2017, 11:54 am

#532

After Burner

Join Date: Sep 2000

Location: OGG, YYC

Programs: AA, AC

Posts: 3,697

Quote:

Originally Posted by yyz_atc_qq

It's the LDA approach I was referring to. That requires a sidestep.

AC759 was on the FMS Bridge 28R approach. That's 100% for certain.

Jul 23, 2017, 11:56 am

#533

After Burner

Join Date: Sep 2000

Location: OGG, YYC

Programs: AA, AC

Posts: 3,697

Quote:

Originally Posted by canadiancow

I can't recall any other regular harsh last minute manoeuvres right before landing anywhere else.

That's because there are very few other airports (if any) with parallel runways so close together.

Jul 23, 2017, 12:12 pm

#534

yyz_atc_qq

Join Date: Dec 2005

Location: YYZ most of the time

Programs: AC SE100K MM, Princess Elite

Posts: 3,921

Quote:

Originally Posted by After Burner

It's the LDA approach I was referring to. That requires a sidestep.

AC759 was on the FMS Bridge 28R approach. That's 100% for certain.

According to my info there is no such procedure. The closest would be the QUIET BRIDGE VISUAL 28L/R but there isn't a specific FMS Bridge 28R

Jul 23, 2017, 12:23 pm

#535

After Burner

Join Date: Sep 2000

Location: OGG, YYC

Programs: AA, AC

Posts: 3,697

Quote:

Originally Posted by yyz_atc_qq

According to my info there is no such procedure. The closest would be the QUIET BRIDGE VISUAL 28L/R but there isn't a specific FMS Bridge 28R

According to what info? Where were you expecting to find it? Unless you're looking at the FMS in an aircraft authorized for this approach you're not going to see it.

The FMS Bridge 28R is an RNAV overlay of the Quiet Bridge approach, but it's not exactly the same.

Jul 23, 2017, 12:30 pm

#536

After Burner

Join Date: Sep 2000

Location: OGG, YYC

Programs: AA, AC

Posts: 3,697

Quote:

Originally Posted by yyz_atc_qq

According to my info there is no such procedure. The closest would be the QUIET BRIDGE VISUAL 28L/R but there isn't a specific FMS Bridge 28R

Here are the specifics.

Code:

ARCHI SFO 092 Radial 25 DME     cross at 8000
TRDOW SFO 095 Radial 19 DME     cross at 6000
GAROW SFO 095 Radial 15 DME     cross at 4000
SAMUL SFO 095 Radial  7 DME     cross at 1800
F101D SFO 101 Radial 4.4 DME

Jul 23, 2017, 1:52 pm

#537

KenHamer

Original Member

Join Date: May 1998

Location: Vancouver, Canada

Posts: 6,222

Quote:

Originally Posted by yowspotter

The main issue with those systems has been certification for Part 25 aircraft application. Having the manufacturers develop them to be as reliable as required by the System's Safety Assessment has been both extremely difficult and cost prohibitive for the manufacturers like Garmin.

Incidentally, Garmin is THE main force behind a massive push by GAMA to "dumb down" certification requirements, especially for airborne software.

More modern avionics systems by Garmin but moreso Honeywell, Thales, Rockwell Collins (the big boys) now contain this technology (and certified), but an airline with a fleet of X dozen/hundred older aircraft will not eat the expense of fleet retrofit and re-certification for debatable benefit (cost benefit analysis fails miserably here).

This sounds like a spot on manifestation of tombstone mentality.

Jul 23, 2017, 6:34 pm

#538

canopus27

Join Date: Dec 2011

Location: YYZ

Programs: AC SEMM / HH Diamond

Posts: 3,167

Quote:

Originally Posted by canadiancow

LGA, landing on 31?

Jul 23, 2017, 7:35 pm

#539

canadiancow

A FlyerTalk Posting Legend

Join Date: Sep 2012

Location: SFO

Programs: AC SE MM, BA Gold, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond

Posts: 44,347

Quote:

Originally Posted by canopus27

LGA, landing on 31?

I've only landed at LGA 3 (maybe 4?) times, so I'll defer to you on this.

Jul 23, 2017, 7:55 pm

#540

quantumofforce

Join Date: May 2016

Posts: 2,494

Quote:

Originally Posted by KenHamer

Ok, so how is it that AF 447 in 2009 didn't have the heater turned on?

According to the program pitot tube freezing was the initiating event:
- tube freezes
- autopilot disconnects
- crew responds incorrectly by "pulling up"
- plane stalls then drops out of the sky.
(Abridged version.)

I'm sure I've seen several episodes where tubes have frozen. As well one if the regular commentators noted this happens all the time and was no big deal.

why not have a backup pitot tube?
Why not have a thermometer so they know it's frozen when it freezes up?