Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Boeing 777 Crash Lands in San Francisco

  1. Jul 6, 2013 #1

    lisab

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 6, 2013 #2

    nsaspook

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

  4. Jul 6, 2013 #3
  5. Jul 6, 2013 #4

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    One picture that says "the beginning of the debris" shows debris on the rocks at the water's edge, did the plane first hit the rocks? It looks that way. (picture #11 in lisab's link)
     
  6. Jul 6, 2013 #5

    lisab

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It's possible. One eyewitness's observation:

    http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/06/19324552-pillars-of-smoke-several-flips-witnesses-recount-scene-at-san-francisco-plane-crash?lite [Broken]

    The San Francisco airport is right on the water - I mean, the distance between the bay and the end of the runway is just feet! I once landed there and was sure we were going into the water, but the runway appeared seconds before "impact" :eek:.

    In a plane having trouble, it's very lucky the pilot made it to dry land!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2017
  7. Jul 6, 2013 #6

    lisab

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

  8. Jul 6, 2013 #7
  9. Jul 6, 2013 #8

    morrobay

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Yes, the plane first hit the breakwater which tore off an engine and tail ( as reported on TV news/Fox)
    A few years ago I decided to never fly a Korean airline again. This was Korean Air landing in Seoul and the plane was landing so steep and fast that its axis was skidding +200 -200.on the runway.
    And eye witness reports of the Asiana plane crash in S.F. have said the plane was coming
    in extremely fast and steep.
     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2013
  10. Jul 6, 2013 #9

    nsaspook

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_07_06_2013_p0-594353.xml

     
  11. Jul 7, 2013 #10

    AlephZero

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    And the reason for that, ironically, is because the ILS beacons are being relocated, to move the touchdown point further inland along the runway and reduce the risk of this sort of accident happening.
     
  12. Jul 7, 2013 #11

    jtbell

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

  13. Jul 7, 2013 #12

    OmCheeto

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    That would explain the spinal injuries. Whiplash at 160+ mph. :cry:

    I used to fly all the time back when I was young, and thoroughly enjoyed it.
    I'm not sure when I stopped enjoying it.
    It may have been that time I flew to Reno, about 15 years ago, and halfway there, I saw myself in another airplane, passing at a 1000 mph relative speed, with a separation of about 100 yards, with eyes as big as saucer plates.

    Note to pilots: As fun as that may be, don't do that. You will lose customers.
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2013
  14. Jul 7, 2013 #13

    jim hardy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    Last edited: Jul 7, 2013
  15. Jul 7, 2013 #14

    OmCheeto

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    I did a google of landing speeds for 777's and it was 260 kph. (~140 knots)

    So obviously, I can't interpret the data from that web site, as for the last minute, the plane appeared to be flying too slowly.

    109 knots, just before touchdown? Perhaps there was a 30 knot headwind?

    Did another web search and came up with the following:

    Those people do not know how to run a forum. Good god they went off topic.

    The closest I could come to an answer was:

     
  16. Jul 7, 2013 #15

    Borg

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    On the national news tonight, there was an official who wouldn't say exactly what the speed was but she stated that it was well below the required speed. The 85 knots at the bottom of Jim Hardy's link looks to match that pretty well. It's really beginning to look like a loss of situational awareness for the flight crew (yes, I know it's waaay too early to know).
     
  17. Jul 7, 2013 #16

    Office_Shredder

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The landing speed was supposed to be 137 knots, and the crew can be heard acknowledging that speed so if they were going significantly slower and their instrumentation indicated that before the landing they must have been really blowing it

    http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/07/us/plane-crash-main/

    Did they just not look at their airspeed meter or whatever it's called when stating they were going 137 knots? Because I feel like that goes beyond situational awareness to full blown incompetence
     
  18. Jul 7, 2013 #17

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Too early to know for sure of course, but using a sort of antropic principle, logic tells us that in order for there to be an accident these days without bad weather or a major mechanical failure, it requires a spectacular level of incompetence. Remember Air France a couple of years ago? Bad weather and a minor mechanical failure, but still the primary cause of the accident was a spectacular level of incompetence. Very sad.
     
  19. Jul 7, 2013 #18

    morrobay

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    So if the plane was approaching at 140 knots at a 350 angle then the vertical velocity is Vy = V sine 350
    80 knots = 140knots (.57)
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2013
  20. Jul 7, 2013 #19

    OmCheeto

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    Happened to me at work one day. (Hospital, 25 years ago)

    I worked in an office just 100 feet from the "Life Flight" landing pad on the top of the building.
    Life Flight was coming in, so I peeked my head out the door, and watched the two ER guys waiting for the copter to land.
    At one point, they both stopped looking out the tiny 10"x10" windows, and [STRIKE]ran[/STRIKE] bolted in my direction.

    I slammed the doors shut, and heard a crash.

    The copter pilot had come in too fast, and his tail rotor shredded on the edge of the rooftop.

    The patient, and everyone else survived, thank god.

    They brought in a crane the next day, and carried the copter away.
     
  21. Jul 7, 2013 #20

    lisab

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Seems like medical helicopters crash quite a lot! Or, maybe they just make the news more...?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Boeing 777 Crash Lands in San Francisco
Loading...