No other info

Don't want to post a lot because the news is spouting bullshit. Sounds like flight from Seoul, declared emergency, crashed on landing. Fire department still fighting fire.

See, now they are saying they did not declare emergency.

Edited July 6, 201312 yr by Butters

Hope everybody got out, video looked like at least some of the emergency slides were deployed.

The media sucks at aviation.

Here's hoping everyone gets out OK.

They are showing video of a lot of people getting on busses. That is a good sign.

Overhead video looks like they either landed short or the tail separated over the underrun.

Looks eerily like the BA 777 crash at Heathrow in 2008. It looks like they barely made the pavement.

Strictly an observation.

Looks eerily like the BA 777 crash at Heathrow in 2008. It looks like they barely made the pavement.

Strictly an observation.

I was thinking the same thing. Debris field starts at the sea wall. Then the plane did not travel very far after impact.

Edited July 6, 201312 yr by Butters

Looks like quite a few made it out ok.

Edited July 6, 201312 yr by herkbum

Holy shit, they just showed a picture a passenger took. There were fuckers carrying their bags. If I am getting out of an aircraft that just crashed and you grab your bag, you are getting throat punched.

I love how there are a few taking pictures after exiting...then posting online. Gotta love technology. I probably would have snapped a few pics too.

Hmm. My best guess: they took birds in both motors on final and had to dead stick it in.

SFO NBC affiliate reporting all pax & crew evacuated safely. 303 total.

Bored on a Saturday afternoon...

SFO Tower Audio (pretty slow to load)

Sounds like things were normal/normal until it hit the ground. No mention of an emergency and other aircraft being cleared to land.

Hmm. My best guess: they took birds in both motors on final and had to dead stick it in.

Unlikely, the GE90-115B loves birds. Chews them up, spits them out, asks for more. That would have to be a very large flock of some big mother fucking birds. They either fucked up the approach and landed short, C-17 crews have been known to do this. Or, they had both engines flame out, similar to the aforementioned Heathrow incident, and saved the day.

Unlikely, the GE90-115B loves birds. Chews them up, spits them out, asks for more.

Really? Interesting. Well, whatever the cause, the crew on that United 747 holding short will have some great info for the investigators.

Edit: According to FlightGlobal.com,

The 777-200ER, one of 12 in the Asiana fleet, was powered by the Pratt & Whitney PW4090 engines.

Not that it matters...

Edited July 6, 201312 yr by TacAirCoug

The core of the -115Bs is pretty small, the bypass ratio of 9:1. Very small chance of any birds going into the core and the fan chops them up pretty good w/o fragging out.

The 777-200ER, one of 12 in the Asiana fleet, was powered by the Pratt & Whitney PW4090 engines.

Well, there is your problem. The 777 that crashed at Heathrow was powered by Rolls-Royce Trent 895s. Buy the GE engines! Oh, and before someone points it out the 200ER GE engines are 90-94Bs, the 115Bs are on the 300LR. Still big ass high bypass engines that do not flame out from FOD easily.

Glideslopes for both 28L & 28R have been OTS in the NOTAMS since 1 Jun. Possible poorly flown visual approach?

CBS now reporting 2 dead 61 injured

SFO NBC affiliate reporting all pax & crew evacuated safely. 303 total.

SF FD reporting 2 dead and 61 injured.

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/07/06/plane-crash-at-sfo/

Cheers,

Hoser

Pic from afar of crash.

Edited July 6, 201312 yr by flynhigh

Glideslopes for both 28L & 28R have been OTS in the NOTAMS since 1 Jun. Possible poorly flown visual approach?

Always possible, but supposedly the company has a very good safety record.

My interest, as a safety dude, is in the fact that the tail is off aft of the doors and just prior to the horizontal stab.

Looks eerily like the BA 777 crash at Heathrow in 2008. It looks like they barely made the pavement.

Strictly an observation.

The BA crash was due to a fuel/oil heat exchanger problem unique to the Rolls Royce engines on the 777. These Asiana birds have Pratts.

Always possible, but supposedly the company has a very good safety record.

My interest, as a safety dude, is in the fact that the tail is off aft of the doors and just prior to the horizontal stab.

Tails probably tend to do that when you slap them on a rock breakwater short of the runway. I'm not a safety guy but what's more likely: An error flying a visual approach after a ~12+ hour flight when you probably use an ILS on 95% of your landings or something catastrophic in the last 200' of the same12+ hour flight that causes the tail to fall off?

SF FD reporting 2 dead and 61 injured.

https://sanfrancisco....e-crash-at-sfo/

Cheers,

Hoser

Major news outlets now also reporting 2 dead. Injured estimates vary, highest I've heard is 70. MSNBC reporting that 10 patients at SF General Hospital are critical, some patients were intubated & put on ventilator (breathing machine). Likely cause would be smoke or toxic fume inhalation during egress from the aircraft.

I love how there are a few taking pictures after exiting...then posting online. Gotta love technology. I probably would have snapped a few pics too.

Asians love taking pictures-Fact