Asiana Pilots Fault Equipment Malfunction in SFO Crash

[SeanD]

Let's not forget that the 3rd person in the cockpit was a 777 instructor...

My thoughts exactly. They are going to try to say whatever they can to make it look like they were the victims. They must not realize just how stupid this latest excuse sounds. It would be a lot better if they simply told the truth, which is that a small group of angry badgers chewed through the avionics and started attacking them during final.

 

[Pépé le Pilot]

I'm not familiar with the korean mentality, but I've been to Seoul a few times and always been dumbfounded by the way people interact... Their defense is unreal, but Airbus and Boeing do exactly that when something serious happens with their planes.

 

[Firebird2XC]

That's it. Not flying on, for, or with an Asian carrier until they straighten this crap out.

Amateurs.

 

[ChasenSFO]

Honestly, nothing the pilots say at this point could surprise me. I'd expect something like this. But for the airline to back them, that's where I see the huge red flag waving at full mass. If this was a United 777 landing at SFO, and the CA gave this excuse, do you think you'd see United telling the media, "The autothorttles weren't working, so naturally the plane was going to slow to just above a stall. Of course the pilots weren't watching the airspeed, the automation is supposed to work?". Its the same airplane, with a very similar ammount of pax in the back. I'm shocked the airline would seriously suggest this and back the pilots. Shocked. Especially since the airline was quick to tell the world "nothing was wrong with the aircraft", only to retract that statement like this.

But keep in mind, I see the words Chinese and Asia being brought up. That's a bit ignorant in this case. There are sketchy airlines in Asia, but you can't compare this stuff to Asian operations like Cathay Pacific, JAL, and ANA who rival or beat the safety and operational standards of many Western airlines.

 

[dasleben]

That's it. Not flying on, for, or with an Asian carrier until they straighten this crap out.

Amateurs.

Nah, that's a little overboard. I've recently flown on Asiana, Korean, JAL, ANA, and even China Airlines. All have good safety records overall. US carriers ball crap up from time to time, too.

 

[ChasenSFO]

Nah, that's a little overboard. I've recently flown on Asiana, Korean, JAL, ANA, and even China Airlines. All have good safety records overall. US carriers ball crap up from time to time, too.

The others, totally, China Airlines...not so much. Recently, yes. But from the 80s to late 2000s, they wrote off one of just about every type they operated. Usually with fatalities. And usually due to horrible mx or bizarre pilot error. If you snoop around the web, you'll see they've had a lot of close calls that they frankly got luck with. They've gotten better, but that is one of the few big Asian carriers I'm not so sure about. It was only a year or so ago that a typhoon hit HKG and there was an ATC clip which was promptly taken off the web that went something like:

CX: "Cathay 123, did the aircraft ahead report abonormalities on final?"
ATC: "Dynasty 123, any reports?"
CI: "Uh, Dynasty 123, we had windsheer alerts from 800 feet to landing"
Random pilot: "And you landed anyway?!"

 

[Pépé le Pilot]

We have a bridge program with Air China where a pilot can go and spend 3 years in China flying while not loosing seniority or retirement. Few volunteers though, mostly due to the great unknown of chinese CRM.