Seeking Alpha

Mechanical problems may have contributed to the crash of Asiana's Boeing (BA) 777 in San...

Mechanical problems may have contributed to the crash of Asiana's Boeing (BA) 777 in San Francisco on Saturday. The pilots had "armed" the plane's auto-throttle devices to maintain a safe airspeed, but the velocity dropped anyway as the jet came into land. Whatever the primary cause of the crash, aviation lawyer Robert Clifford reckons Boeing could anyway be liable, because the 777 didn't have an audio warning of low airspeed despite industry discussions about installing such an alert ten years ago.
Comments (11)
  • jimmydell
    , contributor
    Comments (19) | Send Message
    In service for 18 years, with over 800 -777 examples in service, five million flights and having accumulated more than 18 million flight hours with this being the first hull loss, I'd say it's hard to blame Boeing or the plane.
    10 Jul 2013, 05:14 AM Reply Like
  • etudiant
    , contributor
    Comments (11) | Send Message
    Au contraire.
    Never underestimate the dogged determination of US aviation lawyers seeking justice and a substantial settlement, perhaps in that order.
    If there was a mechanical failure and a secondary sensor that was suggested as a safety measure was omitted, that would be a good starting point for an inquiry. If the competing Airbus aircraft do offer that secondary sensor backup, Boeing's odds in front of a California jury might not be so good, notwithstanding the 777's record.
    10 Jul 2013, 06:19 AM Reply Like
  • dacama1
    , contributor
    Comments (220) | Send Message
    Oh yes, never forget the California part.
    10 Jul 2013, 06:38 AM Reply Like
  • nick3nick
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
    Boeing has always made the best planes out there. No reason to believe the 777 is any different.
    10 Jul 2013, 10:00 AM Reply Like
  • Ooi
    , contributor
    Comments (306) | Send Message
    Your suggestion that justice might be a top priority belies all probability.
    10 Jul 2013, 01:16 PM Reply Like
  • FlyFirstForever
    , contributor
    Comments (4) | Send Message
    The pilots had "armed" the plane's auto-throttle " according to who ? the pilots. "Aviation lawyer Robert Clifford reckons Boeing could anyway be liable". Aviation lawyer Robert Clifford should stop reckoning and just wait till the NTSP gives us the final report. This plane could have landed itself on auto pilot, and stopped on the end of the runway with the pilots just watching the on board computers do the work. None of the other Boeing 777 landing that day had any problems.
    10 Jul 2013, 03:38 PM Reply Like
  • John136
    , contributor
    Comments (7) | Send Message
    The audio warning should have come from the lips of the crewmember variously called co-pilot, pilot not flying, or pilot monitoring. Even one knot below ref-speed should have brought an immediate warning as should rapidly decreasing airspeed. To blame Boeing when no one was monitoring airspeed is preposterous. It is said that the flight crew of a fully automated airliner will consist of one man and one dog. The man's job is to feed the dog. The dog's job is to bite the man if he touches anything. Really, folks, we're not there yet.
    10 Jul 2013, 03:38 PM Reply Like
  • GarryGR
    , contributor
    Comments (204) | Send Message
    RE "The pilots had "armed" the plane's auto-throttle devices to maintain a safe airspeed, but the velocity dropped anyway as the jet came into land". "Armed" does not mean that the airspeed is computer controlled; the pilots have to maintain the air speed when in the "armed" state.


    You read "armed" as if it were standard language; problem is, it's not. That's aircraft terminology (Boeing’s – I don't know about Airbus). As the NTSB reported, there are two auto-throttle switches and they've already determined that one was on and the other was off, hence the technical state of "armed", which means the pilots have to maintain proper air speed. Both switches have to be on if the pilots want auto speed control.


    The interesting question is, what in the heck do you need an "armed" state for? Armed is the same as off, as far as this incident is concerned. I'm guessing the pilot who had the switch on didn't realize that the other switch was off?!
    10 Jul 2013, 03:39 PM Reply Like
  • thomas85225
    , contributor
    Comments (563) | Send Message
    As of 2013, the 777 has been in eight aviation accidents and incidents,[190] including three hull-loss accidents,[191] and three hijackings.[192] Before 2013, the only fatality involving the twinjet occurred in a refueling fire at Denver International Airport on September 5, 2001, during which a ground worker sustained fatal burns.[193] The aircraft, operated by British Airways, suffered fire damage to the lower wing panels and engine housing; it was later repaired and put back into service.[193][194]


    The type's first hull-loss occurred on January 17, 2008, when British Airways Flight 38, a 777-200ER with Rolls-Royce Trent 895 engines flying from Beijing to London, crash-landed approximately 1,000 feet (300 m) short of Heathrow Airport's runway 27L and slid onto the runway's threshold. There were 47 injuries and no fatalities. The impact damaged the landing gear, wing roots and engines. The aircraft was written off.[195][196] Upon investigation, the accident was blamed on ice crystals from the fuel system clogging the fuel-oil heat exchanger (FOHE).[189] In 2009, air accident investigators called for a redesign of this component on the Trent 800 series engine.[197] Redesigned fuel oil heat exchangers were installed in British Airways' 777s by October 2009.[198]


    Two other minor momentary losses of thrust with Trent 895 engines occurred in February and November 2008.[199][200] The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigators concluded that, just as on BA38, the loss of power was caused by ice in the fuel clogging the fuel-oil heat exchanger. As a result, the heat exchanger was redesigned.[189]


    The type's second hull-loss occurred on July 29, 2011, when an EgyptAir 777-200ER registered as SU-GBP suffered a cockpit fire while parked at the gate at Cairo International Airport.[201] The plane was successfully evacuated with no injuries,[201] and airport fire teams extinguished the fire.[202] The aircraft sustained structural, heat and smoke damage. This aircraft was written off.[201][202] Investigators focused on a possible electrical fault with a supply hose in the cockpit crew oxygen system.[201]


    The Boeing 777's third hull loss occurred on July 6, 2013, when Asiana Airlines Flight 214, 777-200ER registered HL7742,[203] crashed while landing at San Francisco International Airport after touching down short of the runway. Most of the passengers and crew evacuated before fire destroyed the aircraft, but 2 of the 307 on board were killed, marking the first fatalities in a crash involving a 777.[204][205] An accident investigation by the NTSB is underway; its initial focus is on the aircraft's low landing speed.[206][207]
    11 Jul 2013, 08:25 PM Reply Like
  • healthythoughts
    , contributor
    Comments (3077) | Send Message
    GarryGr...Is on target..explained it very well
    11 Jul 2013, 10:09 AM Reply Like
  • healthythoughts
    , contributor
    Comments (3077) | Send Message
    GB obviously knows what he's talking about, as I posed same question to another expert & they repeated basically same thing


    I know many Boeing retirees, Airline pilots, etc with many years of experience & they know airplanes...


    Some reports say pilot said a laser type light obstructed view


    so let's let the NTSB investigation ...Listen to info on your own links

    12 Jul 2013, 09:56 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs