Anyone here ever land a 747 at SFO?

[jmowreader]

We know the Asiana captain who crashed a 777 at SFO had landed the 747 at SFO successfully on numerous occasions. This means he knows what the sight picture out the windshield of a 747 should be.

If you were to position a 777 for a landing at SFO on the runway in question so that the sight picture out the windshield matched that of a 747, would you knock the tail off?

[Savannahmann]

1. No, the belly of the plane would smack the seawall, the plane would break in half.

The cockpit of the 747 is much higher off the ground, much higher from the wheels. If he was going off his experience for the 747 he would have, should have aborted much sooner.

[jmowreader]

5. 777s have shorter noses than 747s

To get the same view of the runway you'd have to come in with the nose higher.

[HooptieWagon]

10. That would certainly cause a loss of airspeed and a stall.

There were three other pilots in the cockpit, we'll have to see what cockpit communications are on the voice recorder.

[HooptieWagon]

2. Its possible he did, and that caused the crash.

Its probable that 747 & 777 have different glide and stall characteristics. Perhaps the newbie pilot was flying it like a 747, which he had experience with. A DUer pilot was posting in a thread early this morning. He said he not only flew 777s, but even flew the exact plane that crashed. He said the landing guide system (whatever its called) of the airport was inoperative, and the jet was on a visual approach. That could be important, given a newbie pilot. Have to wait for NTSB investigation.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. Even if he did,

there were THREE other pilots in the cockpit - the OE instructor and the augment crew. Even if the "newbie" pilot was doing it wrong, someone in the cockpit should have noticed and either taken over, or at least pointed out the fact that the approach was unstable from a good three miles out. There is never just one pilot responsible for operating the airplane.

[HooptieWagon]

8. Yes there was a breakdown in cockpit operations.

That seems fairly evident. We don't know the details though, so rather pointless to speculate. I'm sure the cockpit voice recorder will be quite informative.

[October]

9. This.

Responsibility ALWAYS falls to the captain, and in this case, the check airman, as well.

Still, we don't have all the details yet. He was off the center line, and landing way early/short (on the chevrons?).

[NoPasaran]

3. No, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night

[premium]

6. Dammit,

ya beat me to it.

[liberal N proud]

7. Depending on the model, the 777 is a longer jet than a 747

[jmowreader]

13. More importantly...

There's more airplane aft of the main gear on a 777 than there is on a 747.

What we may learn, when all is done, is he tried to land like it was a 747 - he also tried to land at the very end of the runway, like someone in a very heavy jet might try. When he remembered he wasn't in a 747 he tried to do a go-around but reacted when it was too late.

[liberal N proud]

15. Yep!

[Xithras]

11. No. Here's a comparison

You'll notice that a 777 is shorter than the 747 in all respects. The distance from the main gear to the tail is shorter, and the distance from the gear to the cockpit windows is shorter. If he were flying the 777 like a 747, he would have been too HIGH, not too low, because neither the tail or the gear would have extended downward as far as he was used to.

Besides, this wasn't the first time the pilot had landed a 777, just the first time he had landed one at SFO. He should have already been familiar with the altered sight lines.

Looking at the video of the crash really dispels this idea anyway. The plane didn't have its nose too far up during approach, it was simply short of the runway. The tail struck because, during the last second or two, the pilot opened up the engines and pitched the nose up in a desperate attempt to gain altitude. He managed to pull the nose and main body of the aircraft above the seawall, but the tail didn't clear. That move may have saved the lives of countless passengers, as it looks like the plane may have simply bellyflopped into the bay or smacked the seawall nose first if he hadn't reacted that way. Either of those landings would have disintegrated the aircraft and we'd be looking at an exponentially higher fatality count.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

14. good point about raising the nose with last minute throttle, etc.

I feel like the plane would have pancaked onto the runway with tremendous force and killed/injured a lot more people (not necessarily hitting the sea wall).

[EdwardSmith74]

12. They have a completely different shape. The 777 is wider and has no nose.

[kenny blankenship]

16. I don't know if I could do it sober

Get someone else, besides that was a long time ago.