VWVortex.com - AC759 at San Francisco International Airport
Username or Email Address
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    VWVortex


    Results 1 to 9 of 9

    Thread: AC759 at San Francisco International Airport

    1. Member
      Join Date
      Sep 20th, 2000
      Location
      Toronto
      Posts
      12,447
      Vehicles
      2008 Hyundai Accent, 2007 S2000
      05-07-2018 11:35 AM #1
      x 10000000000

      Finally video released from NTSB




      This is almost become the most serious aviation disaster in history.
      “I am not a Mac user unless under duress.” - John Carmack

    2. Remove Advertisements

      Advertisements
       

    3. 05-07-2018 06:02 PM #2
      And the comments. "Where's this guy going" . In a tone I would use at a mall parking lot, not on an active runway.
      Air Canada has had a bunch of near misses and ground strikes in the last year or so. Not all their fault, but still....

      Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

    4. Member stevevr6's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 13th, 2002
      Location
      Toronto, Canada
      Posts
      8,922
      Vehicles
      1997 GTI R32
      05-11-2018 09:40 AM #3
      What a close call.
      @VRBOY666

    5. Remove Advertisements

      Advertisements
       

    6. Senior Member chucchinchilla's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 25th, 2004
      Location
      Los Gatos, CA
      Posts
      20,355
      Vehicles
      2016 A6, 2014 X3, 1967 Bus, 1963 356
      05-14-2018 06:11 PM #4
      It was seconds away from being the next Tenerife. Keep in mind all those planes were loaded with fuel. I do notice a difference between the two videos, actual video shows the plane changing course while it's above the Philippines flight, second video suggests it was after. Without corrective action, I think AC759 would have clipped the tail of PAL 115 but not killing anyone, careened into UA863 and 1118 killing everyone thanks to both planes being full of fuel. Assuming a load factor of 83% (UA last year was 82.5% and I know from experience 1118 is a full flight) that's 477 people which is Tenerife range (583)...and again that's not including the plane they were almost on top of.
      Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
      This forum is more and more of an embarrassment every day...

    7. Member OOOO-A3's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 19th, 2004
      Location
      NAT HLA & WATRS
      Posts
      8,777
      Vehicles
      2013 Volt
      05-26-2018 12:41 AM #5
      This is why I hate visual approaches, and HATE ******* captains who insist on hand-flown visual approaches "to save time". Even if you're cleared for the visual, there is NO REASON to not be coupled up to some form of navigational guidance. Any jet has an FMS, you can always load an approach and VNAV to the threshold of the assigned runway, or at the very least, DIRect and VPATH to TDZE. Our company ops manual states "All visual approaches must be backed up with an instrument approach (precision approach recommended) and the approach briefing information strip on approach chart reviewed. When backing up a visual approach, ensure the correct runway and nav-aids, if applicable, are selected and tuned." Failure to do so is nothing but bull**** machismo.

    8. Member
      Join Date
      Dec 11th, 2002
      Location
      PNW
      Posts
      5,183
      Vehicles
      '17 Chevy Bolt, '94 CBR1000F, '47 Stinson Voyager
      05-27-2018 11:49 PM #6
      Quote Originally Posted by OOOO-A3 View Post
      This is why I hate visual approaches, and HATE ******* captains who insist on hand-flown visual approaches "to save time". Even if you're cleared for the visual, there is NO REASON to not be coupled up to some form of navigational guidance. Any jet has an FMS, you can always load an approach and VNAV to the threshold of the assigned runway, or at the very least, DIRect and VPATH to TDZE. Our company ops manual states "All visual approaches must be backed up with an instrument approach (precision approach recommended) and the approach briefing information strip on approach chart reviewed. When backing up a visual approach, ensure the correct runway and nav-aids, if applicable, are selected and tuned." Failure to do so is nothing but bull**** machismo.
      +1
      If it's not foggy
      and you have your fog |ights on
      you are a doofus.
      "Pro Tip: Don't **** with people who've been trollin' longer than you've been alive." - OOOO-A3

    9. Member
      Join Date
      Feb 3rd, 2007
      Location
      PNW (USA)
      Posts
      516
      Vehicles
      2006 VW Jetta TDI
      06-11-2018 12:15 AM #7
      Quote Originally Posted by philf1fan2 View Post
      And the comments. "Where's this guy going" . In a tone I would use at a mall parking lot, not on an active runway.
      Air Canada has had a bunch of near misses and ground strikes in the last year or so. Not all their fault, but still....

      Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk
      Because the pilot is a trained and experienced professional and nothing is to be gained by freaking out like an 11 YO child. Just guessing, but I have no doubt that his adrenalin level was through the roof.
      Last edited by stratclub; 06-11-2018 at 12:19 AM.

    10. Member MrRoboto's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 26th, 2000
      Location
      VHHH
      Posts
      4,992
      Vehicles
      E82M / W177 A35 / MSX125
      07-17-2018 12:17 AM #8

      Quote Originally Posted by OOOO-A3 View Post
      This is why I hate visual approaches, and HATE ******* captains who insist on hand-flown visual approaches "to save time". Even if you're cleared for the visual, there is NO REASON to not be coupled up to some form of navigational guidance. Any jet has an FMS, you can always load an approach and VNAV to the threshold of the assigned runway, or at the very least, DIRect and VPATH to TDZE. Our company ops manual states "All visual approaches must be backed up with an instrument approach (precision approach recommended) and the approach briefing information strip on approach chart reviewed. When backing up a visual approach, ensure the correct runway and nav-aids, if applicable, are selected and tuned." Failure to do so is nothing but bull**** machismo.
      I haven’t done a visual in a long time. I think major airlines around the world tend to be less receptive to them now. The side effect though is that handling skills are being slowly eroded, but it has reduced the number of incidents.

    11. 08-10-2019 01:44 PM #9
      Quote Originally Posted by stratclub View Post
      Because the pilot is a trained and experienced professional and nothing is to be gained by freaking out like an 11 YO child. Just guessing, but I have no doubt that his adrenalin level was through the roof.
      , I think AC759 would have clipped the tail of PAL 115 but not killing anyone, careened into UA863 and 1118 killing everyone thanks to both planes being full of fuel. Assuming a load factor of 83% (UA last year was 82.5% and I know from experience 1118 is a full flight) that's 477 people which is Tenerife range (583)...and again that's not including the plane they were almost on top of.

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •