• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

SFO plane crash (7/6/13)

I do have a small (9" satchel) that contains all my critical shit underneath the seat in front of me.

You know, glasses, medication, phone, phone charger, spare photo ID, etc. -- anything I wouldn't want to have to abandon if I was going to be stuck somewhere for a couple of days.

Full rollaboard, though? No.
 
Samsung exec has a iPhone ? That blows a hole in my conspiracy.
 
Wow.

The 777-200ER is a damn good airplane. One of my favorites. Looks like the fuselage remained mostly intact immediately after striking ground.

I hope those injured eventually walk away.

Some of you old timers might remember this SFO crash in Nov 1968. The JAL DC-8 floated in the bay for a couple of days before being pulled out by a barge. In early 1969 that same airliner flew back to Japan.

____0000-OJAL4.jpg
 
Whenever I fly I take my shoes off when airborne but always have them on for takeoff and landing, just in case something like this.

If people were holding up my escape to get their overhead I'd be mowing motherfuckers down :mad
 
wow, only 2 dead reported so far - what a relief! well ok, not for those 2 people, but man when first reports came in it said ~300 on board and the plane flipped over and was in flames..... i wrote everyone off at that point! SOOOOO glad to hear that the VAST majority got out alive!!! whew!
 
Every time something like this happens, people are all like "This is why I never fly!" and it's like...goddamn but you drive?

Plane wrecks are big news because they hardly happen and when they do, it's generally serious.
As for shutting down the airport, investigation of what happened isn't as simple as blocking off that one area. If conditions are unsafe for other planes, it's not safe to fly. If it was some act of terror, it's not safe to fly. If it's something the aircraft controllers did, it's not safe to fly.

All in all it probably is pilot error or plane malfunction but better safe than sorry, right?


RIP for the 2 who died. Hope everyone else recovers well!
 
Marlowe said:
Protip: They intersect. See:

http://flightaware.com/resources/airport/SFO/APD/AIRPORT+DIAGRAM/pdf
Click to expand...

Yes they closed the airport after the fact. Traffic was running for a bit afterwards though. Just because something happens on one runway does not mean they have to close the whole airport down. Yes the runways intersect, but so do I80 and I5. If something happens on one freeway it doesn't necessarily mean it affects the other. They decided to close things down a while after the crash, I am sure they had their reasons.
 
SF fire chief is saying ~60 people are not accounted for, but they are not presumed dead.
 
Yikes.

I fly out on sunday, they better have the shit handled by then!
 
teg916 said:
Yes they closed the airport after the fact. Traffic was running for a bit afterwards though. Just because something happens on one runway does not mean they have to close the whole airport down. Yes the runways intersect, but so do I80 and I5. If something happens on one freeway it doesn't necessarily mean it affects the other. They decided to close things down a while after the crash, I am sure they had their reasons.
Click to expand...

Let's review, shall we?

- 28R is closed this summer.
- 28L is...definitely closed at the moment.

I don't see anyone wanting to run LAHSO ops off of 1L/1R right after something like that.

They've reopened 1L/1R now, sure, but some of y'all are high if you think they're going to be doing a ton of ops right next to an accident scene that's still on fire. If nothing else the smoke constrains visibility.
 
teg916 said:
Yes the runways intersect, but so do I80 and I5. If something happens on one freeway it doesn't necessarily mean it affects the other.
Click to expand...

You should probably look up what the word "intersect" means...
 
Dr. Evil said:
My vote is for a load shift. Second possibility is engine trouble.
Click to expand...

My vote is for aZn driver! :rofl I kid I kid!

Seriously though, I bet it comes down to pilot error. Came in too low and landed short.
 
Dr. Evil said:
My vote is for a load shift. Second possibility is engine trouble.
Click to expand...

Would this change your mind any?

!SFO 06/005 (KSFO A1056/13) SFO NAV ILS RWY 28L GP OTS WEF 1306011400-1308222359
!SFO 06/004 (KSFO A1053/13) SFO NAV ILS RWY 28R GP OTS WEF 1306011400-1308222359
 
Marlowe said:
Would this change your mind any?

!SFO 06/005 (KSFO A1056/13) SFO NAV ILS RWY 28L GP OTS WEF 1306011400-1308222359
!SFO 06/004 (KSFO A1053/13) SFO NAV ILS RWY 28R GP OTS WEF 1306011400-1308222359
Click to expand...

Engrish please?
 
1L & 1R are generally only used for takeoff due to terrain. If you look there aren't even any published approaches for those runways. Even if they did land aircraft on those runways, then they could not do LAHSO because they are not long enough for that.

However if the winds cooperate they could use 19L and 19R assuming the aircraft debris and smoke did not obstruct the runways. Since the wind is out of 260 it would be blowing the smoke away from 19L and 19R. If you look at the video of where the airplane crashed, it never reached the intersection of the runways, so the debris would not be an issue. Operationally there is no reason they could not use 19L and 19R other than wind limitations and heavies that may need more runway for takeoff.

I am sure the runway was shut down more for the rescue/search operation than anything else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top