SFO Navigation Instrument Landing System Runways 28L & R, Glide Path Out of Service Effective 2013-JUN-01 1400Z Until 2013-AUG-22 2359Z
-
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)
- Thread starter carries an axe
- Start date
SFO Navigation Instrument Landing System Runways 28L & R, Glide Path Out of Service Effective 2013-JUN-01 1400Z Until 2013-AUG-22 2359Z
louemc
New member
My vote is for aZn driver!I kid I kid!
Seriously though, I bet it comes down to pilot error. Came in too low and landed short.
I'd be surprised if that isn't the case.
Landed might be a loose term...Tail hitting the edge of the runway, before anything else touched the runway..might be more likely.
And then out of control spinning break-up, ensues.
Last edited:
So what, all that does is increase their minimums from 200' AGL to 447' AGL. They can still land. It has been out of service since June 1st.
It's just a data point.
Yes, they're going to be on a visual approach, but not having any feedback from the glidescope isn't helpful.
wellbredred
Swimming the river Styx
Well back home. I've gotta go sfo-lax-pvg tomorrow. They cancelled all international flights and told us to go home a couple of hours ago.
On another note finally used Bart from the airport $10.70. Normal limo is ~$150.
On another note finally used Bart from the airport $10.70. Normal limo is ~$150.
It's amazing they haven't been chucking jets into the displaced threshold for weeks now.
No, if the glideslope is out they would be on either a localizer alproach which raises their minimums a bit, or they could use an RNAV approach which takes them down to the same minimums as an ILS approach. I am sure they could opt for the visual if they preferred in which case they could use the VGSI for vertical guidance instead of the glideslope.
Nah, pilots are trained to land without a glideslope. ILS is only one option from multiple approaches they could use. They can use an RNAV approach which is not dependent on a glideslope transmitter. Any pilot worth a damn can land without it. These systems go down often for maintenance.
Last edited:
Don't get me wrong, it's still on them (as always) for the safe conduct of the flight, but having it OOS isn't helpful. Additional datapoints are always good.
Localizer has nothing to do with the glide path.
Yes, they should be looking at the PAPI, but hey, who knows what sort of visibility they have out the window during the last part of the approach.
Speaking of the PAPI, they might have actually hit it:
!SFO 07/046 (KSFO A1326/13) SFO RWY 28L PAPI OTS WEF 1307062219
Yes, a localizer approach is an instrument approach that does not have vertical guidance, that's why the minimums are higher. My point was they wouldn't have to be on a visual approach due to a lack of glideslope.
The visibility wouldn't be so bad that they couldn't see the PAPI unless they were in LIFR conditions anyways. It was clear this afternoon. It does look like they hit the PAPI with the start time of that NOTAM.
Last edited:
I friend was inbound from pdx. Flight was diverted to oak.
Just flew to Seattle. Due to heat we took off in a different direction to use the longer runway. Planes are losing lift in the heat. Wonder if the pilot misjudged it coming in?
Probably pilot error, but it's not hot at SFO. I flew in there yesterday around 11am and it was 56 when we landed. Cooler today than yesterday I imagine judging by the weather at my house.
LongGoneJohn
Gone
I heard that, I still have absolutely no fucking clue what he's saying.
LongGoneJohn
Gone
damn I'm helpful
Like I said, my bet is the pilot just dun fucked up and came in too low.
louemc
New member
Oh for Gods sake
International Pilots, Or any commercial pilots...Sweet Baby Jesus...
I am wondering about language though...
Last edited:
Prediction:
NTSB concludes pilot error.
Korea concludes everything else other than pilot error.
Doesn't help them any, they pay either way.
Looks like too steep.
goodness-707
Active member
I LOL'd, but it's probably not a screen cap of Eun's phone, rather a screencap of someone else's iphone twitter app.