Asiana Airlines Flight 214 was a scheduled transpacific passenger flight originating from Incheon International Airport near Seoul, South Korea. On the morning of July 6, 2013, the Boeing 777-200ER operating the flight crashed on final approach into San Francisco International Airport in the United States. Of the 307 people on board, 3 died; another 187 were injured, 49 of them seriously.[1]:13 Among the seriously injured were four flight attendants who were thrown onto the runway while still strapped in their seats when the tail section broke off after striking the seawall short of the runway. It was the first fatal crash of a Boeing 777 since the aircraft type entered service in 1995.[2]
The investigation by the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) concluded that the accident was caused by the flight crew's mismanagement of the airplane's final approach. Deficiencies in Boeing's documentation of complex flight control systems and in Asiana Airlines' pilot training were also cited as contributory factors.[1]:129
Aircraft
The Boeing 777-28EER,[a]MSN 29171, registered as HL7742,[3] was powered by two Pratt and Whitney PW4090 engines.[4][5] The aircraft was manufactured in 2006 and was delivered to Asiana Airlines on March 7, 2006.[6] At the time of the crash, the plane had accumulated 37,120 flight hours and 5,388 takeoff-and-landing cycles.[1]:37–38
This was the 777's first fatal accident, second crash (after British Airways Flight 38), and third hull loss since it began operating commercially in 1995.[7]
The aircrew consisted of three captains and one first officer. Captain Lee Jeong-min, 49 years old, was in the right seat (first officer position)[8] and filled the dual role of a check/instructor captain and pilot in command, responsible for the safe operation of the flight.[9] He had 12,387 hours of flying experience, of which 3,220 hours were in a 777.[10] This was his first flight as an instructor.[11]
Lee Kang-kook, 45 years old, was in the left seat (captain position) and was the pilot flying. He was receiving his initial operating experience (IOE) training and was halfway through Asiana's IOE requirements. He had 9,793 hours of flying experience, of which 43 were in a 777 over nine flights,[12] and was operating the controls under the supervision of the instructor captain in the right seat.[13]
At the time of the crash, relief first officer Bong Dong-won, 40 years old, was observing from the cockpit jump seat. He had 4,557 hours of flying experience, of which 715 hours were in a 777.[1]:18Relief Captain Lee Jong-joo, 52 years old, occupied a business-class seat in the passenger cabin.[14][15] Bong Dong-won received medical treatment for a cracked rib; none of the other pilots needed hospital care.[16]
Four flight attendants seated at the rear were ejected from the aircraft when the tail section broke off, but they survived.[1]:111[17][18]
Twelve flight attendants were on board, ten South Korean and two Thai. Six flight attendants received physical and emotional treatment. The other six returned to South Korea.[19]
Wang Linjia and Ye Mengyuan, both Chinese, were found dead outside the aircraft soon after the crash after having been thrown out of the plane during the accident.[1]:108–110[22][23][24][25] Neither victim had been wearing their seatbelts.[1]:108–110 It is likely that these passengers would have remained in the cabin and survived had they been wearing their seatbelts.[1]:xii,110 On July 19, 2013, the San Mateo County Coroner's office determined that Mengyuan was still alive before being run over by a rescue vehicle, and was killed by blunt force trauma.[26][27] On January 28, 2014, the San Francisco city attorney's office claimed she was already dead when she was run over.[28][29]
A third passenger, Liu Yipeng, died of her injuries at San Francisco General Hospital six days after the accident.[1]:108–110[30][31][32][33] She had been wearing her seatbelt and was seated in seat 42A, which is in the last row of passenger seats on the left side of the aircraft, immediately forward of door 4L. During the crash, the back of Yipeng's seat rotated back and against the floor, leaving her exposed. Her injuries were likely the result of having been struck by door 4L, which separated during the airplane's final impact.[1]:110
Ten people in critical condition were admitted to San Francisco General Hospital and a few to Stanford Medical Center.[34] Nine hospitals in the area admitted a total of 182 injured people.[35]San Francisco Fire DepartmentChief Joanne Hayes-White, after checking with two intake points at the airport, told reporters that all on board had been accounted for.[36]
Of the passengers, 141 (almost half) were Chinese citizens. More than 90 of them had boarded Asiana Airlines Flight 362 from Shanghai Pudong International Airport, connecting to Flight 214 at Incheon.[37] Incheon serves as a major connecting point between China and North America. In July 2013, Asiana Airlines operated between Incheon (Seoul) and 21 cities in mainland China.[38]
Seventy students and teachers traveling to the United States for summer camp were among the Chinese passengers. Thirty of the students and teachers were from Shanxi, and the others were from Zhejiang.[39] Five of the teachers and 29 of the students were from Jiangshan High School in Zhejiang; they were traveling together.[40] Thirty-five of the students were to attend a West Valley Christian School summer camp. The Shanxi students originated from Taiyuan,[41] with 22 students and teachers from the Taiyuan Number Five Secondary School and 14 students and teachers from the Taiyuan Foreign Language School.[42] The three passengers who died were in the Jiangshan High School group to West Valley camp.[39][41][43][44]
The instrument landing system's (ILS) vertical guidance (glide slope) on Runway 28L was unavailable, as it had been taken out of service on June 1 and a notice to airmen to that effect had been issued.[46] Therefore, a precision ILS approach to the runway was not possible.
The flight was cleared for a visual approach to Runway 28L at 11:21a.m. PDT, and told to maintain a speed of 180 knots (330km/h; 210mph) until the aircraft was 5 nautical miles [nmi] (9.3km; 5.8mi) from the runway. At 11:26a.m., Northern California TRACON ("NorCal Approach") handed the flight off to San Francisco tower. A tower controller acknowledged the second call from the crew at 11:27a.m. when the plane was 1.5 miles (2.4km; 1.3nmi) away, and gave clearance to land.[17]
Four consecutive days of Flight(s) 214 final approach airspeeds and glide paths (July 6 crash flight shown in red).
Preliminary analysis indicated that the plane's approach was too slow and too low. Eighty-two seconds before impact, at an altitude of about 1,600 feet (490m),[2] the autopilot was turned off, the throttles were set to idle, and the plane was operated manually during final descent.[47] NTSB chairman Deborah Hersman stated the pilots did not "set the aircraft for an auto-land situation ... They had been cleared for a visual approach and they were hand-flying the airplane," adding: "During the approach there were statements made in the cockpit first about being above the glide path, then about being on the glide path, then later reporting about being below the glide path. All of these statements were made as they were on the approach to San Francisco..." Based on preliminary data from the flight data recorder (FDR), the NTSB found that the plane's airspeed on final approach had fallen well below its target approach speed. A preliminary review of FAA radar return data did not show an abnormally steep descent curve,[8][48][49] although the crew did recognize that they began high on the final approach.[17]
At a height of 125 feet (38m), eight seconds before impact, the airspeed had dropped to 112 knots (207km/h; 129mph). According to initial reports from the cockpit crew, the plane's autothrottle was set for the correct reference speed, but until the runway's precision approach path indicator (PAPI) showed them significantly below the glide path, the pilots were unaware that the autothrottle was failing to maintain that speed. The instructor pilot stated that the PAPI indicated a deviation below the glide path at approximately 500ft (150m)above ground level, and he attempted to correct it at that time. Between 500 and 200ft (152 and 61m), the instructor pilot also reported a lateral deviation that the crew attempted to correct.[14] Seven seconds before impact, one pilot called for an increase in speed.[4][50] The FDR showed the throttles were advanced from idle at that time.[8] The instructor pilot reported that he had called for an increase in speed, but that the pilot flying had already advanced the throttles by the time that he reached for the throttles.[14] The sound of the stick shaker (warning of imminent stall) could be heard four seconds before impact on the cockpit voice recorder.[4] Airspeed reached a minimum of 103 knots (191km/h; 119mph) (34 knots below the target speed) three seconds before impact, with engines at 50% power and increasing.[8] The co-pilot called for a go-around 1.5 seconds before impact.[4][51][52] At impact, airspeed had increased to 106 knots (196km/h; 122mph).[8][53]
Runway28L
Left engine
Fuselage andright engine
Landinggear
Tail
←
Approximate locations of the wreckage.[54][55] The arrow indicates the flight direction before impact.
At 11:28a.m., the plane crashed short of Runway 28L's threshold. The landing gear and then the tail struck the seawall that projects into San Francisco Bay.[19][56][57][58] The left engine and the tail section separated from the aircraft.[59] The NTSB noted that the main landing gear, the first part of the aircraft to hit the seawall, "separated cleanly from [the] aircraft as designed" to protect the wing fuel tank structure.[60][58][1]:34 The vertical and both horizontal stabilizers fell on the runway before the threshold.[61]
The remainder of the fuselage and wings rotated counter-clockwise approximately 330 degrees as the plane slid westward. Video showed it pivoting about the wing and the nose while sharply inclined to the ground. It came to rest to the left of the runway, 2,400ft (730m) from the initial point of impact at the seawall.[2]
After a minute or so, a dark plume of smoke was observed rising from the wreckage. The fire was traced to a ruptured oil tank above the right engine. The leaking oil fell onto the hot engine and ignited.[14] The fire was not fed by jet fuel.[60][58] All three fire handles were extended; these operate safety equipment intended to extinguish fires on the aircraft (a handle for each engine and the auxiliary power unit). The speedbrake lever was down, showing that it was not being used.[16]
Final position of plane with exit doors marked
Two evacuation slides were deployed on the left side of the airliner and used for evacuation.[59][62] Despite damage to the aircraft, "many ... were able to walk away on their own."[20] The slides for the first and second doors on the right side of the aircraft (doors 1R and 2R) deployed inside the aircraft during the crash, pinning the flight attendants seated nearby.[17][1]:41–42
According to NBC reports in September 2013, the U.S. government had been concerned about the reliability of evacuation slides for decades: "Federal safety reports and government databases reveal that the NTSB has recommended multiple improvements to escape slides and that the Federal Aviation Administration has collected thousands of complaints about them." Two months before the accident at SFO, the FAA issued an airworthiness directive ordering inspection of the slide-release mechanism on certain Boeing 777 aircraft in order to detect and correct corrosion that might interfere with slide deployment.[63][64]
This was the third fatal crash in Asiana's 25-year history.[65]
Survivor and eyewitness accounts
The rear cabin after the crashThe charred middle cabin after the crash and fire
Several passengers recalled noticing the plane's unusual proximity to the water on final approach, which caused water to thrust upward as the engines were spooling up in the final seconds before impact.[20][39][66]
In the initial moments after the crash, the cockpit crew told flight attendants to delay evacuating the aircraft as they were communicating with the tower. A flight attendant seated at the second door on the left side (door 2L) observed fire outside the aircraft near row 10 and informed the cockpit crew, and the evacuation order was then given, approximately 90 seconds after the aircraft had come to rest. Flight attendants told NTSB investigators that there was no fire inside the cabin when the evacuation began.[17]
The crew also helped several passengers who were unable to escape on their own, and a pilot carried out one passenger with an injured leg. One flight attendant said that many Chinese passengers who sat at the back of the plane near the third exit were not aware of the evacuation.[67]
Smoke rising from the crash site as seen from Terminal 1
During the evacuation, a pilot used an extinguisher on a fire that had penetrated from the exterior to the inside of the cabin.[17][67]
During the crash, two of the evacuation slides inflated into the cabin.[1]:41–42 One slide blocked the forward right exit and nearly suffocated a flight attendant before being deflated by a pilot with an axe from the cockpit.[68] The second chute expanded toward the center of the aircraft near the fire. It trapped a second flight attendant until a pilot deflated it with a table knife.[67]
Some passengers sitting at the rear of the aircraft escaped through the hole left by the missing tail section.[69]
I then noticed at the apparent descent rate and closure to the runway environment the aircraft looked as though it was going to impact the approach lights mounted on piers in the SF Bay. The aircraft made a fairly drastic-looking pull up in the last few feet and it appeared and sounded as if they had applied maximum thrust. However the descent path they were on continued and the thrust applied didn't appear to come soon enough to prevent impact. The tail cone and empennage of the 777 impacted the bulkhead seawall and departed the airplane and the main landing gear sheared off instantly.
—United Flight 885 first officer, "Inside United Flight 885: A Pilot's Gripping Account", Chicago Business Journal[76]
Passengers and others praised the flight attendants' conduct after the crash. Lee Yoon-hye, the aircraft's cabin manager (the chief flight attendant) was the last to leave the burning plane. San Francisco fire chief Hayes-White praised Lee's courage, saying, "She wanted to make sure that everyone was off. ... She was a hero."[78]
A firefighter who entered the cabin said that the back of the plane had suffered structural damage, but that the seats near the front "were almost pristine" before the cabin fire.[60][51]
Hersman said that the NTSB conducted a four-hour interview with each pilot, adding that the pilots were open and cooperative. She said both pilots at the controls had ample rest before they left South Korea and during the flight when they were relieved by the backup crew.[9] All three pilots told NTSB investigators that they were relying on the 777's automated devices for speed control during final descent.[80] The relief first officer also stated to NTSB investigators that he had called out "sink rate" to call attention to the rate at which the plane was descending during the final approach.[17][81] This "sink rate" warning was repeated several times during the last minute of the descent.[82] ARAIB tested the pilots for drug use four weeks after the accident; the tests proved negative.[1]:36
The flight data recorder (left) and cockpit voice recorder were recovered from the aircraft undamaged.
The NTSB's investigative team completed the examination of the airplane wreckage and runway. The wreckage was removed to a secure storage location at San Francisco International Airport. The Airplane Systems, Structures, Powerplants, Airplane Performance, and Air Traffic Control investigative groups completed their on-scene work. The Flight Data Recorder and Cockpit Voice Recorder groups completed their work in Washington. The Survival Factors/Airport group completed their interviews of the first responders.[83] The next phase of the investigation included additional interviews, examination of the evacuation slides and other airplane components, and a more detailed analysis of the airplane's performance.[60] Based on a preliminary review of FDR data, the NTSB stated there was no anomalous behavior of the engines, the autopilot, the flight director, or the autothrottle.[60][51] The autothrottle control was found to be in the "armed" position during documentation of cockpit levers and switches,[17][14][84] differing from both the "on" and "off" positions.[citation needed] Furthermore, the pilot flying's flight director (Primary Flight Display) was deactivated whereas the instructor pilot's was activated.[14] (This may prove to be significant, as deactivating neither or both Flight Directors enables and forces an autothrottle "wake-up" whereas deactivating only one Flight Director inhibits an autothrottle "wake-up".)[85][86]
Hersman said: "In this flight, in the last 2.5 minutes of the flight, from data on the flight data recorder we see multiple autopilot modes and multiple autothrottle modes ... We need to understand what those modes were, if they were commanded by pilots, if they were activated inadvertently, if the pilots understood what the mode was doing."[9][87] Hersman has repeatedly emphasized it is the pilot's responsibility to monitor and maintain correct approach speed[88] and that the crew's actions in the cockpit are the primary focus of the investigation.[89][failed verification][90]
NTSB animation reconstructing the failed descentDescent flight path
The final report into the crash was released on June 24, 2014.[91] The NTSB found that the "Mismanagement of Approach and Inadequate Monitoring of Airspeed led to the Crash of Asiana flight 214". The NTSB determined that the flight crew mismanaged the initial approach and that the airplane was well above the desired glidepath. In response, the captain selected an inappropriate autopilot mode (FLCH, or Flight Level Change) which resulted in the autothrottle no longer controlling airspeed. The aircraft then descended below the desired glidepath with the crew unaware of the decreasing airspeed. The attempted go-around was conducted below 100feet, by which time it was too late. Over-reliance on automation and lack of systems understanding by the pilots were cited as major factors contributing to the accident.[92]
The NTSB further determined that the pilot's faulty mental model of the airplane's automation logic led to his inadvertent deactivation of automatic airspeed control. In addition, Asiana's automation policy emphasized the full use of all automation and did not encourage manual flight during line operations. The flight crew's mismanagement of the airplane's vertical profile during the initial approach led to a period of increased workload that reduced the monitoring pilot's awareness of the flying pilot's actions around the time of the unintended deactivation of automatic airspeed control. Insufficient flight crew monitoring of airspeed indications during the approach likely resulted from expectancy, increased workload, fatigue, and automation reliance. Lack of compliance with standard operating procedures and crew resource management were cited as additional factors.[93]
The NTSB reached the following final conclusion:
The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the flight crew's mismanagement of the airplane's descent during the visual approach, the pilot flying's unintended deactivation of automatic airspeed control, the flight crew's inadequate monitoring of airspeed, and the flight crew's delayed execution of a go-around after they became aware that the airplane was below acceptable glidepath and airspeed tolerances. Contributing to the accident were (1) the complexities of the autothrottle and autopilot flight director systems that were inadequately described in Boeing's documentation and Asiana's pilot training, which increased the likelihood of mode error; (2) the flight crew's nonstandard communication and coordination regarding the use of the autothrottle and autopilot flight director systems; (3) the pilot flying's inadequate training on the planning and executing of visual approaches; (4) the pilot monitoring/instructor pilot's inadequate supervision of the pilot flying; and (5) flight crew fatigue, which likely degraded their performance.[1]:129
Shortly after the accident, the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) used Twitter and YouTube to inform the public about the investigation and quickly publish quotes from press conferences. NTSB first tweeted about Asiana 214 less than one hour after the crash. One hour after that, the NTSB announced via Twitter that officials would hold a press conference at Reagan Airport Hangar 6 before departing for San Francisco. Less than 12 hours after the crash, the NTSB released a photo showing investigators conducting their first site assessment.[94] On June 24, 2014, the NTSB published to YouTube a narrated accident sequence animation.[95]
Air Line Pilots Association
On 9 July 2013, the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) criticized the NTSB for releasing "incomplete, out-of-context information" that gave the impression that pilot error was entirely to blame.[96][97]
NTSB Chairman Hersman responded: "The information we're providing is consistent with our procedures and processes ... One of the hallmarks of the NTSB is our transparency.[98] We work for the traveling public. There are a lot of organizations and groups that have advocates. We are the advocate for the traveling public. We believe it's important to show our work and tell people what we are doing."[99] Answering ALPA's criticism, NTSB spokeswoman Kelly Nantel also said the agency routinely provided factual updates during investigations. "For the public to have confidence in the investigative process, transparency and accuracy are critical," Nantel said.[100]
On 11 July 2013, in a follow-up press release without criticizing the NTSB, ALPA gave a general warning against speculation.[101]
The airport was closed for five hours after the crash.[19][59][22] Flights destined for San Francisco were diverted to Oakland, San Jose, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Portland (OR), and Seattle–Tacoma.[103] By 3:30p.m. PDT, runway 1L/19R and runway 1R/19L (both of which run perpendicular across the runway of the accident) were reopened; runway 10L/28R (parallel to the runway of the accident) remained closed[19][22] for more than 24 hours.[104] The accident runway, 10R/28L, reopened on July 12 after being repaired. In August 2013, Asiana renumbered its Seoul-San Francisco route with the flight OZ212, on a retimed scheduled departure of 8:40pm, using an Airbus A350-900 aircraft; the July 6 accident OZ214 had a scheduled 4:40pm departure using a Boeing 777-200ER.[105]
In the U.S., drug and alcohol tests are standard after air accidents, but this is not a requirement for pilots of foreign-registered aircraft, and the pilots were not tested immediately after the accident.[106] The lack of alcohol testing received much public attention and was critically discussed by various media and politicians after the accident.[107][108][109] Shortly after the accident, Congresswoman Jackie Speier stated that she would consider legislation to improve airline safety by requiring increased pilot training and mandatory drug and alcohol testing for international crews.[110]
The crash damaged Asiana's reputation[65][111][112][113] and that of South Korea's aviation industry following years of apparent improvements after a series of aircraft disasters in the 1980s and early 1990s.[114] Asiana shares fell by 5.8% on the first day of trading after the crash.[115]
Response from Asiana Airlines
In the hours after the accident, Asiana Airlines CEO Yoon Young-doo said his airline had ruled out mechanical failure as the cause of the crash.[116] Later, he defended the flight crew, calling them "very experienced and competent pilots".[117][118] On July 9, Yoon apologized directly to the parents of the two victims,[119] then flew aboard Flight 214 to San Francisco, the same route as the crashed aircraft, to meet with NTSB officials.[120] Asiana gave flights to San Francisco to the families of the victims.[121]
Asiana Airlines announced on July 29, 2013, that it would retire flight numbers 214 and 213 on August 12, 2013. Flights from Incheon to San Francisco and the return leg would thenceforth operate as OZ212 and OZ211, respectively.[122]
Asiana Airlines officials said the airline would improve training for its pilots: in particular, for pilots learning to fly different types of aircraft, and in various skills such as making visual approaches and flying on autopilot.[123][124][125] Asiana officials also said they would seek to improve communications skills among crew members, introduce a system to manage "fatigue risk", set up separate maintenance teams for Boeing and Airbus planes, and improve safety management systems.[126]
On August 12, 2013, Asiana Airlines announced initial payouts to crash survivors of US$10,000, ($13,000 in 2023) stating the survivors "need money to go to hospital or for transportation so we are giving them the $10,000 first," Asiana spokeswoman Lee Hyo Min said in a telephone interview. "Even if they are not hurt or they don't go to hospital, we will still give them this money." "The carrier may pay more after the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board completes its investigation into the accident. The families of those who died were paid more than $10,000 as an initial compensation," Lee said, without providing a specific figure.[113][127]
Response from the South Korean government
South Korean transport ministry officials ordered Korean Air and Asiana to check engines and landing equipment on all 48 of their model 777 aircraft and announced that the government would conduct special inspections on the nation's eight carriers through August 25, 2013.[128] "The measures could include [changing] rules on training flights if needed," Deputy Minister for Civil Aviation Choi Jeong-ho told reporters.[129] The officials also said South Korea had no fatal air crashes between December 1999 and the July 2011 crash of an Asiana freighter.
Response from the San Francisco Fire Department
Helmet-recorded images showed that firefighters on scene saw some victims alive outside of the aircraft after being thrown from the plane. During their response, one firefighting vehicle ran over a woman who "was alive and lying outside the plane near one of its wings when the trucks ran over her." The firefighter driving the vehicle was reported to have said "She got run over... I mean, shit happens, you know?" Afterward the incident was reported by the firefighter to San Francisco Fire Department Chief Joanne M. Hayes-White stating "Chief, there's a woman there who's been run over by one of our rigs." The chief asked if the victim had been crushed, to which the firefighter replied "like someone dropped a pumpkin."[130]
Chief Hayes-White initially made a public statement lauding her firefighters for having "worked as best as it possibly could have". After two days, Hayes-White addressed the incident and said that "public officials most certainly have a duty to tell the truth," and that "it would have been speculative and irresponsible to report something without having confirmation" during the first two days while the San Francisco police and National Transportation Safety Board conducted their investigation. The San Mateo County prosecutors did not file criminal charges against San Francisco firefighters for what they described as a "tragic accident".[130]
Hayes-White stated that the department's 2009 ban on video recording devices would be extended to include any devices mounted on helmets that record emergencies citing privacy concerns.[131]
Lawsuits Involving Fire Department Response
On December 30, 2013, the "parents and successors" of the woman killed after being run over by a responding fire department vehicle filed a lawsuit against the San Francisco Fire Department, its chief at the time, the San Francisco Police Department, and its chief at the time.[132] The lawsuit was later dropped as part of a "confidential settlement" however "the city attorney's office said no money was paid to the family to dismiss their lawsuit."[133]
On May 9, 2014, the San Francisco Fire Department firefighter who drove the vehicle that ran over the woman in the above incident filed a lawsuit against the City and County of San Francisco alleging they were treated as a scapegoat by fire department command staff "to minimize and downplay broader failures within the SFFD [response]" by pushing responsibility for the incident onto the individual.[134][135][136] The lawsuit was later settled for $250,000.[137] The firefighter was never criminally charged.[130]
Lawsuits
On July 15, 2013, two Korean passengers filed a lawsuit against Asiana Airlines in a California federal court for "an extensive litany of errors and omissions" and improper crew training and supervision.[138] On the same day, 83 passengers filed a petition for discovery in Chicago, alleging a possible failure of the autothrottle system and malfunctioning evacuation slides and seat belts.[138][139][140] An additional lawsuit against Asiana Airlines and Boeing Aircraft Company was filed on August 9, 2013. In addition to alleging product defects, the suits focus on the training provided to the Asiana crew.[138][139][141]
Seventy-two passengers reached an undisclosed settlement that was filed in United States Federal court on March 3, 2015.[142] On the same day the Los Angeles Times reported that, "At least 60 lawsuits against the airline filed in the Northern District of California ... have not reached settlements," and "dozens of claims have been filed against the airline in China and South Korea and against Boeing in an Illinois state court."[142]
Asiana also initially announced it would file a defamation lawsuit against KTVU for having aired the Asiana Airlines KTVU prank(see below), but withdrew from that course of action two days later.[143][144]
Legislative action
On July 30, 2013, an amendment to Transportation bill H.R. 2610 was adopted by voice vote for the transfer of $500,000 from the Next Generation Air Transportation System account to the air safety account to study implementing a verbal warning system for low air speed.[145]
Fines
On February 25, 2014, the U.S. Department of Transportation fined Asiana Airlines US$500,000 for failing to keep victims and family of victims updated on the crash.[146]
In popular culture
Mayday TV series
Mayday: Air Crash Investigation mentioned Asiana Airlines Flight 214 in its Season 13 episode, "Getting Out Alive," as part of a series of accidents and discussion of how passengers were able to escape.[147] A season 15 episode focused solely on the Flight 214 accident, titled "Terror in San Francisco," aired on January 13, 2016.[148]
San Francisco television station KTVU fell victim to a prank[149][150][151] which led news anchor Tori Campbell to report the names of the pilots as "Captain Sum Ting Wong," "Wi Tu Lo," "Ho Lee Fuk," and "Bang Ding Ow," in the immediate aftermath of the crash. Viewers quickly realized that these "names" were phonetic double entendres. The prank was described as racist and offensive, and led to the firing of three veteran KTVU producers.[152][153][154] The names do not resemble Korean names, and it has been suggested that they sound Chinese.[155][156][157] The names have also been described as evoking the racist term "ching chong". That term, which is supposed to mock Chinese people, has sometimes been directed to East Asian people in general, which in effect falsely portrays East Asians as culturally and linguistically uniform.[156] While the source of these joke names remains unclear, the NTSB admitted in a statement that one of its summer interns had confirmed the erroneous names when they were stated by the news station.[158]
1 2 The airliner was a Boeing 777-200ER model; Boeing assigns a unique code for each company that buys one of its airliners, which is applied as a suffix to the model number at the time the aircraft is built, hence "777-28EER" designates a 777-200ER built for Asiana Airlines (customer code 8E).
Related Research Articles
San Francisco International Airport is the primary international airport serving the San Francisco Bay Area in the U.S. state of California. It is located in an unincorporated area of San Mateo County, and is about 12 miles southeast of San Francisco.
Asiana Airlines Inc. is a South Korean airline headquartered in Seoul. The airline operates 90 international passenger routes, 14 domestic passenger routes and 27 cargo routes throughout Asia, Europe, and North America. In 2019, it accounted for 25% of South Korea's international aviation market and 20% of its domestic market. It maintains its international hub at Incheon International Airport and its domestic hub at Gimpo International Airport, both in Seoul.
Pacific Southwest Airlines Flight 182 was a scheduled flight on September 25, 1978, by Pacific Southwest Airlines (PSA), from Sacramento to San Diego (SAN), with a stopover at Los Angeles (LAX). The aircraft serving the flight, a Boeing 727-214, collided mid-air with a private Cessna 172 over San Diego, California. It was Pacific Southwest Airlines' first fatal accident, and it remains the deadliest air disaster in California history. At the time, it was the deadliest air crash to occur in the United States, and remained so until the crash of American Airlines Flight 191 in May 1979.
On August 16, 1987, a McDonnell Douglas MD-82, operating as Northwest Airlines Flight 255, crashed shortly after takeoff from Detroit Metropolitan Airport, about 8:46 pm EDT, resulting in the deaths of all six crew members and 148 of the 149 passengers, along with two people on the ground. The sole survivor was a 4-year-old girl who sustained serious injuries. It was the second-deadliest aviation accident at the time in the United States. It is also the deadliest aviation accident to have a sole survivor, the deadliest aircraft accident in the history of the state of Michigan, and the worst crash in the history of Northwest Airlines.
United Airlines Flight 585 was a scheduled passenger flight on March 3, 1991, from Denver to Colorado Springs, Colorado, carrying 20 passengers and 5 crew members on board. The plane experienced a rudder hardover while on final approach to runway 35 at Colorado Springs Municipal Airport, causing the plane to roll over and enter an uncontrolled dive. All 25 people on board the Boeing 737 were killed on impact.
Pan Am Flight 845 was a scheduled international passenger flight between Los Angeles and Tokyo, with an intermediate stop at San Francisco. The flight was operated by a Boeing 747 registered N747PA and named Clipper America.
Asiana Airlines Flight 733 was a domestic Asiana Airlines passenger flight from Seoul-Gimpo International Airport to Mokpo Airport, South Korea. The Boeing 737 crashed on 26 July 1993, in the Hwawon area of Haenam County, South Jeolla Province. The cause of the accident was determined to be pilot error leading to controlled flight into terrain. 68 of the 116 passengers and crew on board were killed. The crash resulted in the first hull loss of a 737-500.
Japan Air Lines Flight 2 was a scheduled passenger flight on November 22, 1968. The plane was a new Douglas DC-8-62 named Shiga (志賀), flying from Tokyo International Airport (Haneda) to San Francisco International Airport (SFO). Due to heavy fog and other factors, captain Kohei Asoh mistakenly ditched the plane near Coyote Point in the shallow waters of San Francisco Bay, two and a half miles short of the runway. All 107 people on board survived the accident without any injuries.
British Airways Flight 38 was a scheduled international passenger flight from Beijing Capital International Airport in Beijing, China, to London Heathrow Airport in London, United Kingdom, an 8,100-kilometre trip. On 17 January 2008, the Boeing 777-200ER aircraft operating the flight crashed just short of the runway while landing at Heathrow. No fatalities occurred; of the 152 people on board, 47 sustained injuries, one serious. It was the first time in the aircraft type's history that a Boeing 777 was declared a hull loss, and subsequently written off.
Turkish Airlines Flight 1951 was a passenger flight that crashed during landing at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport, the Netherlands, on 25 February 2009, resulting in the deaths of nine passengers and crew, including all three pilots.
On 22 December 2009, an American Airlines Boeing 737-800, operating American Airlines Flight 331 and carrying 148 passengers and 6 crew, overran runway 12 on landing at Kingston in poor weather. The plane continued on the ground outside the airport perimeter and broke apart on the beach, causing injuries.
In aeronautics, loss of control (LOC) is the unintended departure of an aircraft from controlled flight and is a significant factor in several aviation accidents worldwide. In 2015 it was the leading cause of general aviation accidents. Loss of control may be the result of mechanical failure, external disturbances, aircraft upset conditions, or inappropriate crew actions or responses.
Delta Air Lines Flight 723 was a flight operated by a McDonnell Douglas DC-9 twin-engine jetliner, operating as a scheduled domestic passenger flight from Burlington, Vermont, to Logan International Airport in Boston, Massachusetts, with an intermediate stop in Manchester, New Hampshire. On July 31, 1973, at 11:08a.m., while on an instrument landing system (ILS) instrument approach into Logan in low clouds and fog, the aircraft descended below the glidepath, struck a seawall, and crashed. All 89 of the occupants aboard were killed, including an initial survivor who died more than 4 months after the crash.
Emirates Flight 521 was a scheduled international passenger flight from Thiruvananthapuram, India, to Dubai, United Arab Emirates, operated by Emirates using a Boeing 777-300. On 3 August 2016 the aircraft, carrying 282 passengers and 18 crew, crashed while landing at Dubai International Airport.
On July 7, 2017, an Airbus A320-211 operating as Air Canada Flight 759 was nearly involved in an accident at San Francisco International Airport in San Mateo County, California, United States. The flight, which originated at Toronto Pearson International Airport, had been cleared by air traffic control to land on runway 28R and was on final approach to land on that runway; however, instead of lining up with the runway, the aircraft had lined up with the parallel taxiway, on which four fully loaded and fueled passenger airplanes were stopped awaiting takeoff clearance. The flight crew initiated a go-around prior to landing, after which it landed on 28R without further incident. The aircraft on the taxiway departed for their intended destinations without further incident. The subsequent investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) determined that the Air Canada airplane descended to 59 feet (18 m) above the ground before it began its climb, and that it missed colliding with one of the aircraft on the taxiway by 14 feet (4.3 m).
Scandinavian Airlines System Flight 901, was a scheduled international flight operated by the Scandinavian Airlines System, that overran the runway at its destination at John F. Kennedy International Airport on February 28, 1984. The flight, using a McDonnell Douglas DC-10, originated at Stockholm Arlanda Airport, Sweden, before a stopover at Oslo Airport, Gardermoen, Norway. All 177 passengers and crew members on board survived, although 12 were injured. The runway overshoot was due to the crew's failure to monitor their airspeed and overreliance on the aircraft's autothrottle.
On February 13, 2018, around noon local time, a Boeing 777-222 airplane, operating as United Airlines Flight 1175 (UA1175), experienced an in-flight separation of a fan blade in the No. 2 (right) engine while over the Pacific Ocean en route from San Francisco International Airport to the Daniel K. Inouye International Airport, Honolulu, Hawaii. During level cruise flight shortly before beginning a descent from flight level 360, and about 120 miles from HNL, the flight crew heard a loud bang, followed by a violent shaking of the airplane, followed by warnings of a compressor stall. The flight crew shut down the failed engine, declared an emergency, and began a drift-down descent, proceeding direct to HNL where they made a single-engine landing without further incident at 12:37 local time. There were no reported injuries to the 378 passengers and crew on board and the airplane damage was classified as minor under National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) criteria.
On February 20, 2021, United Airlines Flight 328 (UA328/UAL328), a scheduled U.S. domestic passenger flight from Denver to Honolulu, suffered what was technically ruled a contained engine failure despite shedding large pieces of debris, approximately four minutes after takeoff from Denver International Airport (DEN). Parts departing from the engine cowling of the Boeing 777-222 aircraft resulted in a debris field at least 1 mile (1.6 km) long over suburban residential areas of Broomfield, Colorado. Falling debris was recorded by eyewitnesses using smartphone cameras and a dash cam. Debris fell through the roof of a private home and significantly damaged a parked vehicle.
↑ Norris, Guy (July 6, 2013). "NTSB Investigates Asiana 777 Accident In San Francisco". Aviation Week. McGraw Hill Financial. Archived from the original on March 8, 2014. Retrieved July 30, 2013. The Asiana accident represents only the third hull loss for the 777 since the aircraft entered service in 1995. The Asiana accident is also the first involving a 777 which has resulted in a passenger fatality.
↑ 韩亚失事航班90余名乘客由上海出发[More than 90 passengers on the Asiana crash flight departed from Shanghai]. Xinhua News Agency (in Chinese (China)). July 7, 2013. Archived from the original on January 25, 2014.
↑ Yang, Sunny (July 7, 2013). "Asiana crash deaths ID'd as 2 Chinese teens". USA Today. Associated Press. Retrieved July 7, 2013. A teacher told Chinese television that there were 34 people traveling in the Jiangshan Middle School group — five teachers and 29 students.
↑ "KSFO San Francisco Intl". PilotWeb. Federal Aviation Administration. Archived from the original on September 29, 2013. Retrieved July 7, 2013. 06/005 SFO navigation instrument landing system Runway 28L glide path out of service with effect from or effective from 1306011400-1308222359
↑ This was in response to a chart showing an abnormal descent rate, that was later corrected. "An Uneven Descent". The New York Times. July 7, 2013. Retrieved October 27, 2013. The corrected data show that the plane descended 200 feet in eight seconds, not 600 feet in nine seconds.
... the captain flying the plane, Lee Kang Kuk, 45, who was new to the 777, inadvertently deactivated the autothrottle, putting it into a hold mode. A training captain who was sitting next to Kuk in the right seat didn't notice the error, and then compounded it by turning off only one of two other key systems for managing the flight [by turning-off the pilot flying's Primary Flight Display, while maintaining his own, thereby requiring the pilot flying to continuously scan his "six-pack" backup flight instruments to know how his airplane was performing, rather than by concentrating on his single Primary Flight Display]. Both [Primary Flight Display] systems are supposed to be on or off, but not one on and one off [and should one be on and the other off, then the autothrottle "wake-up" function is disabled].
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
