Sandeep G

Until printed in black and white on a formal investigative inquiry, such is hearsay. A contributing factor no doubt, but at this point not definitively a probable cause. Hope the report is publicized...

Hahaha jargon is jargon. I apologise, am too comfortable in using jargon to be more concise. That's why I help moderate the tech forum. CPDLC - SMS-like communication between controllers and pilots. ADS-C - Automatic Dependance Surveillance Mode C - Satellite based controller tracking, with intermittent (every 15 mins) automatic position relay. ADS-B - As above, Mode B - continuous satellite-based position information for tracking airplanes. Flightradar24 uses such technology to track airplanes PBN - Performance Based navigation - using satellites and very precise positioning data to maximize use of airspace and to provide alternate non-ground based modes of navigation (e.g. VOR, NDB beacons, ILS systems) Hope this helps. Was actually thinking this convo is more suited to the technical forum.

Thanks, Radzi!

It's technical reasons and not safety or political reasons for the B734 airspace restriction. In a nutshell, (and I'm honestly speculating) the on-board navigation systems in a 734 may not comply with the new standards of navigation under PBN and LORADS III in WSJC FIR. Hence, during testing ofthe system, a tempo restriction of the aircraft may be sourced during certain hours of the day to test system capability and management.

As far as I'm aware, there is no ETOPS Segment over the South China Sea between the Peninsula and Borneo as plenty of airports to be within 60 minutes of.... A B734 driver would have to confirm that though.

WMFC Airspace is GND-FL260 over South China Sea IIRC. WSJC FIR is FL260:UNL. The possible reason why such aircraft may be barred from RVSM airspace (FL290-FL410) over the South China Sea is the implementation of LORANDS III with ADS-B requirement. I'm not sure, but perhaps the 734 fleet are not ADS-B equipped. At the moment, there is no CPDLC (ADS-C) in WSJC FIR during the transition to LORANDS III. It won't just be the 737s, those Transmile 727s and 732s will also face problems. The entire region is moving towards total Performance Based Navigation (PBN) in line with ICAO SARPs. DCA Malaysia has implemented a program that is being trialed with AirAsia I believe.

Malaysia Airlines: B737-200, B737-400, B737-500, B747-200, B747-300, B747-400C, B747-400P, B777-200ER, A330-300, DC-10-30, MD-11 Singapore Airlines: A310-300, A340-300, A330-300, B747-400, B777-200, B777-200ER, B777-300, B777-300ER Pelangi Airways: F50 Berjaya: DHC-7 Skippers: EMB-120 Silkair: A319, A320 Qantas: B737-400, B737-800, B747-300, B767-200, B767-300ER, A330-200, A330-300 Ansett Australia: A320, B767-300 Virgin Blue: B737-800 British Airways: B747-400 AirAsia (system wide): B737-300, A320, A330-300 Tiger Airways: A319, A320 Jetstar Asia (Valuair): A320 Air New Zealand: B737-300 Air Nostalgia: Douglas DC-3 Other types flown: Dornier Seastar, C152, C172, DA-20, DA-40, BE-58, Learjet 45, G IV. Wish list: A380, B787, L-1011, B747SP, G650, GLEX 6000, CR-20, Cessna TTX, Tiger Moth, Boeing Stearman, Any sort of Extra model. Dream list: Concorde (Sat in it in NY USS Intrepid), Lockheed Constellation, Avro Lancaster, Spitfire, P51 Mustang, P38 Lightning, Boeing Sonic Cruiser.

RIP. Very sad event.

This is not the control tower - This is Kuala Lumpur Area Control Centre (ACC) situated behind T3 in Subang. FYI, even Singapore ACC radar controllers are unable to provide weather radar deviation services with the present equipment installed. The use of another aircraft is perfectly fine and has been done on many occasions in the past. The Tower does indeed have access to Meteorological department doppler weather radar which you would see located abeam the ELITE highway atop a hill - looks life a golf-ball on a tee. However, I believe this is for guidance and awareness only and primarily used by the Met officer to issue trend type forecasts associated with half-hourly METARs

Errr... Air Turn-Back (ATB) not Ramp Turn-back (RTB)

What about PBN implementation?

JV dah mati.... http://www.thestar.com.my/Business/Business-News/2013/09/18/MAHB-ends-JV-deal-with-Atoz-Hospitality.aspx So allow me to begin the jokes: "Thanks for screwing us on this joint-venture!! ... SAMA-SAMA!" What in the world... terrible management of resources and probably a quick-buck for some crony. Who does Mr. Hans G Winses proxy for? and what a fantabulous website - http://www.atozhospitality.net/Pages/aboutus.aspx Mr. RR Khoo is certainly a star! Wonder if they'll sell to Tan Sri TF and the Tune Hotels brand

Watched a video replay... still sourcing information on why the gear doors extended after take-off but the landing gear didn't retract...

Nice catches! Delayed delivery? Or has the past few days of heavy rain resulted in an inability to wash the airplane prior to the ferry flight?

Should be brand new... Ordered a few years back.. http://www.iraq-businessnews.com/tag/boeing/

Wasn't a glitch - now MH 3x daily into MEL. http://airlineroute.net/2013/08/19/mh-mel-13update2/ Meanwhile, AirAsiaX upset some local Adelaidians with its advertising, which it has now graciously offered to change http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/national/18564170/airline-ads-changed-after-sa-objects/

I wonder why the Automation vs. Manual flight debate is being raged on over here?

Guys, don't be too fast to conclude error on EVA's part - they may have very well been responding to a TCAS Descent RA, which happens in SFO due to the close simultaneous parallel ops.

I suspect they are going to reroute Jakarta-London via Kuala Namu (Medan). Less operational restrictions.

Requirement is for AFRS to reach the scene of an accident within 3 mins. Can bet your bottom dollar, there will be AFRS Station 3 in the vicinity of Runway 3.

Actually... just got thinking... If they were in FLCH, looking at the graphics from Naim's post above... I wonder what Asiana's policy regarding the speedbrake extension is?? The high on profile situation combined with their desire to get down... could be that the speedbrakes were extended out for additional descent rate... the sudden and quick wash off of speed could be explained by the speedbrakes being extended.. "SPEEDBRAKES EXTENDED" EICAS Caution should have been activated, but the crew may have disregarded this as they had knowingly extended it to recapture profile below 800 ft R.A. and subsequently were then distracted by the lateral deviation of the approach. The quick speed loss and attempt to go-around by pushing the thrust levers full forward where then futile, and it also explains the high pitch of the aircraft. Last minute recognition of the speedbrake extended may have prompted someone to stow it rapidly to down - hence a possible explanation as to why they are not extended post crash - would be interesting to see the position of the speedbrake lever in the cockpit.

In Australia, there are regular Drug Alcohol Tests under an initiative known as DAMP.,Other countries perform random checks on crew credentials (license and medical) and toxicity levels.

Aaron, betul! The speed had washed off to 103KIAS as now mentioned by NTSB... I believe all this must have happened above and in close vicinity to 100ft... He must have been holding back the thrust levers and not allowing them to advance? However, both pilots Instructor and PIC (not sure about PM) have claimed that they advanced thrust levers to full... Too little too late perhaps..

Possibly, an RNAV28L approach was given, or the visual 28L. Because no GP, the RNAV28L would most likely have been keyed into the FMC for vertical profile reference, even for the Visual approach. SFO ops often see a slam dunk approach on 28L, where aircraft are brought in tight at 6000, and on receipt of intercept heading ~310, descended to 3,000 and cleared for the Instrument or visual Approach. for the visual approach, cross the San Mateo bridge at 1,500'. Perhaps in this case, it would be interesting to see if they had maintained 3,000 ft before realizing and therefore losing the profile becoming high, or alternatively, being high all the way. Must configure very quickly and use full speed rake after descent clearance from 6000'. I feel, they were high, and in an effort to dive low, the PIC, whom may have been on conversion from the 744 disconnected the auto throttle. A/T is used for ALL approaches in the 777 as reccomended by Boeing. Aftersinking below the profile, the subsequent pitch-up without the A/T would have washed off the speed - the attempt to regain the profile explains the high nose up pitch and speed decay. With A/T, the speed should have been set at Vref+5, and the thrust would have adjusted to maintain this.. Stick shaker triggered the flight envelope protection feature for adding thrust, and the A/T would have kicked back in albeit too late.. The rest is now history. The A/T state and PIC inputs are key to determining the final cause of the accident. Basic stabilized approach windows were thwarted, and S.A.seems to have been tunnel focused on achieving a landing. I believe from numerous NTSB/FAAsources the PAPI was switched on. Interestingly, some colleagues have mentioned that last week, ops intoSFO were without PAPI orGP on 28L. For anideaofhow the 28Lapproach looks Ike,search it onYouTube.for28R, the best is the PilotEYE LH A380.. SFO is a challenging and hair-raising approach -done right, the sense of accomplishment is remarkable.

Hehe this is the sentiment of all pilots. We wish the same of controllers sometimes in WSJC.