Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Asiana Flight 214
- Thread starter MacNut
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I sleep perfectly well in all classes, but better when not in economy.
The secret is closed headphones (sound isolation) and sleep mask (which you would receive from business class and up).
It's a known issue whether on purpose or by accident. Warnings regularly go out to aviation on areas where laser light shows are taking place. Google it.
Laser light shows do not take place outdoors, in broad daylight, and at the end of commercial airport runways. No need to google it.
Michael
Well this airplane in question wasn't going a few hundred MPH. Even if it was, the laser issue is a problem and gets people in real trouble. Thinking the laser pointing at airplanes isn't a real issue just shows ignorance.
We're not talking about a Las Vegas laser show
We're talking about a single person with a (powerful) laser pointer. If you look at the maps (Google Map it
) there is an area just south of the route planes take where a person could get a possible aiming spot. Difficult yes. But not an impossible thing to do.
Random thought / babble, apologies in advance.
Having driven a manual for so long, on occasion when I'm driving a different car, my foot will accidentally go for the clutch - only to find a double-wide brake pad instead. Resulting in an unexpected / unpleasant action. This happens subconsciously, and it usually happens only once, just lagging muscle memory. When driving a completely different vehicle (truck instead of car), it's far less likely. But when driving a vehicle similar to my primary, I may do it one or two more times. What are the chances something similar happened to the pilot here? Different planes, but an environment close enough, that habit dictated settings / approach from the wrong plane. Is this possible?
Having driven a manual for so long, on occasion when I'm driving a different car, my foot will accidentally go for the clutch - only to find a double-wide brake pad instead. Resulting in an unexpected / unpleasant action. This happens subconsciously, and it usually happens only once, just lagging muscle memory. When driving a completely different vehicle (truck instead of car), it's far less likely. But when driving a vehicle similar to my primary, I may do it one or two more times. What are the chances something similar happened to the pilot here? Different planes, but an environment close enough, that habit dictated settings / approach from the wrong plane. Is this possible?
No-one said that they had to happen at the end of airport runways, whether commercial, GA, or otherwise.
One of the latest NOTAMS broadcast over the ATIS at LAX warned of 'unauthorized laser light activity', and gave bearing and distance from the field to where it was occurring.
Needless to say, it would be hard for this to happen at SFO, as the source in question would have to be on a boat to interfere, if at all. If on land, the closest point would be Coyote point (which would be in put the captain's seat in line of sight) or Oyster Point, which would put both chairs in line of sight. If the latter were the case, BOTH pilots would have said something well beforehand, as the light would have been at least 3nm out on final. More than enough space and time to spool the engines up for a go around.
possible? yes. would it have been done? probably not.
BL.
That was not my point. It was that lasers are a real, known threat in aviation and have been pointed at commercial aircraft whether by accident or on purpose.
New airplane usually means new habit patterns must be developed to deal with different configurations. Most major airlines push standardization of procedures from fleet to fleet so that when jumping from airplane to airplane the changes are minimized, but there are still difference that must be gotten used to.
That said, if anything, these differences might reduce one's vigilance of basic flying maneuvers, but by the time a pilot reaches the OE stage (Operational Experience- supervised checkout on the aircraft), he is expected to have a handle on the flying of that particular airplane. I said previously, the primary purpose of OE is to make sure the pilot has his head on straight and to smooth out any rough spots. The role of the instructor is to ensure the new pilot (to that aircraft) has reached a minimum and satisfactory safety standard in his/her ability to function as a Captain.
To address you specific question, yes sort of, under times of stress, habits or more commonly, inappropriate call out responses to check lists from former aircraft can and do pop up, but in this case they should not normally effect an individuals ability to fly a visual approach path, spotting deviations in a timely fashion, which goes back to very basic skills regardless of the airplane flown. Could be some fatigue involved.
Last edited:
This airplane was going slower than normal for a 777 approaching. No way to know that in advance.
Can you show me a verified case where a jet airliner pilot was "blinded" by a so-called handheld laser. Doctor verified.
Yes, you can find reports of pilots claiming this or that happened. Even visiting a hospital (with no injury). Of course, pilots have claimed alien contact too.
I didn't bring up "laser shows."We're not talking about a Las Vegas laser show
More than just difficult. Not to mention at great distance, a small window on a large moving target, the angle of the plane to even be able to be low enough to hit anything but the ceiling of the cockpit, and to be lucky enough to get it all right and at the exact point in time? Better chance that a meteor hits the plane.We're talking about a single person with a (powerful) laser pointer. If you look at the maps (Google Map it
Meanwhile we have another thing that can dazzle the eyes. It was present the day of the crash: The sun. Still blinding after all these years.
Michael
There was NO laser
"pilot at the controls of Flight 214 told investigators that at about 500 feet before crash landing, he briefly saw a bright light "that could have been a reflection of the sun," but he wasn't sure.
The pilot told investigators he did not believe the light affected his ability to fly the plane, as it didn't affect his vision and he could see inside the cockpit, she said."
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/11/us/asiana-airlines-calls/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
"pilot at the controls of Flight 214 told investigators that at about 500 feet before crash landing, he briefly saw a bright light "that could have been a reflection of the sun," but he wasn't sure.
The pilot told investigators he did not believe the light affected his ability to fly the plane, as it didn't affect his vision and he could see inside the cockpit, she said."
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/11/us/asiana-airlines-calls/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
While I don't believe that a laser was involved in this accident, you seem to think that it is an imaginary issue. The FAA does not agree with you.
FAA Laser Safety Initiative.
LaserPointerSafety.com.
Tinmania - I believe they (FAA) mean "temporarily blinded" and/or "day / night vision degraded" due to the cells in the eye having to regenerate from saturation due to the light.
The other blinding, obviously, is catastrophic laser-induced damage (aka permanent blindness) - I do not believe the FAA cites that as their primary concern. Not saying this is not possible, but the vast majority of pointers, distances involved, and exposure times - make it considerably less likely a pilot would suffer damage to the retina. Especially as during the day - pilots are exposed to a LOT more light than ground-based observers - making their eye less sensitive to a light source for some time.
I think even pilots are not aware of how bright it really gets at just 20k feet above cloud cover - having built heads up displays, when testing in the lab - I was constantly amazed at how much intensity went into making a display - and solar simulation testing. As you gradually transition it's less noticeable, but when seeing it instantly - made laser pointers laughable by contrast. Oddly enough, this display I worked with, used a high power laser as the illumination source.
The other blinding, obviously, is catastrophic laser-induced damage (aka permanent blindness) - I do not believe the FAA cites that as their primary concern. Not saying this is not possible, but the vast majority of pointers, distances involved, and exposure times - make it considerably less likely a pilot would suffer damage to the retina. Especially as during the day - pilots are exposed to a LOT more light than ground-based observers - making their eye less sensitive to a light source for some time.
I think even pilots are not aware of how bright it really gets at just 20k feet above cloud cover - having built heads up displays, when testing in the lab - I was constantly amazed at how much intensity went into making a display - and solar simulation testing. As you gradually transition it's less noticeable, but when seeing it instantly - made laser pointers laughable by contrast. Oddly enough, this display I worked with, used a high power laser as the illumination source.
Key word here is a few hundred MPH/knots. That indicates a plane going 200+ MPH/knots.
A 777 landing at 137 knots does not qualify for the term, " a few hundred knots". It would be better to describe its normal approach speed as above 100 knots....
Those are not my words. I wrote MPH not knots. I calculated 159 MPH landing speed, added a little for approach, and rounded up. I think quibbling over that amount is a bit pedantic. It doesn't get a appreciably easier to accurately point and hold a handheld laser, in broad daylight, at an object going 160MPH vs 200MPH.
Michael
Sorry, as a pilot I use knots when talking about an airplanes speed. Habit.
It was more of explaining why tech4all said the plane wasn't going a few hundred MPH because 157 MPH( 137 knots) is not a few hundred MPH.
Last edited:
That's.... real?
Edit: Just Google'd KTVU - first line on Wikipedia: KTVU - Fox Affiliate.
Ok, I believe it now.
Edit: Just Google'd KTVU - first line on Wikipedia: KTVU - Fox Affiliate.
Ok, I believe it now.
Sorry, as a pilot I use knots when talking about an airplanes speed. Habit.
It was more of explaining why tech4all said the plane wasn't going a few hundred MPH because 157 MPH( 137 knots) is not a few hundred MPH.
I intentionally converted to MPH since figured that would be more common to those reading. Yes I wanted it to be seen as fast, which it is (not cruising speed fast but fast nonetheless). I did consider KPH but that was a bit much....
Michael
That's.... real?
Edit: Just Google'd KTVU - first line on Wikipedia: KTVU - Fox Affiliate.
Ok, I believe it now.
Yes it's real.
http://gawker.com/ktvu-reports-asiana-air-pilots-were-sum-ting-wong-and-759185714