How One Misheard Word Almost Killed 271 People | United Airlines 1722
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 авг 2023
- Help Support The Channel!: / miniaci
Join My Discord: / discord
This is the story of United Airlines flight 1722. Hawaii is a US state like no other, its the only state that is made up of islands. This means that getting the to the state requires you to either get on a boat or on a plane and lets be honest most people are gonna be flying. This means that the tiny airport of Kahului and honolulu handles a ton of traffic. On the 18th of december one of those planes was a united airlines boeing 777 with 271 people on board. The jet was to make the trip from kahuli airport to sanfranciso airport. This was one of the many flights that connected the islands back to the mainland. The pilots of flight 1722 were on the ground at Kahului and they punched in the data into their flight computers. This computer would then spit out how to fly the takeoff. It would tell them how much power to use, how long the takeoff run will be all that sort of stuff. Contrary to popular belief you dont go full power for all takeoffs, that would tax the engines too much reducing their lifespan by a lot. So instead youd give the computer the conditions that were expected at the time and youd get an optimized departure profile. ON the 18th their calculations showed that they could get away with a reduced thrust takeoff with flaps at 20. But as the plane started to taxi the controller threw a wrench into that idea. You see the sensors around the airport had picked up wind shear around the airport. Wind shear is a weather phenomenon when the direction of the wind quickly changes for a short period of time. Think of it like a current of air that can push planes off course or worse if it is strong enough. This is why modern jets are equipped with wind shear detectors. This information changed their plans the captain now decided to go for a maximum thrust takeoff with the flaps at 20. This would allow them to punch through the windshear with no problem at all, as jeremy clarkson says “power and speed solved many things” and indeed this was one of those cases. So with their new plan the pilots taxied the 777 all the way to the threshold of runway 02 at the airport. The nigh was rainy and dark and the pilots couldn't see very far out into the night. The departure would take them out over the dark pacific ocean and so they would have to keep an eye on their instruments as they flew out to figure out what their plane was doing. With that the pilots lined the jet up with the runway the lights of the runway shone through the rainy dark night leading them into the dark pacific. The the captain pushed the engines to max power and then engaged the autothrottle. The computer would now take care of the power setting while the captain hand flew the plane on departure. The 777 went though 80 knots and everything was fine and then came the V1 speed. At this point they were committed to this takeoff. With that flight 1722 lifted off into the dark sky. The jet gained altitude as it left hawaii behind. Then right on cue the planes airspeed indicators began to fluctuate as the jet punched through some turbulence. This is what the controller had warned the pilots about when they were on the ground. As the plane picked up speed the the captain called for flaps 5, they were flying fast enough that the plane could have enough lift on its own without the flaps being at 20. The first officer carried out what the captain had asked of him and then he contacted departure to discuss the weather. But the captain noticed something strange. The max speed on the primary flight display was lower than expected. On the primary flight display you have this speed ribbon and on the ribbon you have this red overlay that shows you the maximum speed that your plane is capable of in the current configuration that it is in. its a very simple idea, stay out of the red and you'll be fine. For what ever reason that red bar was lower than expected. He expected to be able to fly a lot faster with the flaps at 5. Then, the plane started to pick up speed. The captain grabbed the throttles and pulled them back to avoid overspeeding thus overriding the autothrottle. He quickly scanned the instruments to see what was wrong with this jet, he saw that the flaps were at 15 and not 5 like he had asked. So he asked for flaps 5 again and this time he made sure that the flaps were now in the 5 degree detent. The first officer was also now trying to troubleshoot the issue. He knew that the captain had some issues with airspeed control and so he asked the captain if his instruments, the one on th 
Наука
that is why repeating the given command is very important so that it can be acknowledged that you have correctly heard what was given.
Really good thing that pilots actually reported this accident. That's what I love about the aviation safety culture
incident
Thankfully 😁@@pilotactor777
Yeah. Two months after it happened. By that time the aircraft recorded data was recorded over and unavailable to investigators.
Most airlines have a FOQA program that will flag unusual situations. Probably caught this event. The ASAP program may have also been utilized by the pilots as well.
@@mickeydoolittle2057 From the story I read, this incident wasn't caught by the FOQA folks. The crew reported it two months after the incident.
I’m sorry folks.
I am a B777 Captain, and this crew was very unprofessional and the captain apparently does not know the systems of the airplane he flies. The First Officer set flap 15 instead of 5, but that is not the major factor here at all.
The captain was hand flying the airplane, but the Auto throttle was engaged. All the Captain had to do was fly the FD (Flight director) and the auto throttle would automatically reduce thrust to maintain a speed that is 5 KTS below the Flap placard speed, or as a secondary choice he could engage the Autopilot and let the auto throttle do what it intended to do…..then select flaps 5 to continue the acceleration. The B777 would not overspeed as mentioned in this video. The captain could easily see all this information on his PFD (Primary Flight Instrument) but he failed to do so.
To override the auto throttles the way he did, was extremely reckless, and that caused the airplane to nose dive.
They almost killed a lot of innocent people over nothing, and this crew is by no means heroes.
If I was the B777 Fleet manager at UAL, I would never let this crew fly again.
United airlines care more about diversity these days, instead of hiring pilots based on experience
Good luck….I never fly United Airlines and would never let my family on one of their aircrafts.
Certainly a shocking level of incompetence on display from the Captain.
In the past two years, both Delta and UAL have had inexperience and incompetence nearly lose five aircraft. The FAA has already stepped into UAL’s Training Department, removed their APD’s and ASI’s now monitor their AQP rides. Delta has been warned.
If the guy from Ohio was flying for the first time, did he take a boat to Hawaii?
my thought exactly lol
Hahahaha
Same thought
Yep, I switched the video off after that and went to a more reliable source. No way Ohio Kid took a boat either because cruises to Hawaii require the passengers to re-board the cruise. Maybe he the Ohio family stowed away inside an 2014 Prius that was loaded onto the boat. Not to mention, did he drive from Ohio to the west coast then get on a boat? Good call out!
I'm assuming he meant first ever trip and this was the return flight.
I thought it was practice in aviation for the recipient of a a command or information to repeat the words back to the one who issued the command, this is to avoid situations like this where something is misheard...
Boeing can now sigh in relief that this incident turns out to not be their fault
For once.
@@curbyourshi1056 luckily nobody pre-emptively blaned Boeing here. Sadly there are other incidents where Boeing got pre-emptjve blame for something that turned out to not be their fault, like AF11, UIA752, UA328, Miami Air 293, etc.
You're awfully mistaken. The bad press is only for the 739 and occasionally the 78x. The 777, OTOH, has been known to be rock solid for yonks now
@@phugoidYou mean 737
@@Blank00or they didn't get the blame when should have.. with all max fiasco..
Dude you have been fighting it for a couple of weeks. Don’t die. You are doing a great job. They were lucky they were over the ocean and not Hawaiian terrain.
Measuring altitude in length of CVS receipts was brilliant. They are about two feet long on average or more. Take care of yourself first. The videos can take a back seat for a while.
It's weird that they set takeoff thrust manually. Usually they would use autothrottle, which would prevent an overspeed.
CVS receipts are totally a normal measure of length/distance!
I thought everything was free at CVS.
I hear there's a standard reference receipt in a vault in Woonsocket, made of a platinum-iridium alloy.
Can you convert that into bananas for me please?
Americans will use anything but the metric system.
I loved the Jeremy Clarkson reference. He's one of my favourite presenters.
You never want to be less than 154 CVS receipts from the ground while too low on speed.
Oh you are the best when showing how to get the information. Thank you!
Nonstop Dan, I love your analysis!
Is it really him? It sounds like him!
Great video, thanks!
How do you mistake "five" for "fifteen"? These words sound nothing alike, unlike "fifteen" and "fifty", for example.
Isn't the scenario that's much more likely that the copilot just selected the wrong setting by accident and didn't doublecheck?
In the cockpit, numbers are mostly read by the individual digit. For example, 15 is spoken as "one five"
@@Blank00 This makes more sense.
It seems much more likely that the captain called out something like "flaps uhh... five" with the first officer mishearing it for "flaps one five".
@@dh510 they actually say fifteen for flaps, it's only over radio they say individual digits. The co-pilot probably went on automation, I'm guessing he heard "flaps fi-" and his brain subconsciously filled it in as fi(fteen) as it was the next stage after flaps 20.
@@Blank00shouldn’t there be a callback tho
@@theflyinggasmask Confirmation bias perhaps. He expected the captain to say flaps 15. Or there may have been radio chatter or other noise which obscured the fifteen. The captain then compounded the issue with poor airmanship. Without the black box data we will never know all the details.
Basic airmanship.
Sorry- but as a 30k hour retired heavy jet captain, there is far more to this story. The pilots have not told the full story, either intentionally or otherwise.
A simple minor error during flap retraction whether from “hearing wrong” (or something else) is a surprisingly common event. It does NOT cause an accident or serious incident like this in 99.9999% of cases. This was about as close to a catastrophic event as you can get!
How convenient for the pilots that the CVR was not pulled, and that they had more than four hours to get their story right!
It’s high time we had CVRs that record FAR longer periods before being overwritten. Even my car’s dash cam records for far longer before old files are wiped!
P.S.
The Aircraft is only rated for 2Gs with the flaps extended, so pulling 2.7G with flaps still out is seriously overloading the aircraft!
The final report is released. The whole story was told by the crew.
@@aviationandotherstuff6571we don't know if that's the whole story. The FDR and voice recorder are overwritten, meaning we don't have a way of verifying what they said. As OP said, it is absolutely possible that the crew got their story straight. For all we know, one of the pilots had their kid in the cockpit to fly the plane, the captain said "watch this sick dive", or anything else. We don't know. We can only speculate, and determine whether the account of the pilots is believable. Apparently, a 30k hour retired heavy jet captain doesn't think so, and he's definitely more experienced than me.
Yo lose control of a 777, under any circumstance is difficult to believe. It’s such a big, docile aircraft and very pilot friendly.
Mad respect for these guys being one of the rare pairs that can avoid a complex CFIT situation in the middle of a dark storm. Too many pilots haven't been able to do that. This is a perfect example of good pilots following training, reading instruments and overcoming problems.
Storms don't make you sick.... germs do. 😉
And both can make you dead
@@outofturn331 indeed
Fantastic video!😸
Just a case of neither pilot flying the airplane. The simple solution was for the Captain to turn the auto pilot off and raise the nose and take a moment to understand the problem.
Props to the crew for snapping out of it and fixing the situation, then reporting it, even if it was their fault.
Except the crew did NOT tell the full story. There is far more to this.
A simple error during flap retraction like this is surprisingly common, and doesn’t end up in a near crash like this. (What do I know? How about 30k hours, most of which is on heavy Boeings!)
@@FutureSystem738 What's your working theory?
@@WestAirAviation My working theory is based on the fact that the aeroplane stopped climbing, the nose was lowered, the aircraft descended very rapidly, activated the GPWS and may very well have impacted the water if not for becoming visual just in time.
Things break, pilots “mishear” things and for example select a wrong flap setting during flap retraction surprisingly often especially when the workload is high. This happens surprisingly frequently, is usually just an inconvenience and does NOT normally result in any significant deviations from a safe climb.
Therefore my theory is pretty obvious for someone with lots of experience : the pilot flying “took his eye off the ball”, was distracted and overloaded, lowered the nose, and did not obey rule #1, which is simply revert to absolute basics and “FLY THE PLANE” as you sort other unexplained and unexpected issues out. At the very least the nose should have been maintained a few degrees above the horizon with a moderate thrust level and things then methodically sorted out, before properly resuming the climb. Instead it was a total stuff up that came absolutely incredibly close to disaster.
There was nothing “professional” about how this was handled at least up until a safe climb was reestablished, (though the aircraft was overstressed in the process. 2Gs is the design limit with flaps extended, but perhaps that might have not been enough to save the day. We will never know.)
Flight Radar 24 have released the flight path on their blog section. You can see the dive curve...scary.
I think maybe the plane pitched down a lot because the power was reduced so much. With underslung engines, when you add power it wants to pitch up and when you reduce power, it wants to pitch down.
Great point. Presumably they were trimmed down very far as their take off was done at an unusually high power setting.
IMO most pilots wouldn't have reacted the way this captain did. If you're reaching the max speed for your current configuration, increase pitch and change your configuration. If he would have just repeated his request the whole thing could have been avoided. This right here is why we have FOQA
it was a dark and stormy night.....
Love your CVS receipt unit of measurement. 😄
Great video. I am not a pilot, but is flaps 15 setting ever used for takeoff? Why would the first officer mechanically choose that setting without any reflection.
20° was used on takeoff, and retracting the flaps somewhat is normal.
15° is less than 20° … so why not?
20° to 5° sounds rather aggressive…
I got a laugh out of the CVS receipts, too. 😂 I enjoy your videos!
It's almost *always* 20 to 5 or 15 to 5, but not always. The CA likely said "Flaps ... uh ... five, please," but the FO certainly heard "Flaps one five, please" and the rest is history.
Jeremy Clarkson mentioned, instant good video
Get well soon! Here we are devastated with floods and hail and mini twisters etc... I hope others are doing better.
I have a question. The speed indicator indicates 200 or so knots. With 200 knots and flaps 5, can't you maintain the glide? I thought the fall speed was much slower. IN case of lack of speed... lack of lift (low speed and lack of flaps) shouldn't it have remained horizontal?
I understand the error in the flaps, in my country a plane crashed due to an error in the takeoff configuration, but I do not understand how once a speed for lift is gained, reducing gas, it ends in a dive.
I'd say it was roughly 700ft from crashing
Nah, 748 feet.
I wonder why the Captain chose to reduce thrust in a scenario where windshear was a very real possibility, rather than raise the nose to keep the airspeed in check. All that would’ve happened would be a higher Vertical Speed - surely not a factor immediately after takeoff with an initial climb altitude of at least 4-5000 feet?
The NTSB report said he did both. He pulled back on the stick and reduced thrust to avoid overspeed and damage to the aircraft..
Incompetence?
Get well soon!
It was way too close. Great crew and training saved lives.
447 was a long way from a startle effect. It was a slow motion disaster of 100% pilot error.
I think Vanity Fair had a good and terrifying article describing what happened. Scary.
Maui is in the news again.
Hope you get well soon
After a flaps-20 takeoff, what is the standard call? What is the normal setting for the first retraction call? Is it "flaps 15', or is it "flaps 5?" And why would this particular takeoff flaps retraction setting be different? Was there a non-standard call conflicting with an expectation bias? Something came off the rails procedurally...
On the 73, it's 15, 5, 1 and up. The cap could have said flaps 15 flaps 5.. Assuming they were good for the speeds. Problem was him pulling the power back drastically. The nose will drop with these under slung engines. Another problem that contributes to issue is some pilots not wearing headsets or enabling intercom... Usually older captains.
@@Bren39 Don't they usually repeat commands back to each other? And 15 doesn't sound anything like 5, so I'm curious what the recording would have sounded like.
@@raytownloc My working theory is that the CA said "Flaps ... uh ... five, please," but the FO heard "Flaps one five, please."
I'm sure we've all seen similar stuff before.
For the 777 the PFD shows bugged speed of 20/5/1/UP, so it’s literally right in front of the pilots. The PM should visually check the speed trend is positive, call “speed checked” move the flap level to 5, then confirm the setting from the EICAS display. It’s absolutely speciation basics, so messing it up is unthinkable.
Shouldn't the copilot have known that flaps 15 was not appropriate?
I always thought that pilots read back what they were asked?
Comparing to AF 447? - in that case speed indicators failed before the disaster happened.. //
Great video, but wasn't this flight at 3pm in the afternoon? Visibility was affected by clouds and stormy weather, but many reports say they saw the ocean.
You sound like a completely different person, I'm not gonna lie. Still great episode!
Co-pilot needs his hearing checked or something.
Five sounds NOTHING like fifteen.
He just completely f'd up.
As a native San Franciscan, I share that perplexity. Honestly, we're VERY fortunate that there haven't been MANY more fatalities at and around SFO beyond the three in total who died as a result of the Asiana 214 crash. Two of the worst near misses ever happened here. As you mention, there's United 863, which I vividly remember as it happened, having grown up at the base of the northern slope of San Bruno Mountain. Also, in 2017, there was Air Canada 759, an Airbus A320 that mistakenly tried to land on a taxiway where four other planes full of passengers were queued for takeoff. That one could have potentially resulted in over 1,000 deaths, so it really could have been the deadliest aviation disaster in history by far.
I move we change all standard measurements of length to be based on the length of CVS receipts.
Clearly this was a very close call. Thankfully the captain had his wits about him and had received good training in how to recover in an emergency situation. Another pilot might easily have failed to follow the correct procedures, or to have had such a quick assessment as to the problem with which they were confronted. In such circumstances there is almost no time to go through a checklist. Maybe a guardian angel had been assigned to them on this occasion.
they all get training on this, it's one of the first things
@@shellderp Some airlines give far better and more thorough pilot training than others. For example, British Airways and Quantas give much better training than most (perhaps all) Russian or Somalian airlines.
Sadly, the training given to French pilots was proven to be far from adequate, as we saw from the Air France Flight 447 from Rio to Paris.
And even when a pilot has received good training, they still sometimes have to make a snap decision as to the cause of the problem before them, and to decide the correct course of action to take in order to prevent a catastrophe.
Queensland and Northern …
I'm sorry, what year did this happen? I'm struggling to find it in the transcript or video, but I might have just missed it. I have a TBI and it can make looking for things like that really hard
It was United flight 1722, Maui to San Francisco, 2022-12-18.
@@AdrianColley thank you!
Storms in the summer? You must be from earth
Im no pilot but that close to the ground I wouldn’t pull the thrust back, I’d probably raise the nose to keep the airspeed out of the red
I read a news article about this which did a terrible job describing what had happened. It basically just said the flaps were set to 15 instead of 5 and that caused the plane to plummet towards the ocean. Which makes absolutely no sense.
Thank you for cleaning up my confusion!
The missing information is that moving the flaps causes the plane's angle of attack to change. If the pilot doesn't cancel it out using a simultaneous pitch change, the plane will briefly climb (if extending flaps) or fall (if retracting) until it's back in equilibrium. It makes sense that a retraction which didn't match the expectation of the pilot flying would lead to instability.
I think I read the same article as you because after reading it I literally said out loud “this makes no sense”
Can you make a vid on pia 740?its a forgotten crash
Excellent job by the Captain! And another great episode!
So what I always understood is higher flaps mean more lift but also speed reduction. If the flaps were to be at 5 instead of 15, wouldn't the speed be even closer to overspeed than with a flaps 5 and full thrust, or was the captain ready lowering the thrust? I may have missed something or I simply just don't get the flaps system as I thought I did. Can someone explain?
No, the lower the flap setting, the faster the plane can fly. The captain lowered the speed when it was close to overspeed, not knowing that the flaps were at 15. The plane slowed down quite a bit, then the flaps were adjusted to 5 and the plane speed was getting dangerously low, that nearly put it into a stall.
Textbook example of a black hole departure combined with the somatogravic illusion.
Get well soon
Can you imagine this being your first flight?
It might also be your last!
@@Sashazurin a way first flight
Im surprised they don't do callbacks: Capt "Flaps 5" , Copilot "Flaps 5"
good point. it's crazy that something so critical to flight can happen due to misunderstanding, miscommunication, or just mistakenly putting the flaps in the wrong position.
It’s aviation basics to have some sort of challenge and response. If they don’t do this, as per company SOP, then there is seriously something amiss at United.
@@EdOeuna Thank you for your wisdom
I don't understand why the copilot made the mistake. He should have assessed the situation as flaps 5 as well, I would say.
Interesting point of view…would’t be an overspeed impossible when the plane was on auto-throttle? Subsequently just get the flaps in the right setting and auto-throttle would have adjusted accordingly. Lots of pilot mismanagement imho!
Probably less than 2 minutes from becoming unrecoverable. So glad they made it.
December 2022; lowest point of dive 748.
One word?
Five?
Fifteen?
One five?
Yes. You'd think the calls would be "Flaps zero five", "Flaps one zero", "Flaps one five", etc. if flap settings are in degrees. (I have around 230 hours flying experience from a few years back and I don't remember this being and issue with small aircraft.) Also Captain should confirm with a 'read back' after checking new flap setting on the panel?
When im flying as Captain, and ask for a flap setting change after takeoff, one eye watches his hand movement for mistakes, ive caught mistakes many times, "trust but verify"
You usually talk fast but on this video you recoded even faster
Ok, i have a few questions, why didn't the pilot just adjust the flaps vs throttling back and then adjusting the flaps.? and if throttling back, why to such a low setting? Also a question about recovery. I assume throttling back is to give yourself more time, but would that not also pitch the plane down as the engines on idle create drag?
The elevators will easily override that nose down create day idle engines especially as they have excessive airspeed to bleed off.
I don't understand how this doesn't happen everyday, the speed at which the controllers talk, giving vital info very quickly, the different airports around the world with the different accents, that rushing of words and numbers is too quick in my judgement.
Yeah, sometimes it’s hard to pick up when you’re not entirely sure what ATC will tell you.
In that case one says to the the ATC...."Say again, you're coming in garbled."@@aspiringcaptain
I may be wrong but I don't recall you telling us the year of this incident, only the month.
A minute after takeoff? Not possible
15 and 5 sound nothing alike. It was input error, not a misheard word, right?
The incident occurred around 14:51 local time. There was a marine layer, but this was not a night flight
Perhaps the 14:51 was for EST or GMT.
Why did he pull back the thrust instead of pull back on the stick when he's going too fast?
a close call in the US, i hope the US continues with its good streak with commercial flights (save the Southwest engine-out incident) , i really hope we dont get close calls like this again
It was pure luck, that none of the Boeing 737MAX crashes happened in the US, as there were several pilot reports of incidents, that later showed to have been incredibly close to ending up like the 2 crashed planes. Yet nothing was done. But that wasnt on the airlines, that was on Boeing.
@@dfuher968 I still shake my head in disgust when I think about the MAX crashes, disgust that MCAS was so poorly designed, disgust that pilots were not trained on MCAS or even made aware that it existed, disgust that they didn't GROUND ALL 737 MAX's after the first crash and fix the problem then! I used to work for Boeing.
@@pimacanyon6208 Boeing F*CKED UP ROYAL when they let leadership start trundling behind the accountants and shareholders instead of KEEPING the engineers relatively at the helm of operations... end of argument.
AND for what it's worth, this is a cycle I've watched and researched happening practically throughout the history of business when it comes to stocks, shares, and stockholders. As SOON as accountants start dictating procedures, you've got morons talking out of their asses about business where they have NO BUSINESS. It's exactly on that motion that companies go from "building brand and a stellar reputation for excellence" to "selling out the soul of the company for cheap chinesium crap" and defrauding customers more than any resemblance of "good faith business".
AND 99 out of 100 stockholders similarly have NO BUSINESS in the businesses they own. Their roles SHOULD remain silent largely, only piping up to question progress when general operations seem to take a detrimental turn on the market... and even then, only cautiously. ;o)
@@dfuher968not luck, my dad is a 737 max captain for southwest and he says any US 737 pilot would’ve been able to amply disable the system and identify the issue and continue normally.
I'm nowhere near a pilot, but when you aggressively pull back on the yoke, full thrust should be applied?
Bit when you're over speed and trying to get the nose up. The faster you're going, the more time and distance it takes to rotate the plane.
I think you messed up your calculations. 854 CVS receipts is approximately the current distance to Voyager 1.
the state of security in the industry is such that we now most only have "near" crashes....
This is why you can fully trust your pilots. They can make these live saving decisions so well and so quickly
At 2:06 you state: "the night was dark and rainy......" I think you meant to say "It was a dark and rainy night....." (a classic line in literature.) lol.
I was almost on this flight. The similar timing southwest flight were like $100 cheaper tho.
That flight was closer to crashing than the altitude indicates. Excessive input on the controls could have caused catastrophic damage.
there should be a way to easily send over black box data at the end of every flight... with modern tech, it should be really simple to store all flight information just in case for quite a while... the digital storage is just so much more capable these days, that, whilst it will incur some expense, done correctly it should not present a huge issue technologically or monetarily...
many airlines store nearly that volume of data already for statistical and engineering/maintenance purposes... we just need to tweak the features recorded a little
if you're on a Mormon mission and get a car, you have to "badge in" and "badge out" to use the car. Everything you do "wrong" (ex: brake too hard, exceed the speed limit) is logged and reported to the central office, who can use the log to take away your car privileges.
I wonder if a similar system could be used for planes?
@@moonman239 notably, many "museum trains" and "toy railways" also have that sort of device, more so, as I said, many airlines have those kind of devices for their own points, but they do not usually have the types of data we need
Excellent video but I thought the flight departed during daytime hours
After the mistake was noticed, was changing the flaps from 15 to 5 really the right call given it almost crashed the plane? Is there something else they could have done instead?
With the luxury of hindsight, a more gradual transition back to the desired profile. Increase engines so speed is increasing. Flaps 10. Bring engines to desired power. Flaps 5. Resume climbing profile.
No flaps 10.
Why did changing the flaps send it into a dive? And why reduce the throttle when raising the plane out of the dive? Shouldn't he have increased throttle to make sure they didn't stall?
I don’t understand how having the flaps one or two detents out can cause a plane to effectively start falling out of the sky.
It's a combination of two things. The pilot flying pitched up too much for flaps 15 because he was expecting flaps 5, but he didn't immediately notice the difference in performance because the engines were at unusually high thrust. When he saw the overspeed, he then overreacted slightly, because an overspeed-induced failure would have been unrecoverable. Combining these, the aircraft was pitched too high with thrust too low, therefore descending too fast.
United has thousands of stories like this
Why are you depicting night flight in the simulation when the NTSB report says the incident was at 14:51 HST?
one time I was on a airplane and I sat by the window and looked out and saw a cloud.
holy shit that’s terrifying. i hope u have someone you feel comfortable talking to about that
Think how surprised the cloud was.
@@misseselise3864 - just you really.
A terrible sequence of mistakes from both pilots nearly led to their deaths and a CFIT. Unbelievable that these guys are anywhere near to the front seat of a 777. Crew coordination was clearly left behind.
When did this happen, last December?
Yes
And then the pilots continued....... which is INSANE.
SFO flights seem almost cursed, holy sh8t! 👀
That actually seemed like it would be quite fun as a passenger at the beginning of the dive - since it would probably be zero G or close to it.
But I would probably be scared as well, if it continues for more than a second or 2 when it happens that close to take off. Right at the beginning he will probably be at a rapid climb rate, so 1-2 seconds of weightlessness could probably be reached by just level off quickly (which will make just a deceleration of the upwards movement) - but if it continues, that means he will start to sinking rapidly and that's not good news, when he is already at such low altitude.
wow, still hope an investigation is carried out
CVS receipts 😂😂😂😂 Well done, my friend.
Great video. Imagine flying for the fist time and this is what you experience 💀
And live to tell the tale..not
It would also be the last time 😱
Rather than pulling the power back to prevent an overspeed of the flaps, the Captain should have just pulled up more aggressively and traded his excess speed for a higher climb rate. The A/C even has computers that will prevent a stall. Easy to say as a Monday morning quarterback for sure. I also heard there was a lack of crew resource management between the CA and the First Officer due to the Captain's crotchety personality.
Wow, initially misread the title
18th of December 2022 (last year)?
These pilots need to learn to HAND FLY! I’ve had enough of relying on auto-pilot
They were hand flying. Autopilot wasn’t on