Boeing 777 crashes at San Fransico airport

egghead1 · 07/07/13 - 01:14

Details still sketchy but ts breaking on Twitter
https://www.youtube.com/embed/0dFtmSybpuw

jojo01 · 07/07/13 - 01:16

Just saw that. CNN coverage shows smoke coming from the aircraft. Hope everyone gets off safely though it says that the fire department says people are trapped on board.

irishguy · 07/07/13 - 01:17

At least there's no reported deaths as of yet

http://www.buzzfeed.com/adriancarrasquillo/fire-rages-as-plane-crash-lands-at-san-francisco-airport

jenzie · 07/07/13 - 01:21

sounds like as it was landing, it's tail section was too low and struck the ground, breaking off part or all of it, lost stability and rolled!

Thine Wonk · 07/07/13 - 01:24

They requested an emergency landing then, hmmm.

Ads · 07/07/13 - 01:26

touch wood no major casualties - everyone would have been in landing positions with seatbelts on

Caldari · 07/07/13 - 01:28

jenzie wrote: »

sounds like as it was landing, it's tail section was too low and struck the ground, breaking off part or all of it, lost stability and rolled!

It hasn't rolled, the wings are still attached. I'm guessing that during the emergency landing it came down heavily on the rear which caused the entire tail section to snap off.

[Deleted User] · 07/07/13 - 01:29

Reported on Sky News that everyone got off the plane. Tweeted by a passenger.

Inspiration · 07/07/13 - 01:31

Same guy took a photo too:

https://path.com/p/1lwrZb

I'm guessing landing gear failure and they've had a bad belly landing.

jojo01 · 07/07/13 - 01:32

The top of the aircraft seems to have been burnt away.

[Deleted User] · 07/07/13 - 01:32

Caldari wrote: »

It hasn't rolled, the wings are still attached. I'm guessing that during the emergency landing it came down heavily on the rear which caused the entire tail section to snap off.

According to a witness, around 11:30 a.m. the plane was just about to land -- its landing gear had come down -- when the tail of the plane came off.

Eddie Badger · 07/07/13 - 01:38

Looks a right mess, they were very lucky http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23214513

[Deleted User] · 07/07/13 - 01:39

https://pathakacdn-a.akamaihd.net/photos2/f36a5729-6db7-40db-9c98-99aa8b68df4c/2x.jpg

lemoncurd · 07/07/13 - 01:39

Ah, I see the problem. It didn't have a tail. This is useful to control the yaw of the aircraft when landing.

Inspiration · 07/07/13 - 01:40

woodbush wrote: »

According to a witness, around 11:30 a.m. the plane was just about to land -- its landing gear had come down -- when the tail of the plane came off.

I doubt that. I suspect either all or some of the landing gear has failed, possibly left wing, the plane has hit the runway and the tail came away as a result of the impact. Plane has then slid off and spun around.

Arcana · 07/07/13 - 01:41

Looks nasty.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23214513#TWEET813353

https://twitter.com/Brosner85/status/353597610633883648/photo/1

https://twitter.com/Brosner85/status/353598792022491136/photo/1

[Deleted User] · 07/07/13 - 01:42

All 290 passengers and 12 crew members have been accounted for according to Sky News.

2+2=5 · 07/07/13 - 01:42

"Haven't felt this way since 9/11"

stargazer61 · 07/07/13 - 01:42

Amazing. Seems as if all passengers and crew got out alive. Staggering considering the amount of devastation

[Deleted User] · 07/07/13 - 01:43

Pictures on Sky News show debris and tail parts before runway starts.

jojo01 · 07/07/13 - 01:43

From the images on Sky, it looks as if the landing gear may have clipped the edge of what looks to me like some sort of lake before the runway and then it's scraped along from there.

twingle · 07/07/13 - 01:44

Inspiration wrote: »

Same guy took a photo too:

https://path.com/p/1lwrZb

I'm guessing landing gear failure and they've had a bad belly landing.

why are they carrying their hand luggage. We are always told in an emergency everything gets lefts on the plane

swingaleg · 07/07/13 - 01:44

Does 'all accounted for' mean the same as 'all alive' ?

Inspiration · 07/07/13 - 01:45

The footage seems to show debris going all the way back to where the runway meets the water. As if the plane only just reached the runway and hit the ground literally immediately as the runway starts after water.

If anyone has flown into SFO.. you'll know how nervous that approach is. You're looking out the window at water waiting for the runway to appear.

f_196 · 07/07/13 - 01:45

twingle wrote: »

why are they carrying their hand luggage. We are always told in an emergency everything gets lefts on the plane

And in a building fire, you're told to leave all your belongings.

In one real fire evacutation in my life - and many drills, I've never known anyone to leave their belongings. No chance.

[Deleted User] · 07/07/13 - 01:45

jojo01 wrote: »

From the images on Sky, it looks as if the landing gear may have clipped the edge of what looks to me like some sort of lake before the runway and then it's scraped along from there.

That would be San Francisco Bay.

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=San+Francisco+international+airport&hl=en&ll=37.662081,-122.33963&spn=0.539219,1.352692&sll=37.64251,-122.371902&sspn=0.269681,0.676346&t=h&hq=San+Francisco+international+airport&z=10

Hey there!

Quick Links

Boeing 777 crashes at San Fransico airport

Comments