No hint of emergency before small plane crashed upside down

from cnn

By Greg Botelho, CNN

August 10, 2013 -- Updated 2225 GMT (0625 HKT)

Small plane crash leaves three missing

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• A turboprop plane's pilot did not indicate any problems before crash, NTSB official says
• It hit a Connecticut house upside down and at an angle, he adds
• Two children, ages 1 and 13, inside one house are believed to have been killed
• An ex-Microsoft executive, his son were on board plane, a relative says

(CNN) -- The pilot didn't indicate any issues before a turboprop plane slammed upside down into an East Haven, Connecticut, neighborhood, a federal investigator said Saturday.

Authorities have not detailed how many died as a result of the crash that damaged two homes, or the victims' identities. Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy has said as many as five people -- including three on the plane -- were killed.

While saying he was still awaiting word on IDs from the medical examiner, National Highway Transportation Safety Board investigator Patrick Murray did offer details Saturday on what authorities believe happened.

The pilot -- who had a certificate allowing him to fly the multi-engine plane -- told the control tower that yes, he could see the runway, and didn't hint at an emergency before transmissions suddenly cut off, according to Murray. It was raining at the time, though the NTSB investigator did not say whether it's been determined weather played any role.

"We don't have any preliminary indication that anything was wrong with that plane," Murray said.

What they do believe is that the aircraft came in inverted and nose down at a 60- to 70-degree angle when it crashed into the side of a home about a half-mile from Tweed New Haven Airport. Before that impact, the plane approached at allowable altitude level for landing in that area, the investigator said.

Murray stressed there's still much more to be done, including ideally piecing the aircraft back together and looking for on-board equipment that may provide telling details such as speed and altitude.

Saturday's first focus was getting the neighborhood back to normal, including cleanup and recovery operations, Murray said.

The Rockwell International Turbo Commander 690B was registered to Bill Henningsgaard, who had worked for Microsoft for 14 years including as vice president of sales for the western United States, Australia and New Zealand. It took off from New Jersey's Teterboro Airport on Friday morning and crashed while approaching the southern Connecticut airport around 11:25 a.m., according to theFederal Aviation Administration.

There's every reason to believe that Henningsgaard and his son were on board the plane when it went down, Bill's brother, Blair Henningsgaard, told CNN.

Two children -- ages 1 and 13 -- in one house are presumed dead, East Haven Mayor Joseph Maturo Jr. said. The other damaged house was unoccupied.

The fuselage entered one of the homes, according to Malloy. The right wing of the airplane could be seen in the smoldering wreckage of one house, and the left wing was in another house.

Video from CNN affiliate WTNH showed smoke rising from a heavily damaged house in East Haven, and what appeared to be the tail of a plane nearby.

Fire consumed both houses, initially preventing firefighters from searching for victims, East Haven Fire Chief Douglas Jackson said Friday.

Maturo said the children were in one house with their mother when the plane struck shortly before 11:30 a.m. The mother escaped, he said.

"It's ... total devastation in the back of the home," Maturo said.

CNN's Aaron Cooper, Lauren Russell, Jason Hanna, Chelsea J. Carter, Kevin Conlon and Cristy Lenz contributed to this report.

Newport Beach seeks new John Wayne takeoff path to lessen jet noise

from latimes

At John Wayne Airport, planes already take off at a steeper angle. If the city has its way, they'll also travel in an S-curve above Upper Newport Bay, away from homes.

• 
• Comments

  58

• Email

  Share 146

A commercial jet leaving John Wayne Airport flies over the Upper Newport Bay preserve in Newport Beach. (Don Bartletti, Los Angeles Times / August 1, 2013)

By Jill Cowan

August 3, 2013, 5:12 p.m.

The Boeing 737 screams out of John Wayne Airport, lifting into the thin, misty clouds over Newport Beach.

With its distinctive Southwest Airlines stripes, the jet soars toward the gunmetal gray waters of Upper Newport Bay and then drifts over the multimillion-dollar homes in Dover Shores, where residents are just beginning their Monday.

"He didn't turn," notes aviation consultant Ken Shapero, peering skyward.

Departing from one of America's most restricted airports — over a city where residents have used their money and political might to fight for peace and quiet — is no simple task. Pilots must take off in what feels like a rocket-ship ascent, then throttle back as their jets rumble over the Orange County beach city, leaving passengers with the stomach-dropping sensation of a Disneyland ride.

But now city leaders are asking regulators and pilots to employ even more stringent measures to make life quieter in the neighborhoods below: They want jets departing John Wayne to follow a satellite-guided slalom course that will keep them over the bay and away from the homes that line its shores.

While airports elsewhere have instituted complex takeoff patterns and other maneuvers — such as the airfield in Juneau, Alaska, where pilots risk smacking into nearby mountains — such steps almost always have been in the interest of safety.

By contrast, the pitched takeoff at John Wayne is designed to reduce the level of jet noise raining down on the pricey real estate below.

"We'll do anything we can to reduce the impact" on residents, Mayor Keith Curry said.

Thanks to lobbying by top-dollar consultants and lengthy legal battles, John Wayne — the third-busiest commercial airfield in Southern California — is considered the most tightly controlled airport in the nation when it comes to noise.

A curfew mandates that no commercial planes can take off before 7 a.m. or after 10 p.m. most days, nor can they land later than 11 p.m., except in emergencies. Late arrivers are generally diverted toLAX. A 1985 settlement resulted in passenger and traffic caps on the airport. And the airport's unusually steep takeoffs (designed to muffle noise) have earned John Wayne a reputation among passengers and pilots.

Jets head skyward at up to a 25-degree angle, about 10 degrees steeper than normal, quickly gaining altitude before throttling back and gliding over Newport Beach.

"John Wayne's an interesting airport — one because you have a very short runway — so landings are more critical," said Jon Russell, an Air Line Pilots Assn. regional safety director who's flown for a major airline for 26 years. "And, of course, the takeoff profile. Those are two important catalysts for making an airport unique and more difficult."

Adding an S-curve to the already complex takeoff pattern could add a challenge for the 12 airlines that operate out of John Wayne. But it would give Newport Beach officials another toehold in their fight to spare residents the auditory assault that plagues neighborhoods and communities across the country.

Known as a "required navigation performance departure," the procedure would take jets through an extra curve to keep them over the middle of the bay, which is about half a mile across at its widest point. That way, neither the west nor the east side of Upper Newport Bay, also known as the Back Bay, home to wildlife and lined by houses, would bear the brunt of direct flyovers.

Officials say pilots wouldn't be blazing through the turns like NASCAR drivers or dragging passengers' insides along for a wild ride. Rather, a precise flight plan would be programmed into a plane's computers before takeoff.

A similar departure procedure developed for Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, the busiest airport in the world, is set to be tested in the fall. There, some departing Delta Air Lines jets will be guided over a golf course.

The Orange County proposal is subject to approval by the Federal Aviation Administration — which has indicated that, depending on the results of Atlanta's experiment, Newport's request would be considered by mid- to late 2014.

Executives at GE Aviation System's Naverus division, which is helping Newport Beach analyze the procedure, envision national air traffic that runs more like a Swiss rail system, with computerized coordination.

"Let me be perfectly clear about this," said Shapero, an official with GE Aviation. "It will happen."

Already, the FAA is working to move navigation from ground-based systems to satellites. Although air traffic control towers still manage airspace, the transition from using beacons on the ground to satellite systems once planes are on their way makes for more precise flight paths.

Still, Newport's push may be a step too far for now.

"We don't know if the city's proposal is technically possible," FAA spokesman Ian Gregor wrote in response to an inquiry from The Times.

But that hasn't discouraged Newport residents.

"A lot of people in this community are like high achievers. These are movers-and-shakers type of folks," said longtime resident Tom Anderson, who lives near the bay and the departing jets. "They're not afraid to go right to the FAA and complain."

Put another way, said resident Millie Noble, 74, as she walked her dog near Dover Shores' Galaxy View Park: "There's people always raising a ruckus."

That may be why residents spent much of the 1990s trying to push their problem to another part of the county by fighting to convert the shuttered El Toro Marine base into an international airport — an effort that failed when residents in southern Orange County mobilized in protest.

For passengers, though, much of the debate stays firmly behind the scenes of John Wayne's three pristine terminals.

On a recent weeknight, as the evening's last passengers trickled through security, Irvine resident Albert Li, 50, sat at a bench working on his laptop. A consultant who travels frequently, he said he noticed that the preflight warnings from pilots about the departure seem to have tapered off.

"Pilots used to tell you, 'We have a steep departure, blah, blah, blah,'" he said. "Now they don't do that anymore."

Either way, he added, "I'm just along for the ride."

jill.cowan@latimes.com

Twitter: @jillcowan

Copyright © 2013, Los Angeles Times

Terrafugia Readies Flying Car for First Public Air Show

from wsj

By Jonathan Welsh

Terrafugia Inc.

Terrafugia Transition

Flying-car maker Terrafugia said its Transition vehicle will make a demonstration later this month during EAA AirVenture, an annual gathering of aviation enthusiasts and industry insiders in Oshkosh, Wisc.

The event, known by the airplane crowd simply as “Oshkosh,” will also mark the first public airshow appearance of the Transition, which can be driven on roads and highways like a car and flown off airport runways where other small aircraft operate. Its wings fold electrically for driving and extend for flight.

By flying the craft in front of a huge audience in a public setting, the Woburn, Mass., company is saying it is largely ready for prime time.

During the planned 20 minute demonstration, which is scheduled for Wednesday, July 31 just before sunset, the Transition prototype will unfold its wings, fly, land and make a driving pass in front of spectators. The twilight flight precedes a popular nighttime air show act, so Terrafugia expects a big crowd.

The vehicle has flown before, but only in private tests.

AirVenture, which many consider the king of general-aviation events, is run by the Experimental Aircraft Association, a group that advocates for private pilots including those who design and build their own aircraft. In some ways the new flying car taps into the organizations roots.

Last year Terrafugia skipped the Oshkosh show because it was busy putting the Transition through tests it needs for Federal Aviation Administration.

Asiana Airlines pilots say auto-throttle didn't maintain landing speed

from latimes

The pilots of the Asiana Airlines jet that crashed Saturday in San Francisco say it was set for the proper landing speed. Outside experts suggest they relied too much on technology.

By Dan Weikel, Ralph Vartabedian and Laura J. Nelson

July 9, 2013, 9:57 p.m.

SAN FRANCISCO — The pilots flying the Asiana Airlinesjetliner that crashed in San Francisco told federal investigators that an automatic throttle — a system akin to acar's cruise control — had failed to keep the jetliner at the proper speed for landing.

The Asiana pilots said in interviews with the National Transportation Safety Board that they had set the auto-throttles to maintain an air speed of 137 knots. That's a significantly faster speed than the plane actually achieved as it came in for its landing at San Francisco International Airport on Saturday.

As the inquiry entered its fourth day, Deborah A.P. Hersman, chairwoman of the National Transportation Safety Board, said investigators were still trying to verify whether the throttles were properly activated.

The pilots' statements do not resolve the central question of why the Boeing 777's speed and altitude fell so far out of the normal range for landing at SFO before it hit a sea wall and crash-landed. But outside air safety experts said the statements suggest a risky reliance on technology when the flight crew should have been constantly monitoring the airplane's speed.

"Whether it was engaged or not working is almost irrelevant," said Barry Schiff, a former TWA pilot and an airsafety consultant. "The big mystery of Flight 214 is why in God's name did these two pilots sit there and allow the air speed to get so low."

Experts said the pilots should have been monitoring the plane's speed every few seconds, and could have manually taken control of the engines at any time.

Auto-throttles, which are connected to an airplane's flight management computers, allow pilots to select the appropriate speed for takeoff, cruising or landing. The devices automatically make corrections if there are deviations from the setting.

Jon Russell, a veteran airline pilot and safety official for theAir Line Pilots Assn. on the West Coast, said the auto-throttle is a valuable tool.

"I don't know what happened. It just doesn't make sense," said Russell, noting that the pilots were very experienced in Boeing aircraft. "The situation deteriorated a lot farther than it should have."

Much of the information released by the NTSB since Saturday morning's crash has focused on the pilots, who were flying too low and slow during their final approach. Two people were killed and 182 were injured as the plane's landing gear and tail struck a seawall at the end of Runway 28L.

Investigators said the plane was flying 30 knots under its target landing speed of 137 knots, or almost 158 mph, and had dipped well below the normal flight path into the airport.

Several seconds before the crash landing, a stall warning went off in the cockpit. With the impact 1.5 seconds away, the pilots finally attempted to accelerate and abort the landing, investigators said.

The Asiana pilots were making a visual approach to San Francisco without the instrument landing system, a part of which was not operating due to airfield renovations. NTSB officials said, however, that there were other automated systems and visual references available to assist the flight crew.

At the time, the pilot, Lee Kang-kook, who had only 35 hours flying Boeing 777s, was being checked out and supervised in the plane by Lee Jung-min, a captain who had been certified as a training pilot June 15, less than a month before the crash. It was Lee Kang-kook's first landing in San Francisco in a Boeing 777 and Lee Jung-min's first landing at the airport in a training situation.

Hersman said that when the jetliner crashed, three pilots were in the cockpit. Lee Kang-kook was in the left-hand or captain's seat. Lee Jung-min was in the right-hand or co-pilot's seat, supervising his flight, and a relief first officer was sitting in the jump seat to monitor the landing.

The approach to San Francisco International Airport is not particularly difficult, but it does require closely monitoring a jetliner's air speed as it executes a sweeping 180-degree counterclockwise turn in the approach from the north, according to Robert Ditchey, former vice president for operations at US Airways.

Ditchey said that only the pilot in the left-hand seat — in this case, one who was not yet fully qualified to land the 777 — could see the runway during the turn. The supervising pilot in the right-hand seat could not see the runway from his position, he said.

Aviation safety experts and federal investigators have questioned why the crew did not recognize the problem and take action before the plane struck the end of the runway.

Hersman rejected the suggestion that any problem or misunderstanding about the auto-throttle by the crew would excuse the pilots from their duty to manually fly the airplane.

"But let me be clear: the crew is required to maintain a safe aircraft, which means that they need to monitor. They have a monitoring function, all three of them in the cockpit. One of the very critical things that need to be monitored on approach to landing is speed," she said.

None of the crew was tested for drugs or alcohol after the crash, Hersman said, because foreign flight crews involved in accidents do not fall under the same regulatory requirements as U.S. crews.

Hersman also said that two flight attendants in the rear of the aircraft were ejected after the impact and found on the side of the runway with injuries.

During a news briefing in Seoul on Tuesday, Asiana President Yoon Young-doo defended the pilots, saying they were "excellent" and qualified members of the flight crew with experience flying into San Francisco International.

Lee Kang-kook, who has almost 10,000 hours in the air, had previously flown into San Francisco 29 times as a co-pilot on Boeing 747s, Yoon said. Lee Jung-min, with almost 12,000 hours, had flown into the airport 33 times.

Yoon said he personally apologized to the families of the two Chinese girls who were killed in the crash. He said he planned to visit the crash site and meet with survivors and their families in San Francisco to apologize. He added that would assist the investigation in any way he could.

dan.weikel@latimes.com

ralph.vartabedian@latimes.com

laura.nelson@latimes.com

Weikel and Vartabedian reported from Los Angeles; Nelson reported from San Francisco. Times staff writers Victoria Kim and Kate Mather contributed to this report.

Investigators Raise Questions About Pilots

from wsj


NTSB Chief Says Cockpit Crew 'Required to Maintain a Safe Aircraft'

NTSB officials on Tuesday examined the crashed Asiana Airlines jet just off the runway at San Francisco International Airport.

Even before investigators have finished questioning the Asiana Airlines 020560.SE -1.33% cockpit crew whose jet crashed in San Francisco, the National Transportation Safety Board ratcheted up signals that pilot error was the most likely culprit, prompting U.S. pilot-union leaders to issue an unusual public criticism of the board.

After providing new details Tuesday about the final minute of the flight—during which the plane was too low and not centered on the runway—NTSB Chairman Deborah Hersman indicated that the jet's senior captain told investigators he believed automated safety systems would maintain the plane's speed and make the approach safe.

"He assumed the auto-throttles were maintaining speed," she said at a briefing.

"Let me be clear," Ms. Hersman added, "the crew is required to maintain a safe aircraft." In an apparent answer to critics who contend the safety board is rushing to judgment, she said "one of the very critical things that needs to be monitored on approach to landing is speed."

Ms. Hersman characterized her remarks as simple statements of fact, not conclusions. "We will not determine probable cause" at this early stage of the investigation, she said.

Still, her comments raised questions about the actions and performance of the three pilots who were in the cockpit of the Boeing BA +0.30% 777 as it crashed Saturday while attempting to land at San Francisco International Airport, hitting a sea wall and slamming onto the runway before bursting into flames. The crash killed two people and injured dozens.

The Air Line Pilots Association said it was "stunned by the amount of operational data" the board has released. Without the proper context and detailed analysis, according to the union, "prematurely releasing" such information "encourages wild speculation."

ALPA, among other things, called on the NTSB to determine if the pilots had adequate training to use onboard navigation aids for a visual approach, on a day when the primary ground-based landing aids for the strip had been turned off due to runway improvements. The union also urged the board to look at whether there were differences between what the pilots saw on their instruments, versus information subsequently downloaded from the plane's flight-data recorder.

Asked about the criticism from pilot groups, Ms. Hersman said the board's release of information has been "consistent" with its practices in past probes.

Assisted by interpreters and flanked by South Korean crash investigators, U.S. investigators have spent hours questioning the pilots and cabin crew. The investigators spent roughly 10 hours Monday in the pilot interviews and continued them Tuesday, but the sessions have been hampered by the limited English skills of the cockpit crew, said people familiar with the matter.


Eugene Anthony Rah survived the crash of Asiana flight 214 at San Francisco International Airport. He talked to WSJ's Monika Vosough about the moments of the crash and the emotional aftermath.

Lee Kang-guk, who was at the controls during the crash, was a newly minted 777 captain who had just 43 hours of flying experience on the Boeing model and was making his first 777 landing at San Francisco. He was a veteran pilot of other types of passenger jets.

On Monday, investigators questioned Lee Jeong-min, a longtime 777 pilot who, according to the NTSB, was making his first flight as a training captain.

A puzzling aspect of the probe is why the two aviators apparently didn't discuss the plane's eroding speed until about seven seconds before impact, according to the cockpit voice recorder—by which time it was sinking fast and flying some 30 miles per hour slower than the speed the cockpit crew had chosen for the final approach.

According to pilots and safety experts, most airlines require pilots to halt an approach—which means pulling up and increasing engine power to climb away from the runway—if the speed when they descend to an altitude of 1,000 feet or less varies by 10 or 12 mph from the predetermined target.


Related Articles

Asiana Says Supervising Pilot Was Very Experienced
Asiana's Response to Crash Draws Notice
Religious Ties Concern Parents of Chinese Students
The Middle Seat: Baggage-Toting Fliers Threaten Emergency Evacuations
The probe also has created friction between the safety board and Asiana over the airline's repeated public statements about investigative issues, said people familiar with the details.

As it typically does during the early part of an investigation, the board demanded that the airline not make any such statements, these people said. But Asiana has commented about whether the jet's engines were working properly, the condition of other systems on the aircraft and personnel details about the crew and the training they were conducting.

According to two people who have talked with investigators, safety-board leaders are angry about their inability to rein in Asiana's comments.

A safety board spokeswoman said "we are coordinating with them on the release of information."

Asiana said that in recent days, the safety board asked the company to avoid making "public statements which can affect the result of the investigation." The company said the board made the request without "pinpointing any specific comment made earlier" by Asiana.

One of the issues investigators are examining is why the 777 captain undergoing training may have misjudged the plane's angle to the runway as he made a visual approach in good weather. Asiana has said the pilot had flown Airbus A320s, a significantly smaller model, immediately before moving to train on the 777.

According to pilots and safety experts, it often takes pilots some time to get adjusted to the view from the cockpit of a new plane, which can differ significantly especially if the planes are different sizes. Safety experts said even the most advanced flight simulators provide only limited help in getting pilots accustomed to the different sight lines from the windshields of bigger jets.

In her briefing, Ms. Hersman disclosed that two flight attendants sitting in the back were ejected from the plane and ended up injured on the tarmac, but they survived. She also said the Federal Aviation Administration is pulling together information about landing patterns and potential difficulties other planes, especially 777 jetliners, may have experienced in recent weeks at San Francisco due to the runway work.

—Jon Ostrower contributed to this article.
Write to Andy Pasztor at andy.pasztor@wsj.com

A version of this article appeared July 9, 2013, on page A4 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Investigators Raise Questions About Pilots.

Pilot Error Eyed in San Francisco Plane Crash

from wsj

Investigators Say Asiana Plane Approached Runway at Dangerously Slow Speed

By
• ANDY PASZTOR
And
• VAUHINI VARA
• CONNECT

The Asiana Airlines jet that crashed at SFO was descending at a dangerously slow speed, and pilots apparently ran out of time to correct their approach, investigators said. The WSJ's Mariko Sanchanta and Jeffrey Ng discuss.

SAN FRANCISCO—The Asiana Airlines jet that crashed while landing at San Francisco International Airport, killing two Chinese teenagers and injuring 182 others, was descending at a dangerously slow speed and pilots apparently ran out of time to correct their approach, investigators said Sunday.
While stopping short of pinpointing pilot error as the likely cause of the fiery crash Saturday, National Transportation Safety Board Chairman Deborah Hersman's comments indicated investigators were focused primarily on why the cockpit crew allowed speed to decay to such an extent—and failed to take decisive action until the Boeing 777 was less than two seconds from impact.

The overnight flight from Seoul, with 307 people on board, including 16 crew members, hit a rocky sea wall, which sheared off its tail and landing gear, then slammed onto the runway, skidded, spun off the tarmac and erupted into flames.
Some passengers and witnesses said it looked as if the aircraft was too close to San Francisco Bay as it approached the runway.
"There was no feeling of anything wrong. No announcement. Then suddenly the plane went bam, bam, bam, bam," said Fawen Yan, a 48-year-old resident of the San Francisco Bay area who was sitting in economy class.
Remarkably, 123 passengers walked away without major injuries after exiting from emergency slides or leaping from gaping holes in the burned body of the plane.
China's Ministry of Education said 70 of those aboard were Chinese students or their teachers bound for U.S. precollege exchange programs. Among them, according to Asiana and Chinese officials, were Wang Linjia and Ye Mengyuan, who died.
The San Mateo County Coroner said Sunday his office is conducting an autopsy to determine whether one of the victims had been run over and killed by an emergency vehicle at the crash site, the Associated Press reported.
An Asiana spokesman identified the co-pilot who was flying the plane when it crashed as Lee Kang-guk, born in 1967 and with just under 10,000 hours of flying time—but only 43 hours of that piloting 777s. He previously had landed aircraft at San Francisco International but this was his first 777 landing at that airport, the spokesman said.
If Asiana adheres to global industry standards, a big chunk of the co-pilot's 43 hours were logged in a 777 simulator rather than during actual flights, according to safety experts. And he still would have been under special supervision by a senior Asiana training captain.

Photos

View Slideshow

Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

Broken Landing

View Graphics

Getty Images

In the first on-scene briefing by the NTSB, Ms. Hersman said a preliminary readout of the plane's flight-data and cockpit-voice recorders indicated that everything was normal—with no discussion of any onboard problems or concerns about the visual approach in good weather—until just seven seconds before impact.
At that point, she told reporters, the cockpit crew realized the plane was flying too slowly. "The speed was significantly below" the designated approach speed of roughly 160 miles per hour.
Three seconds later, a stall-warning activated in the cockpit, indicating the jet was losing aerodynamic lift, Ms. Hersman said. The crew didn't act to sharply increase engine thrust and try to climb away from the runway—conducting what is called a "go-around"—until 1.5 seconds before impact, she said.
The safety board believes "the engines appear to respond normally" to those commands, Ms. Hersman said, but by then it was too late to recover and portions of the lumbering jet slammed into the sea wall in front of the strip.
Ms. Hersman stressed that there was "no prior distress call" from the cockpit crew, which should have been able to rely on both ground-based and onboard landing aids to "establish an approach path" to safely reach the beginning of the runway.
Since the jet was on a visual approach in excellent weather, "you don't need instruments to get into the airport" safely, Ms. Hersman said.
In another significant disclosure, she said investigators "haven't identified any specific similarities" between Saturday's crash and the 2008 belly landing of another Boeing 777, operated by British Airways, on final approach to London's Heathrow International Airport. Investigators determined the British jet's engines were starved of fuel after chunks of ice blocked its fuel system. There were no fatalities. The incident prompted changes to the 777's fuel systems.
Taken together, the preliminary data and Ms. Hersman's early description strongly suggest investigators are leaning away from mechanical or other system failures as the likely culprit.
There were three other pilots on the flight, the Asiana spokesman said. None sustained any significant injuries, said people familiar with the situation.
After spending the night at the airport, the pilots checked into a San Francisco hotel Sunday. NTSB and Korean investigators tentatively scheduled interviews with the crew for Monday.
The last major U.S. air accident occurred in 2009, when a Bombardier Dash-8 Q400 flown by regional carrier Colgan Air crashed on approach to Buffalo Niagara International Airport, killing 50 people.
At a news conference in Seoul midafternoon Sunday, Asiana President Yoon Young-doo and a group of executives bowed in apology. Mr. Yoon called the accident "regretful."
The airline doesn't believe the accident was caused by an engine or mechanical problem, Mr. Yoon said, but added that all facts related to the investigation would be announced by the NTSB.
One issue likely to come under review by investigators is the overall experience and hand-flying skills of the pilots, who couldn't rely on all elements of an airport instrument-landing system as a backstop.
Since last month, pilots landing at the busy airport have been warned that one type of approach aid has been temporarily turned off while work is under way to improve the strip. Alternate ground-based aids were functioning as the Asiana jet descended with both engines on idle.
In the cockpit, according to investigators and industry safety experts, there also should have been alerts if a landing plane is descending too quickly or its trajectory threatens to take it short of the runway threshold.

Enlarge Image

Close

If onboard flight-control and speed management systems were working normally as the safety board suggests, then "guidance was available to the crew" about an approach that was becoming dangerously slow and low, said safety consultant John Cox, a former airline pilot and accident investigator.
While visual approaches typically don't require any assistance from instrument-landing systems, safety experts said some airlines prefer to have pilots rely on them as an additional safeguard under nearly all circumstances.
Investigators also are expected to examine if pilot fatigue or flight-control problems contributed to the accident, and whether air-traffic control instructions may have been a factor.
The aircraft should have been flying roughly 100 or 150 feet above the airport's surface when its tires or tail apparently smacked into a stretch of the sea wall and the jet began breaking apart, experts said. Large pieces of the tail section and scrape marks were visible near the sea wall, and both left and right portions of the landing gear were found hundreds of yards away from the main wreckage.
Despite the Asiana jet losing both left and right landing gear, its rear bulkhead, portions of the wings and at least one engine, early reports indicated that the crew and airport emergency officials quickly evacuated most passengers, before an intense fire melted its aluminum skin and left a giant gash replacing what had been the top half of the middle of the fuselage.
The Boeing 777 has had a nearly unblemished record, and previously was among a small group of long-range jets from Boeing and Airbus to have never sustained a fatality in passenger service.
The worst U.S. accident before the 2009 Colgan crash came in 2001, when an American Airlines Airbus A300 went down shortly after taking off from John F. Kennedy International Airport, killing 265 people.
—William Harless, Jason Dean, Cassandra Sweet, Jon Ostrower, Alastair Gale, Kanga Kong and Liyan Qi contributed to this article.

A version of this article appeared July 7, 2013, on page A1 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Pilot Error Examined in Crash.

Copyright 2012 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved