Skip to main content
Internet Archive's 25th Anniversary Logo

tv   CNN Newsroom  CNN  July 7, 2013 2:00pm-3:01pm PDT

2:00 pm
>> the question was whether or not we had the lowest speed that the crew achieved. i will tell you that the speed was significantly below 137 knots. xxxx we're not talking about a few knots. we still have to corroborate some information. as i mentioned, this was a preliminary mention of the recorders. the 137 knots came from the crew conversation about their approach speed. we have to take another look at the raw data and corroborate it with radar and air traffic information to make sure we have a very precise speed. but again, we are not talking about a few knots here or there. we're talking about a significant amount of speed below 137.
2:01 pm
if i could ask you to raise your hand and identify yourself and your outlet it makes this a lot easier. yes, sir? [ inaudible ] >> and then also -- can you explain further what that stick shift means and what the go around -- >> sure. the question is, could we provide additional explanation about the stick shaker activation and the go around. what i had shared with you was that prior to impact, there was a stick shaker that activated. this is both an oral and a fix call cue to the crew they are approaching a stall. it's called a stick shaker but there's a yolk that the pilots are holding and that yolk vibrates or shakes and it is telling them that a stall is
2:02 pm
approaching. that activated four seconds prior to impact. there was a call out for a go around from one of the crew at 1.5 seconds prior to impact. and the call out is a -- is communication between the crew that they want to go around, that means they want to not land but apply power and go around and try to land again. that call came 1.5 seconds before impact. yes, ma'am? [ inaudible ] >> based on those reportings, are you finding -- preliminary findings pointing to pilot error? >> the question is, based on the information we briefed today, are we finding pilot error? the ntsb conducts very thorough investigations. we will not reach a
2:03 pm
determination of probable cause in the first few days on an accident scene. we want to gather all the perishable information and facts early in the investigation. we have just been here for a few hours. not even a full day yet. we have preliminary information but we have a lot more work to do. we need to interview the crews. we need to interview the first responders. we need to validate the raw data on the flight data recorder as well as on air traffic tapes so we'll be working to do that. >> yes. los angeles. can you tell us and characterize again at what point did something seem to go wrong, from the data recorder first or did it seem to go from the voice recorder? where did sort of a discrepancy enter first? >> the question is, from the information that we have on the flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder, where did things begin to go wrong? and which one occurred first? what we need to do is corroborate the information that we have on both the flight data
2:04 pm
recorder and the cockpit voice recorder to overlay that with the crew's position, their spatial position as they're approaching the runway. there's a lot more work this needs to be done but some of the things that we're seeing on the flight data recorder are mirroring some of the things going on on the cockpit voice recorder. the command for increased throttles or increased power from the engines, we also are seeing a go around request about the same time. >> madame chairman? >> yes, ma'am? >> inaudible ]. >> so now there are two -- in this action. so are you -- t >> the question was about the
2:05 pm
two fatalities. the fatalities did occur yesterday and the question was whether or not we know information about their family members. one of the thing that is we want to do is make sure that we respect those who have lost loved ones in crashes like this. we work very hard to make sure that they have time and they have space for grieving. and that they're stretreated respect. so i would ask all of you to give them that space. i don't have that information. but i will not be sharing it with the press. it's up to the family members to decide if they want to -- >> [ inaudible ] >> are you looking at the other incident of a 777 at heathrow and similarities of those two and a speed problem that you're aware of. >> sure. could you identify yourself. >> steve from -- >> hi, steve. the question was about previous
2:06 pm
event that it occurred where there was another haul loss with a 777 at health row and whether or not we have evaluated that event and identified similarities with this event. in that event, there was some specific issues identified. those issues had to do with slushy or frozen fuel and that aircraft was equipped with rolls royce engines. this aircraft is equipped with pratt and whitney engines. we'll certainly be looking at prior investigations and prior events to see if there's anything to learn from that past work but at this time we have not identified any specific similarities with that cause of the heathrow event but it is early in the investigation. >> seems like you're hedging against mechanical failure. is that right? what if any role is boeing playing right now? >> the question is, it seems as
2:07 pm
if we're hedging against any mechanical failure and what role is boeing playing? everything is on the table. it is too early to rule anything out. i'd ask you to make sure to report the facts and make sure that the public is well informed. we'll share with you factual information. we will not speculate and we'll not draw conclusions if we don't have good, factual information. we are telling you what we know to be true. what we have identified as a concern or a problem and what we're going to follow up on. bioing is a party to the ntsb's investigation. this is a 777 aircraft. they have the best intelligence and the best experience with respect to the production and manufacturer, the type, design of this aircraft and previous problems. we expect all the parties to our
2:08 pm
investigation to cooperate fully. we are having good cooperation from all the entities we're working with. in the back. [ inaudible ] >> there's two questions. we mentioned the national of the victims. we did not do that. that was provided by other entities. the ntsb does not identify victims. we leave that to the experts in the area. the coroner in this case of the county or the medical examiner in other jurisdictions. we don't do victim i.d. in this case and we didn't in this case. the question is how long will our investigation take? i expect we'll be on scene at least a week conducting evidence gathering, interviews and creating factual information. if need be, we'll be here longer. we often tell people it takes 12 to 18 months to complete an
2:09 pm
investigation. however, what i will tell you is if we identify any safety issues that we think need immediate attention, we have the ability to issue safety recommendations at any time. yes, sir? [ inaudible ] >> are there cameras on the runways and always recording? have you seen that footage or -- [ inaudible ] >> sure. i'll defer to the airport officials but we have requested any footage that might be reported on the airport that would record the accident sequence or the aftermath of the accident. we have found in past investigations that video footage, whether surveillance or security video or whether it's video that's provided by the public can be very helpful. and along those lines, we do have an opportunity for -- if anybody has any photos or video
2:10 pm
they believe would be helpful to our investigators that they can submit that. that information can be submitted if you go to our website. www.ntsb.gov. on the left-hand side, you will see information about eyewitness reports. you can click on that link and submit information, videos, photos or you may e-mail it to eyewitnessreport.gov/ntsb and we very much appreciate that information. >> can you identify who was flying the airport or cabin and first officer or someone else? >> the question was, who was flying, who was the pilot flying the aircraft, the captain or first officer or someone else, i don't have the answer to that question but i'll provide it at the next briefing. i'm going to take two more questions. in the back. [ inaudible ]
2:11 pm
>> if that's the case, does that not suggest -- there was another enough speed to make a proper landing? >> the question is, i related from the cockpit voice recorder at seven seconds prior to impact there was a call for an increase in speed. and the question asked me to interpret what that meant. what i'll relay is the factual information on the cockpit voice recorder is a call to increase speed. we are going to be working to corroborate all of the information we have. we would still like to interview the crew and when we do and we have additional information to provide you we will do so. we'll take the last question in the back. [ inaudible ]
2:12 pm
>> the question is, the glide path on runway 28 left was it inoperable and play a role in the crash? i will tell you that the glide path was noted. it was out of service. it was scheduled to be out of service for construction project for an extension of a runway safety area. it was noticed to be out of service june 1st to august 22nd. pilots have available to them a number of options for how to get the plane in, the right speed, on the right approach, on the right path. one of those tools is the glide slope. a glide slope can give you a constant approach to the airport. and it's really looking at an
2:13 pm
approach down. a localizer will line you up on the center line of the runway. the localizer was not out. they do, though, we've talked about the precision approach path indicator lights. these lights will tell the pilots, again, on the vertical if they're too high on the approach or if they're too low. it will also give them an indicator if they are on a glide path to approach. the aircraft also may have some technology that's gps based to allow the pilots to use vertical guidance. rnav, lnav guidance with gps coordinates. again, to establish an approach path for them. finally, this was a visual approach. what a visual approach means is that you can fly it visually.
2:14 pm
you do not need instruments to get in to the airport. again, it was a clear day, good visibility. they were cleared for a visual approach. so we do have a piece of equipment, a glide slope that's out. we have to evaluate whether or not the pilot's used or had available to them other tools in the aircraft or outside of the aircraft that were on the airport property and how they were flying the approach. whether they were using automation. whether they were hand flying. that's information that we have yet to determine and so i would discourage anyone from drawing any conclusions at this point. we will be back. we will provide more factual information. i thank you all for your efforts to get it right. have a good day. >> what time? >> okay. that is deborah hersman, the chairwoman was the national transportation safety board holding a press conference at
2:15 pm
san francisco international airport. as you see there on the right of the screen, that's exclusive video in the crash. it will be up on the screen and bring in richard quest. you're with me? >> yes, i am,en deed. >> okay. richard -- >> information -- >> we did. we did. i want to go over some of it with you right now. let me go through this. the speed she said on the approach. this is what she said according to the cockpit voice recording. right? she said the speed on approach 137 knots and then went back and questioned about it. she said it was significantly below 137 knots. did you hear that? >> yes, i did. we know that it was considerably below that because if you look at other online resources, we know that the speed dropped considerably below 137 knots. but even that would have been on the low side. i mean, we are talking about
2:16 pm
109, 110 knots according to some people so we know that the speed in those last seconds is when the aircraft is already too low the speed was too slow. and if you run the video, the exclusive cnn video, and you corerelate it to what she said and running it from the beginning, basically, according to to what deborah hersman said, this -- they called for increased power seven seconds before the impact. >> right. >> that's roughly nine seconds in to the video. i'm watching the video in realtime now and roughly nine seconds in to the video that we have got that's when the call for power. you sort of see the reaction but it's too late by then. the plane is already at stall speed. three seconds later, 18 seconds in to our video, you have the impact. and we know this now from what
2:17 pm
deborah hersman had said. the stick shaker, i can tell you, i've been in the simulators and i have simulated the stick shaker and it is brutal. this is a very, very aggressive noisy -- sounds like a rattlesnake. >> richard quest? richard quest, i want to go through a few points and have you respond to them. >> right. >> to make it as clear and concise to the viewer as possible. okay. so there's two different recordings. there is the cockpit voice recorder with two hours of information. excuse me. there's the flight data recorder which she said had 24 hours of information. >> correct. >> recorded the entire flight. she said the aircraft was configured for approach based on cockpit voice recording communications between the crew and the cockpit. the speed she said for approach at 137 knots. she initially said that and then questioned about it she said it was significantly below that. approach proceeds normally as they descend. no discussion of anomalies or
2:18 pm
concerns with the approach. a call from one of the crew members to increase speed was made as you said and pointed out here approximately seven seconds prior to impact. the sound of the stick shaker and she clarified and you talked about, richard, four seconds prior to impact. a call to initiate a go around occurred 1.5 seconds before impact and what that means is if you've been on an airplane, overshoot is runway or whatever, that's when you're going -- you're about to land and then all of a sudden -- those engines wind back up and you go back up in to the sky. right? in to the air. that's what a go around is and then you land again. you go around the airport and they land again. in your assessment of doing this, seven seconds prior to impact, to get that plane back up in to the air, it would take a lot of power. is that possible with seven seconds left? >> how long's a piece of string? yes.
2:19 pm
it is possible. but only depending on what their speed was when they're -- i mean, if they were just under the approach speed, then yes, of course, it's possible. push it forward, the engines -- takes a few second, whatever for them to spool forward but if they're significantly below the speed, no -- i mean, only had seconds to go, and to use a little phrase, there is no way to push it all the way forward and go to power and go around is, takeoff, go around, you could push it all the way forward but by that stage, you have a sink rate that's too fast. you have -- the aircraft has stalled so there's not enough left and you physically do not have enough time to recover before impact. that's what happened in the -- now, all of this is the mechanics of how the accident
2:20 pm
happened. what we don't know and deborah hersman continues to say is why it happened. planes crash because the laws of aeronaug aeronautics is broken in some way. why were they low? why were they slow? why did none of them notice that they were clearly low off the glide slope in that's going to be the -- where she talks about the crm, the crew resource management. how was this crew reacting to each other? how were they behaving as a team? those are the sort of things people looking at as well as the sheer nuts and bolts of what took place. >> when it's a few seconds to impact, the throttle at idle. air speed below the target air speed. what is she saying? >> well, when a plane comes in to land, you don't need much thrust. you are gliding it down.
2:21 pm
it's throttles down to flight idle. literally just turning over. producing enough thrust for control of the aircraft. at any given point, you can push it. the thrusters are what people think of as the throttles. you can push them forward. firewall them all the way and the engines spool up quite quickly but it takes a couple of seconds to do it. that's one thing this plane didn't have. there were only a couple of hundred feet if that above the water. they were at stall speed and know from the stick shaker and they literally -- i mean, the engines at flight idle. to go from flight idle to total power would take a couple of second and that's what we didn't have. >> richard, you know, we have been playing this exclusive video you are seeing now and i want you to stand by because i want to talk about that with you as well as with another aviation expert. we're going to play the video for you in its entirety and hear from the man who shot it.
2:22 pm
this exclusive video, my exclusive interview with him. richard quest and other aviation experts back on the other side of this quick break. if you're looking for help relieving heartburn, caused by acid reflux disease, relief is at hand. for many, nexium provides 24-hour heartburn relief and may be available for just $18 a month. there is risk of bone fracture and low magnesium levels. side effects may include headache, abdominal pain, and diarrhea. if you have persistent diarrhea, contact your doctor right away. other serious stomach conditions may exist. don't take nexium if you take clopidogrel. relief is at hand for just $18 a month. talk to your doctor about nexium.
2:23 pm
2:24 pm
we have exclues i new video of flight 214's final seconds. let's play it for you now. >> look at him.
2:25 pm
hmm. yeah. yeah, he does. look at that one! look how his nose is up in the air. oh my god! oh, it's an accident! >> you're filming it, too. >> oh my god! >> oh no! >> oh my god! you're filming it. >> oh my god. oh my god. oh my god. >> you filmed the whole thing. >> oh lord have mercy. >> just look at this. flight 214's final seconds. as we welcome our viewers here in the united states and around the world. i'm don lemon in new york reporting to you this incredible video just in to cnn a short time ago. according to the ntsb, the national transportation safety board, prior to impact, there
2:26 pm
was a call to increase the plane's speed. four seconds before impact the stick shaker sounded. that means there's a warning to the pilots of an imminent stall. 1.5 seconds before impact they tried to abort the landing but it was too late. two 16-year-old girls were killed. the teens from china were headed to a summer camp in the u.s. traveling with dozens of classmates. ready for a summer adventure. i'm joined now by cnn's richard quest who is in london and covered aviation for the network and extensively for years now and dan rose here in new york. a current pilot and aviation attorney and you flew for -- >> flew in the navy. >> for the navy, as well. okay. we'll speak to dan in a moment. richard, we were talking just before the break. as you're watching this video, no doubt this video will be part of the investigation. >> well, absolutely.
2:27 pm
absolutely. don, run the video whilst -- i can see the video, as well. if we run it together, you can get an idea looking at the time scales and if we start the video and you start to see the aircraft -- as it comes in, already the aircraft is too late. it's too late. but just about now is where they call for more power. you see the nose go up ever so slightly. >> richard, as you're describing this, you are a few seconds behind on a bit of a delay so it's not exactly matching up but proceed. >> right. well, on that basis, on those share you seconds we talk about, the seven seconds in, you can see more power coming in and the nose just start to rise ever so gently. again, it's too late. a second and a half when they call for the go around, you can see again the nose starts to arrive as they put the power on
2:28 pm
but it's too late. the plane is flying way too slow. deborah hersman admits -- he says significantly below the speed of 137 knots. we believe it's somewhere 90, 109, 110 so it's considerably slower than it should have been. the stick shaker, what is extraordinary about these pictures and the authorities will be certainly looking at them very closely, is that there were so many survivors because the way this aircraft went down the runway, one point lifting its, watching the nose lift up in to the air, almost vertically and then coming back down again, that anybody survived the impact and the subsequent fire from such a violent trauma is really remarkable. i think that although we talk about survivable accidents, don,
2:29 pm
looking at the pictures it is an extraordinary event that it was survivable. >> 139 knots, about 160 miles per hour approximately 157 miles per hour we're talking about. let's listen to deborah hersman talk about that right now. >> during approach, the data indicate that the throttles were at idle and air speed was slowed below the target air speed. the throttles are advanced a few seconds prior to impact and the engines appear to respond normally. >> dan rose, what does that mean? >> well, this is a classic what we call a low and slow approach. that the aircraft is too low
2:30 pm
coming in for the approach and it's too slow in terms of the air speed and doesn't have enough power to get it to the runway in this case or just barely as we can see but completely unsatisfactorily. >> you said equivalent to what in driving? >> she said the power, the throttle at idle. it's as if you had the foot off the gas in a car and just cruising and just trying to make it to a point and you're not giving it power. that's what it means. >> this is the most we have heard from any of the investigators, national transportation safety board. this along with this video provide -- gives us a unique insight in to what possibly went wrong with this particular plane. very early on. you hear her talking about it. she is not saying -- she said we want to gather as much information as possible. we don't want to give you the wrong information but stressing, saying significantly below a certain air speed. >> right. >> so if you're listening to
2:31 pm
that as an aviation attorney and as a pilot, what are you assessing? >> well, significantly low means about 30% lower than the air speed he should be at. that's when the aircraft is going to stop flying and start crashing. but there were some warning signs to this crew. even in the last seven or nine seconds when the stick shaker comes on as richard pointed out, it is a violent shaking of the control yolk. that's a four seconds before impact. and the golden rule there is that any time you get the stick shaker to come on with the power full power. take off and go around power which is full power and had they done that, whether or not they would have been able to go around they certainly would have landed in a better position. >> look at the video. what is this saying to you? looks like the edge of the runway. >> right. >> just before. can you tell from the video when that tail section breaks off? past this other plane it appears
2:32 pm
to be gone. >> yeah. >> and then this. look at that. >> yeah. that's what i think the passengers have described some of them as a cart wheel. you can see it's not really a cart wheel but one of the wings flying and airborne and came back down. >> yeah. >> but in terms of when the tail came off, you can't really see it precisely here. there's no dispute whether, you know, it came off in this second or that second. end of the day it doesn't make a difference, i don't think. we know that it impacted the ground and the answer is why did it get close to that situation. what went wrong in the approach and even beyond that. you can't just look at the approach. you have to look at the train. you have to look at the airline's policies and procedures, how the aircraft was handled beforehand and you have to look at the aircraft systems and how they interfaced with the pilot on board. there's a lot of automation on that plane. >> you can look at the video.
2:33 pm
we didn't know. was the plane intact when it was coming down? was there something wrong with the rutter? what happened to the engines? the plane appears to be intact until it makes contact with the ground. >> yeah. i mean, i think deborah hersman and the ntsb are doing the right thing. meticulous job not jumping to conclusions until you confirm all the facts. you know? in theory, you could still possibly have something that impacted the engines but she seemed to say that the engines responded properly and power starting to come on. i think it's a fair assumption to make that you're not going to find a problem with the engines but i don't think you can just cross that "t." >> yeah. until the investigation is complete. >> right. >> but just we're looking at the evidence now, listening to what she said and also looking at this unbelievable video that is exclusive to cnn taken by fred hayes. i interviewed fred hayes and he
2:34 pm
talked to me about his experience when he saw this. we'll get that to you on the other side of this break. humans.
2:35 pm
we are beautifully imperfect creatures living in an imperfect world. that's why liberty mutual insurance has your back, offering exclusive products like optional better car replacement, where if your car is totaled, we give you the money to buy one a model year newer. call... and ask an insurance expert about all our benefits today, like our 24/7 support and service, because at liberty mutual insurance, we believe our customers do their best out there in the world, so we do everything we can to be there for them when they need us. plus, you could save hundreds when you switch, up to $423. call... today. liberty mutual insurance -- responsibility. what's your policy?
2:36 pm
i'm don lemon. we're talking about the crash of 214. exclusive new video of the final seconds. let's play it for you now. >> look at him. hmm. yeah. yeah, he does. look at that one! look how his nose is up in the air. oh my god!
2:37 pm
it's an accident! >> you are filming it, too. >> oh my god. >> oh no! >> oh my god. >> you're filming it. >> oh my god. oh my god. oh my god. >> you filmed the whole thing. >> oh lord have mercy. >> that indeed is a big story today. the man who shot that video spoke exclusively to us, as well. my interview with him just moments away. i promise you we won't go far from the story but a quick update. bear with us. we'll get back to the video and the yeah that shot it in a moment. but first, other news now. the man behind the nsa leaks still looking for asylum. he has some possible options from latin american countries. offers of venezuela and bolivia and nicaragunicaragua. the u.s. is silent about who
2:38 pm
should be president of egypt. it's been four days since the overthrow. the supporters were rallying today. since the coupe, 30 people died and 1,400 hurt in the clashls among protesters. the defense will resume the case tomorrow morning in the george zimmerman murder trial after a second week of riveting testimony. in the two weeks of the prosecution's case, nine days of testimony. 38 witnesses. seven statements by george zimmerman. three 911 calls and more than 200 exhibits brought before the court. but was it enough to prove the shooting of trayvon martin stemmed from ill will, hatred, spite or evil intent? joining me is darren kavinoky and lonnie coombs in los angeles. lonnie, beginning with you. did the prosecution make a strong enough case? >> it's interesting. this is a hard case for the
2:39 pm
prosecution. they have to overcome two things. one, they have to be able to show that george zimmerman did not have the right to self defense. and secondly, for the second-degree murder charge they have to be able to show that george zimmerman had an ill will, hatred or spite at the time he shot and at the time that the prosecution closed their case, the defense made a very standard motion for acquittal but they put on an argument like a closing argument for the judge and the prosecution responded and you're really able to see what happens for the your in the closing arguments and both sides have very strong arguments in this case. it's a very difficult question for the jury. >> darren, everyone thought martin's mom would be the big witness of the week. then dr. bo took the stand and really stole the show. i want you to listen. >> are you reading from something that -- >> yeah, yeah, yeah. i type them myself.
2:40 pm
>> may i see what you're referring to? >> because i'm puzzled by that. i could not remember the thing and other people can. >> may the witness not answer until i've had a chance to -- >> yes. >> show me what you're looking at. >> before this testimony, i told you, i spent hundreds, hundreds of hours. i typed out potential answers to your potential questions. with my notes. >> may i see them, please? >> i rather you do not see. this is my notes. nobody saw that before. >> okay. mr. bao, if you're reading from your notes, both attorneys are entitled to see what you're reading from. >> okay. >> so please allow him to do so. >> perhaps it is convenient to make a copy. i can continue with some questioning and look at them at our leisure. >> you can make a copy if you wish. >> so we can make a copy?
2:41 pm
it's my -- it's my note. i type myself. nobody read them before. >> darren, what do you make of this? >> yeah, well, doctor, sorry, they're not your notes, especially if you're using them to refresh your recollection or you're reading from them. this was a failure on so many levels and obviously the judge made the right legal call to turn those notes over to counsel. but from the other aspect of this case, where in my view it was an epic fail on the part of the prosecution is orchestrating their case in to a succinct narrative, in to a through line and a story that people could follow easily, and when you end your case with a whimper rather than a bang, it doesn't bode well for the prosecution and it seems to me they have been doing this over and over and over again. their opening statement was
2:42 pm
fantastic. and since then, in my view, they just haven't delivered. >> all right. darren and loni, thank you. our segment was cut short. i'm sure you understand. >> see you soon. the exclusive new video that shows that moment an asiana airlines flight 214 crashed in to the runway. our aviation experts will analyze the video. they'll weigh in. you will hear exclusively from the man who shot this video right after a very quick break.
2:43 pm
2:44 pm
2:45 pm
back now. i'm don lemon. the horrific san francisco crash. this video is exclusive to cnn and shows the moment that passenger plane hit the runway yesterday. >> look at that one. look how his nose is up in the air. oh my god! oh, it's an accident! >> you are filming it, too. >> oh my god! >> oh no! >> oh my god! >> you're filming it. >> oh my god. oh my god. >> fred hayes recorded that
2:46 pm
video a few minu video. a few minutes ago i spoke with you. >> you know? so i was like look at that guy. the nose is pretty high and so, you know, it was one of those things where, you know, i didn't -- it appeared to me that the pilot trying to divert the landing. that's what it appeared to me. >> kind of surreal. my wife gina, you know, she took it pretty hard. we did. we all did. it was, you know, a tragedy. and our initial reaction was that, you know, everybody on the plane was in bad shape. you know, we're just really happy that, you know, it was minimal, you know, and not everybody on the plane lost their life. >> 182 people rushed to hospitals.
2:47 pm
around san francisco. six of them in critical condition at this hour. two teenagers who were on the plane died but amazingly more than 100 people walked away without a scratch. what caused asiana airlines 777 to slam in to the ground, break in to pieces and catch fire? the flight data recorders are now in the hands of the right people. and they've got a million questions to answer. their investigation might take a long time but it begins today. the chairperson, the chairwoman of the ntsb held a press conference just a short time ago. joining me now is jim tilmon, a retired airline pilot. dan rose is also here, a pilot, former military pilot and flies privately for himself. he owns his own plane and knows what he's talking about, as well. he's also a aif yigs attorney. first to jim on the phone, you have seen this video. is it a valuable tool for investigators right now? what does your experience tell
2:48 pm
you about this? >> are you talking with me, don? >> yes, jim. >> oh, i'm sorry. my experience tells me that he was, quote, low and slow. that simple. the corrective action that you take if you're low and slow is add power. this is very basic airmanship. nothing to do with all the sophisticated modes and everything else that are available to the 777 pilot. it's very, very basic thing. you know? low and slow is not a good thing and do something to correct that the second you think it might be the case. it sort of tells me that the corrective action that was being taken was taken pretty late in the game. you know? with seven seconds from hitting something out there, possibly, and now we're going to add power? i mean, don, i have to tell you, my experience has been in a
2:49 pm
situation like that, not just add power but pour the power on. let's get this thing to a safe place and then deal with whatever else is necessary later. we're going to be listing a number of factors here that may or may not play a role. one of them has to do with the attitude of the pilots. the cockpit management between the pilots and coordination. and the closer that it is pervasive to people that are flying together under these circumstances. and that's going to be very interesting to see what the human factors people come up with when you look at that and the time of day it was or night for that matter. they lose a whole day coming over here like that. and when you look at how much rest they had, all those things, i'm concerned to find what those indicators are because from what i can see on this exclusive
2:50 pm
video, the airplane seemed to be operating just fine. level flight. below the desired flight path. and below the desired air speed. >> dan, why did the plane -- when it landed, crash landed, didn't immediately catch fire. why would it catch fire after the landing? >> could be a bunch of explanations for that. you need the ignition source. if the rupture didn't occur in the fuel cells then you don't have the fuel providing that. it it looked like the flier started in one of the engines and that's where that air comes from. the hot air is used to provide that air that goes to the cabin. that may have been the source of
2:51 pm
the fire, but fortunately, the fuelcells themselves seem to have stayed intact and not provided a fire. >> one would think that's an explosion. according to the gentleman who shot this, he didn't hear an explosion. that is, he believes, the dirt from the plane going off the runw. >> i think that's right. it has that orange color to it. we can see after the crash where the aircraft landed that it obviously went across the dirt. i think he's right. that is what you would expect to see. >> i wonder this myself when i see it and on social media. this guy is taking video inevitably when things happen, you think someone is going to have a video somewhere. why aren't there cameras on every single runway. >> good question. my friends have been asking me that. in the navy, every landing on the carrier was filmed, used and analyzed. probably because it has, and in
2:52 pm
commercial operations like this, it's fairly routine. you have to scratch your head to think the last time you had a crash landing like that. certainly in the u.s. i think that's right. there is no good reason these days if you're going to film a grocery store 24/7, you probably should have video cameras strategically located at airports to help in understanding what may have happened or more importantly, prevent accidents happening before they end up like this. >> it's interesting. jim tillman, as i walk around the building at work, one camera there is a camera, the lobby there is a camera, why not on runways, jim? >> there is no good reason for not having cameras there. i can't think of one good single reason except we haven't done it. they think they use one video every 50 years so it's not worth the effort.
2:53 pm
i think it would be a very good idea, don. >> has there been a push to do that? i'm sure people have raised that. >> well, i haven't heard it, frankly. it's logical and reasonable. somebody else may wonder if it's practical. i don't know. when you start talking about spending money to do something, you have all other ideas what its value would be. its frequency of use would be that sort of thing. i never heard the debate, but it's a reasonable debate to have. >> if you're looking at the federal government and faa cut being back funds in this environment now and the sequester, it would be an uphill battle to have them outfit airports all over the country with video cameras. >> i have a time issue here. if you can, what happens next?
2:54 pm
ntsb will be looking at this video, no doubt. >> well, they'll look at this video. they'll take all of that and correlate with voice recorder and data recorder. when you get through, it will be a story that will be complete. >> thank you, fellows. don't go anywhere. we'll talk more about this exclusive new video of the crash and what the ntsb had to say about the investigation so far. that will happen at the top of the hour. first, a big men's final at wimbledon.
2:55 pm
2:56 pm
this is a big story this hour. the crash landing of flight 214 in san francisco. cnn has exclusive video of the plane coming in and making a
2:57 pm
crash landing and an exclusive interview with the man who shot this video. we want to get other news in here quickly for you. we'll talk about britain. britons are beaming wildly today. andy murray won the men's single title in wimbledon. that hasn't happened in 77 years. he beat novak djokovic in eight sets. he lost to roger federer last year. britain is in the news because of kate middleton the duchess of came bring is going to have her baby any day now. she is going to pop. britain are taking odds what she will have, everything down to the baby's name, including hair color.
2:58 pm
>> i'm celebrating with the rest. it's all in the numbers, 7-7, first time in 77 years virginia wade to win in 1977. there is something about the number "7" up-and-comers should be paying attention to. >> people are taking bets on what the baby will be. the heir, the name, what is going on here? >> you can even bet if you're feeling particularly prophetic on the future baby's first boyfriend or girlfriend name, what their first job may be. obviously, everyone is getting into the spirit of things. that's what the most fun is here. people are really trying to enjoy it and get onboard. >> where will this baby boy or girl be placed in line for the throne? >> charles, william then this baby. prince harry gets knocked down a peg. i don't think he'll mind too much.
2:59 pm
what is exciting is the change of laws to succession have been changed. if this is a girl, it will be the first time in history she will take precedence over any younger born brothers. >> and everybody is watching and waiting. thank you, victoria. our time is cut short because of the breaking news. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. i'll get back to our breaking news on cnn. it is that video we have been showing you. i can't take my eyes off it. i'm sure you folks at home can't either. we learned about this just before 4:00 eastern. the man who shot the video, man and his wife were out just taking a stroll, walking in san francisco looking at the airport and taking pictures. and they are taking video. all of a sudden they come across this. they catch the actual plane crash as it is happening on videotape to their shock and surprise. it appears in the video that
3:00 pm
there is an explosion, but according to the people on the ground there wasn't. what you're seeing is dirt from the plane skidding off the runway into that dirt. it is the top of the hour, everyone. everyone. you're in the cnn newsroom. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com i'm don lemon. the passenger jet that crashed and burned on landing yesterday was going way too slow and flying way too low. this is showing the asiana split. it smashed into the runway, broke into pieces killing two of the more than 300 people onboard that plane. i want you to listen to what the ntsb boss said they learned from the cockpit recordings. >> a call from one of the crew members to increase speed