0 >> 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. 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 ] >> 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 ] >> 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 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. 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 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 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 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 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. 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 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. 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. 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.