remains of flight 214 are right now. they were coming in at 103 knots. not 137 knots. 103 was their lowest speed just seconds before they hit the end of the pier here. when they hit the sea barrier wall. so the question investigators are asking is, how could that happen? generally the co-pilot is supposed to be watching the air speed and the descent rate. the pilot is supposed to be watching the actually doing the flying. so was it one captain thinking the other was watching the airspeed and the other one thinking that the other one had it? there s some question about that. they re interviewing the crew in korean and english. they re trying to get some answers to that. there s another tragic twist to the whole story. that is as firefighters responded with a full emergency response on saturday, the fire department says it now believes one of its responding rigs accidentally hit one of those two girls that was out on the
responders on the airport property. some of that we ve already talked about yesterday. i have seen and heard some reports about a 4,000-per-minute 4,000-foot-per-minute descent rate. they have reviewed the radar data. and the group that reviewed the initial faa radar data have indicated that there s no abnormally steep descent curve that s been detected in the data that they have. our power plants team has conducted an on-scene examination of the two engines. they indicate those preliminary evaluations indicate that both of the engines were producing power at the time of impact. and this is consistent with
of all the major airlines, certain checks and balances to monitor and help and assist each other in the flying of the airplane. the pilot flying has certain responsibilities. the pilot monitoring has certain responsibilities. and we have certain protocols that we follow. at a certain point prior to landing at a certain altitude, a certain distance from the runway, we must be stabilized with the wings level at the proper descent rate, the proper speed, the proper altitude all the way from that point to the runway. if we re not, we re required to go around. so we need to find out why they didn t. sully, speaking of that, we have some cnn exclusive video of the moment the plane makes impact. when you talk about being in exactly the right position, the wings level, and certainly in this case the nose, can you react to this as you see what s happening? it s very difficult to tell. i think it certainly looks abnormal. it looks as though the airplane is at a very high angle of attack.
responders on the airport property. some of that we have already talked about yesterday. i have seen and heard some report about a 4,000-foot per minu minute descent rate. the group that reviewed the initial data have indicated that there s no be a normally feet descent that has been defetecte in the data that they have. hour power plant team has conducted an on scene visual of the engines. the primary evaluations indicate both engines were production power at the time of impact. and this is consistent with information that we also see on
medication, like health issues. and so, we will be looking at all of those things to see if there are any impacts on their ability to perform their jobs. joining me now, pilot and aviation lawyer arthur walt. arthur, thanks for being here. i don t remember a case like this of such catastrophic consequences, where on the tip of everybody s tongue, even if they re not saying it, seem to be the words, pilot error. at this early stage, is that your assessment? yes, there s no question about that. this airplane made an unstabilized approach to the airport under beautiful weather conditions. there was no reason for it not to have been stabilized. and what stabilized means is being at the proper speed, the proper descent rate, the airplane configured for landing. and this airplane, for most of that, wasn t any of those things. it was at the improper speed, slow at some point right before the crash. it was fast at other points. it was too high, it was too low,