Return to Transcripts main page


Continued Coverage of the San Francisco Airliner Crash; NTSB News Conference Regarding Preliminary Findings; Plane Flying Below Target Airspeed; George Zimmerman Murder Trial; The Crash Caught on Camera

Aired July 7, 2013 - 17:00   ET


DEBORAH HERSMAN, NTSB DIRECTOR: 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, on the flight data recorder as well as that 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.


HERSMAN: If I could ask you to raise your hand to be acknowledged and to identify yourself and your outlet it makes this a lot easier. Yes, sir?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: (INAUDIBLE) And then also -- can you explain further what that stick shift means and what the go around --

HERSMAN: 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 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?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER: (INAUDIBLE). Based on those reportings you just explained, are you finding preliminary findings pointing to pilot error?

HERSMAN: The question is, based on the information we briefed today, are we finding pilot error? What I will tell you is that 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 make sure that we gather all the perishable evidence and the 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.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. Steve (INAUDIBLE) from 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?

HERSMAN: 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 I will you that 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.


HERSMAN: Yes, ma'am?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER: (INAUDIBLE). So now there are two -- in this action. So are you (INAUDIBLE).

HERSMAN: 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 treated with respect. And 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 --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: (INAUDIBLE). I would like to know, are you looking at the other incident of a 777 at Heathrow and are there similarities you are seeing right now of those two. Was there is a problem that you're aware of in that incident.

HERSMAN: Sure. Could you identify yourself.


HERSMAN: Hi, Steve.

The question was about previous event that it occurred where there was another haul loss involving a 777 at Heathrow and whether or not we have evaluated that event and identified similarities with this event. I will tell you 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.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: Seems like you're hedging against mechanical failure. Is that right? What if any role is Boeing playing right now?

HERSMAN: The question is, it seems as if we're hedging against any mechanical failure and what role is Boeing playing right now? I will tell you everything is on the table right now. It is too early to rule anything out. I would ask you all to make sure to report the facts and make sure that the public is well informed. We will 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.

Boeing 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.


HERSMAN: Sure. There's two questions. The first question is we mentioned the national of the victims. I would like to mentioned that that is not something that the NTSB did. 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.

NTSB did not do victim ID 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 as long as it takes to get our work done. We often tell people it takes 12 to 18 months to complete an investigation. However, what will I 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?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: (INAUDIBLE). Are there cameras on the runways and are there always recording? Have you seen that footage or -- (INAUDIBLE )

HERSMAN: Sure. And 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 it is 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 that they believe would be helpful to our investigators that they can submit that. That information can be submitted if you go to our Web site, 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 and we very much appreciate that information.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: (INAUDIBLE). Can you identify who was flying the airport or cabin and first officer or someone else?

HERSMAN: The question was, who was flying, who was the pilot flying the aircraft, the captain or first officer or someone else, and I do not 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.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: (INAUDIBLE). If that's the case, does that not suggest -- there was another enough speed to make a proper landing?

HERSMAN: The question is 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. And 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.


HERSMAN: 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, no it don't. 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 from 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 glide slope was out. The localizer was not out. They do, though, we have talked about the path (ph) lights or 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, VNAV, LNAV guidance take in. This is using 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.


DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: OK. 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 side of your screen, on the right of the screen, that's exclusive video in to CNN of that crash. We are not going to play it all for you in its entirety because -- it will be up on the screen, but I want to bring in Richard Quest.

Richard, you're with me?


LEMON: OK. Richard --

QUEST: Information --

LEMON: 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 she went back and she was questioned about it. And she said it was significantly below 137 knots. Did you hear that?

QUEST: Yes, I did. And 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 correlate it to what she said and to what the way she described it, and running it from the beginning, basically, according to what Deborah Hersman said, this -- they called for increased power seven seconds before the impact.

LEMON: Right.

QUEST: So, that's roughly nine seconds in to the video. I'm watching the video in realtime now and it 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, and 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.

LEMON: Richard Quest? Richard Quest, I want to go through a few points and have you respond to them, right?

QUEST: Sure.

LEMON: To make it as clear and concise to the viewer as possible.

OK. 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 14 hours -- 24 hours of information.

QUEST: Correct.

LEMON: 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. And 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 any aircraft 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, occurs approximately 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. They go around the airport and they land again.

So Richard, 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?

QUEST: 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. You put a bit of trust. You push flash bit forward, the engines (INAUDIBLE) It takes a few second, whatever for them to spool forward. But if they were 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. And 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 aeronautics are broken in some way. What we need to know is why were they broke the laws? Why were they land? Why were they slow? And 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 that people looking at as well as the sheer nuts and bolts of what took place.

LEMON: Richard, when it's a travel advance a few seconds prior to impact, is it the throttle was at idle. Air speed slow below the target air speed. What is she saying?

QUEST: Well, when a plane comes in to land, you don't need much thrust. You are gliding it down. So, you retard the throttles all way down to what is known as flight idle and then literally just turning over that producing enough thrust for control of the aircraft.

At any given point, you can push thrust speed. The thrusters are what people think of as the throttles. You can push them forward. You can firewall them all the way and the engines will spool up quite quickly but it takes a couple of seconds to do it. And 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 because we know from the stick shaker and they literally -- I mean, the engines at flight idle. So, to go from flight idle to total power would take a couple of second and that's what we didn't have.

LEMON: 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.


LEMON: We have exclusive new video of flight 214's final seconds. Let's play it for you now.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Look at him. Hmm. Yes. Yes, he does. Look at that one! Look how his nose is up in the air. Oh my God! Oh, it's an accident!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You're filming it, too. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh my God!



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You're filming it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh my God. Oh my God. Oh my God.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You filmed the whole thing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh Lord have mercy.


LEMON: 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, apparently seven second prior to impact, there 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 this network and he has done it extensively for years now and also Dan Rose is here with me in New York. He joins me. He is a current pilot and aviation attorney and you flew for --


LEMON: For the Navy, as well.

OK. We are going to speak to Dan in just 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.

QUEST: Well, absolutely. Absolutely. Don, run the video while -- because I can see the video, as well. If we run it together, you can get an idea looking at the time scales. So, 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. But then --

LEMON: Richard, I want to tell you, as you're describing this, you are a few seconds behind. You are a on a bit of a delay so it's not exactly matching up to what you are saying, but proceed. QUEST: 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 but it's too late. The plane is flying way too slow. Deborah Hersman admits -- she 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, at 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. And I think that although we talk about survivable accidents, Don, looking at the pictures it is an extraordinary event that it was survivable.

LEMON: A hundred and thirty-seven 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.


HERSMAN: During the 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.


LEMON: Dan Rose, what does that mean?

ROSE: Well, this is a classic what we call a low and slow approach. That the aircraft is too low 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.

LEMON: You said equivalent to what in driving?

ROSE: Well, when she said the power, the throttle at idle, it just means that the as if you had the foot off the gas on a car and it is just cruising and just trying to make it to a point and you're not giving it power. That's what it means.

LEMON: This is the most we've heard from any of the investigators, the National Transportation Safety Board. This along with this video provide -- gives us a unique insight into 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 because we don't want to give you the wrong information but she is stressing, she's saying significantly below a certain air speed.

ROSE: Right.

LEMON: And so if you're listening to that as an aviation attorney and as a pilot, what are you assessing?

ROSE: Well, significantly low means about 30 percent lower than the air speed that he should be at. That's when the aircraft is going to stop flying and actually 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's a very 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 is to come on with the power -- full power.

LEMON: Go --

ROSE: Yes. Take off and go around power which is full power and had they had done that, whether or not they would have been able to go around they certainly would have landed in a better position.

LEMON: Look at this video right here. What is this saying to you? This looks like the edge of that runway, right?

ROSE: Right.

LEMON: That it hits just before. Can you tell from this video when that tail section breaks off? Because it still seems to be there and then when it goes past this other plane it appears to be gone.

ROSE: Yes.

LEMON: And then this. Look at that.

ROSE: Yes. That's what I think the passengers have described some of them as a cartwheel. You can see that wasn't really a cartwheel but certainly one of the wings was still flying and kind of got airborne and then came back down.


ROSE: But in terms of when the tail came off, you can't really see it precisely here. I mean, there's really no dispute whether, you know, it came off in this second or that second. At the end of the day it's not going to make a difference, I don't think. We know that it impacted the ground and really the answer that I think everybody is looking for is why did it even 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 training. You have to look at the airline's procedures and policies. You have to look at how the aircraft was handled beforehand. Maybe by air traffic control. 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.

LEMON: You can look at this video because there were -- you know, 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.

ROSE: Yes. I mean, I think Deborah Hersman and the NTSB are doing the exact right thing. Doing a meticulous job and not jumping to conclusions until you completely identify and 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 was starting to come on.

So I think it's a fair assumption to make that you're not going to find a problem with the engines.

LEMON: True.

ROSE: But I don't think you can just cross that T.

LEMON: Yes. Yes. Yes. Until then -- until they -- the investigation is complete.

ROSE: Right.

LEMON: 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 talked to me about his experience when he saw this. We'll get that to you on the other side of this break.


LEMON: Hello, everyone. I'm Don Lemon. We're talking about the crash of Flight 214. Exclusive new video of the final seconds. Let's play it for you now.


FRED HAYES, RECORDED ASIANA AIRLINES CRASH: Look at him. Hmm. Yes. Yes, he does. Look at that one. Look how his nose is up in the air. Oh my god. It's an accident.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You are filming it, too.

HAYES: Oh, my god.


HAYES: Oh, my god.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You're filming it.

HAYES: Oh, my god. Oh, my god. Oh, my god.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You filmed the whole thing.

HAYES: Oh, Lord, have mercy. (END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: 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're not going to go far away from the story but I just have to give you a very quick update. So bear with us. We'll get back to that video and the gentleman who shot it in just a moment.

But first, other news now. The man behind the NSA leaks Edward Snowden still looking for asylum. He has some possible options now from three left-leaning Latin American countries. Since Friday he's gotten offers from Venezuela and Bolivia and Nicaragua says it is willing to consider it.

The U.S. is staying strategically silent about who should be the next president of Egypt. It has been four days since the country's military overthrow of Mohamed Morsi. His supporters rallied today to get him back into power, only to be met with a mass demonstration against Morsi's return. Since the coup, 30 people have died and 1400 hurt in the clashes along -- among protesters.

The defense will resume its 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, there were 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 now criminal defense attorney Darren Kavinoky and he's in Las Vergas, and then former prosecutor Loni Coombs is in Los Angeles.

Loni, to you first. I'm going to begin with you. The prosecution, did it make a strong enough case?

LONI COOMBS, FORMER PROSECUTOR: You know, it's interesting. This is a hard case for the prosecution. They have to overcome two things. One, they have to be able to show that -- 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 this ill will, hatred or spite at the time he shot.

And at the time that the prosecution closed their case, the defense made this 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's going to happen for the jury in the closing arguments.

And I'll tell you both sides have very strong arguments in this case. It's going to be a very difficult question for the jury.

LEMON: Darren, everyone thought Martin's mom would be the big witness of the week. Then Dr. Shiping Bao -- Bao took the stand and his notes really stole the show. I want you to listen.


DR. SHIPING BAO, CONDUCTED FINAL AUTOPSY ON TRAYVON MARTIN: Yes, yes, yes. I wrote -- I type them myself.

WEST: May I see what you're referring to? May I approach the witness?

BAO: Because I'm puzzled by that. I could not remember the thing and other people can.

WEST: Right. May the witness not answer until I've had a chance to --



WEST: Show me what you're looking at.

BAO: Before this testimony, I told you, I spent hundreds, hundreds of hours. I typed out potential answers to your potential questions. With my notes.

WEST: May I see them, please?

BAO: I rather you do not see. This is my notes. Nobody saw that before.


NELSON: Dr. Bao, if you're going to be reading from your notes, both attorneys are entitled to see what you're reading from.


NELSON: So please allow him to do so.

BAO: No problem.

NELSON: You may approach the witness.

WEST: Perhaps it would be convenient if we make a copy for counsel. I can continue with some questioning and then we can look at them at our leisure.

NELSON: Is that -- people here behind you, you can make a copy if you wish.

BAO: So we can make a copy? It's my -- it's my note. I type myself. Nobody read them before.


LEMON: Darren, what do you make of this? DARREN KAVINOKY, HOST OF DEADLY SINS, ON INVESTIGATION DISCOVERY: Yes, well, Dr. Bao, 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 -- 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 into a succinct narrative, into 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've been doing this over and over and over again. Their opening statement was fantastic. And since then, in my view, they just haven't delivered.

LEMON: All right. Darren Kavinoky and Loni Coombs, thank you.

Our segment was cut short because of the breaking news that we have here. I'm sure you guys will understand. We'll see you back here on CNN soon. Have a great day.

KAVINOKY: See you soon.

LEMON: All right. Now back to our big story. The exclusive new video that shows that moment an Asiana Airlines Flight 214 crashed into the runway. Our aviation experts will analyze the video. They will weigh in. You will hear exclusively from the man who shot this video right after a very quick break.


LEMON: Welcome back, everyone. I'm Don Lemon. Now the latest in that horrific San Francisco plane crash. I want you to take a look at this amazing video that's exclusive to CNN and it shows the moment that passenger plane hit the runway yesterday.


HAYES: Look at that one. Look how his nose is up in the air. Oh my god. Oh, it's an accident.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You are filming it, too.

HAYES: Oh, my god.


HAYES: Oh, my god.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You're filming it.

HAYES: Oh, my god. Oh, my god. Oh, my god.


LEMON: Fred Hayes recorded that video. A few minutes ago I spoke with him.


HAYES: 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 was trying to divert the landing. That's what it appeared to me. And it's 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. And you know, we're just really happy that, you know, it was minimal, you know, and not everybody on the plane lost their life.


LEMON: One hundred and eighty-two people rushed to hospitals around San Francisco. Six of them are 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.

So what caused this Asiana Airlines 777 to slam into the ground, break into 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. He's a retired airline pilot, a captain with 30 years experience in the cockpit.

Jim, thank you very much.

Dan Rose is also here. He's a pilot, former military pilot, and flies privately for himself. He owns his own plane so he knows what he's talking about, as well. He's also an aviation 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 you about this?

JIM TILMON, RETIRED AIRLINE PILOT: Are you talking with me, Don?

LEMON: Yes, Jim.

TILMON: I'm sorry. I just can't hear you. 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. Has nothing to do with all the sophisticated modes and everything else that are available to the 777 pilot. It's a very, very basic thing. You know? Low and slow is not a good thing and you do something to correct that the second you think that might be the case.

It sort of tells me that, you know, the corrective action that was being taken was taken pretty late in the game. I mean, 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, you know, my experience has been in a situation like that, not just add power but pour the power on. You know, it's like, bend the throttle sword. 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 you look at 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 video, the airplane seemed to be operating just fine. Level flight. Below the desired flight path and below the desired air speed.

LEMON: Dan, why did the plane -- when it landed, I mean, crash landed, it didn't immediately catch fire. Why would it catch fire after the landing?

ROSE: Well, there could be a bunch of explanations for that. I mean, 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 looked like the fire kind of transferred itself across the top of the fuselage or just where you see the ducting, you know, for the air conditioning and the bleed air. So it could be that a fire started in one of the engines and the -- that's where that air comes from.

The hot air and the exhaust air is used to provide that air that goes through the cabin. So that very well may have been the source of the fire, but fortunately, you know, the fuel cells themselves seem to have stayed intact and not provided a fire.

LEMON: As you're looking at this, one would think that that's an explosion. But according to the gentleman who shot this, they didn't hear an explosion. And that is, he believes, the dirt from the plane going off the runway.

ROSE: Yes, I think that's right. It has that orange color to it. And we can see from the photographs after the crash where the aircraft landed that it obviously went across the dirt. And that's -- I think he's right. That's what you'd expect to see.

LEMON: I wonder this myself and I see it also on social media. People are asking, you know, this guy is taking video, right? Inevitably when things happen now, you think someone is going to have a picture or video of it somewhere.

ROSE: Right. LEMON: Why aren't there cameras on every single runway.

ROSE: It's a good question. My friends have been asking me that, too. You know, when we're in the Navy, every landing on the carrier was filmed, and reviewed and analyzed. Probably because it has, you know, in commercial operations like this, it's fairly routine. I mean, you -- you know, you really have to scratch your head to think of the last time you had a crash landing like that certainly in the U.S.

So -- but I think that's right. There is no good reason these days if you're going to film a grocery store 24/7, you know, I mean, you probably should have video cameras strategically located at airports to help in understanding what may have happened or more importantly, prevent accidents from happening before they end up like this.

LEMON: Yes, it's interesting. Jim Tilmon, you know, as I even walk around the building at work, and go around one corner, there's a camera, the next corner there is a camera, in the lobby there is a camera, on the street there's a camera. Why not on runways, Jim?

TILMON: There is no good reason for not having cameras there. I can't think of one single good reason for that except that we just haven't done it and somebody probably think as well, you know, they probably use one video from this every 50 years so it is not worth the effort. I think it would be a very good idea, Don.

LEMON: Yes. Has there been any sort of push to do that? Has anyone raised that -- I'm sure, Jim, that people have raised that.

TILMON: Well, I haven't heard it, frankly. And it's one of these things that's very logical and reasonable when everything else, somebody else may wonder if it's practical.


TILMON: I don't know. You know, when you start talking about spending money to do something, you being to have all kinds of other ideas about what its value really would be. And it's -- it's frequency of use would be that sort of thing. So I've never heard of the debate, but it's a reasonable debate to have.

LEMON: Yes. Dan?

ROSE: Yes. I don't disagree with that. I think if, you know, you're looking at the federal government and the FAA cutting back funds in this environment that we live in now and the sequester and all that, I think it would be an uphill battle to have them outfit -- airports all over the country with video cameras.

LEMON: Yes. Hey, Jim, I have a time issue here. So quickly, if you can, what happens next? The NTSB will be looking at this video, no doubt.

TILMON: Well, they'll look at this video but they're going to take all of that and correlate it with the voice recorder and with the flight data recorder. And when you get through, it will be a story that will be complete.

LEMON: All right. Thank you, fellows.

Don't go anywhere. We're going to talk more about this exclusive new video of the crash and what the NTSB had to say about the investigation so far. That's going to happen for you at the top of the hour. First, though, a big men's final at Wimbledon. Stay with us.


LEMON: 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 crash landing and an exclusive interview with the man who shot this video.

We'll have that for you in moments but we want to get some other news in here quickly for you. We're going to talk about Britain. Britons are beaming wildly today. Wildly, too, on two fronts. A native son Andy Murray won the men's single tennis title at Wimbledon. Congratulations to him. That hasn't happened in 77 years.

Andy Murray beat the former champion, Novak Djokovic, in straight eight sets. Murray made it to the final last year before losing to Roger Federer. Remember that? It was heart-breaking. And he won this year.

And it's more than Murray, Britain is very much in the news today because of Kate Middleton, the duchess of Cambridge, is going to have her baby any day now. She is going to pop, as they say. And Britons are taking odds at what she'll have, everything down to the baby's name, the hair color.

Victoria Arbiter joins us now -- it says there from London but she's right here in the U.S.

VICTORIA ARBITER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I'm right here. Imagine that.

LEMON: You're not in London.

ARBITER: I know.

LEMON: But you're from London, right? Are you?

ARBITER: I am. I'm celebrating along with the rest of London today.


LEMON: Give us a reaction to Murray's win.

ARBITER: Just stupendous really but it's funny, it's all in the numbers. It's 7-7, first time in 77 years Virginia Wade, the last British female to win in 1977. So there's something about the number 7 that up-and-comers should be paying attention to.

LEMON: OK. So I hear people are taking bets on what the baby will be. Is it going to be the hair, the name, what is going on here?

ARBITER: You name it. You can even bet if you're feeling particularly prophetic on the future baby's first boyfriend or girlfriend's name, what university they may go to, what their first job may be. So obviously, everyone is getting into the spirit of things. And I think that's what the most fun is here. People are really -- just really trying to enjoy it and get onboard.

LEMON: Where will this baby boy or a girl fallen -- be placed in line for the throne?

ARBITER: We've got Charles, then William, and then this baby. So Prince Harry gets knocked down a peg. I don't think he'll mind too much. Uncle Harry will be there to provide lots of guidance I'm sure. But really what's very exciting this time around is a change in the laws to succession have been changed. So if this child is a girl, this will be the first time in history that she will take precedence over any younger born brothers.

LEMON: And everybody is watching and waiting.

Thank you, Victoria. Again our time is cut shorter because of the breaking news.


LEMON: We appreciate you joining us here on CNN.

ARBITER: Thank you.

LEMON: OK. Thank you very much.

We're going to get back to our breaking news here on CNN. And it's that video that we have been showing you. And it's unbelievable I can't take my eyes off of it. And 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. And all of a sudden they come across this. They catch the actual plane crash as it is happening on videotape to their shock and their surprise. And everyone around them. It appears in the video that 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. And you're in the CNN NEWSROOM.