United Airlines plane departing Maui plunged to within 800 feet of the Ocean, flight data shows

Thank you. MSNBC assumed the detail was not relevant.

hahaha skivvy issues :D :D :D

Given the wx, they could have hit a microburst out over the water just after takeoff. Reminds me of Delta flight 191 at DFW on August of 1985. I'd just passed directly over DFW about 20 minutes earlier and there wasn't a cloud in the sky around the airport. Not sure if their wx radar (or the airport radar) displayed anything before takeoff or not, but I'll bet they were doing all they could and praying hard :)

I believe the 25000 combined flight hours was a claim from airline's public response, and may be a red herring.

I have not found any public report of HOURS ON TYPE for this 777 crew.

For all we know, many of the claimed flying hours were on Regional jet or narrowbody.

Just .7 G more than a 60 degree bank (in any airplane). Not really that disruptive, I suppose ;-)

If that's the case, the FDR should show it.

That was my first thought

Presumably after this incident the flight crew assessed the health of the airplane, before taking the decision to continue the flight to SFO? Perhaps whether that decision was wise or not was addressed in the reported additional training.

With all the auto systems WHAT IS THE RUSH TO ENGAGE THEM?? Hand fly to 4000" or 6000" then when all is stabilized " Auto pilot A to command" and then what ever is necessary on your type. 17,400 on 747 and more on her types.

Oh do give it a rest. At 25,000 hours these pilots (a) can't be considered unqualified (b) you have absolutely no evidence of exactly who these pilots are and their qualifications or backgrounds.

Thus you are spreading a racist dog whistle based on ZERO knowledge of the actual facts.

Also consider this : for literally hundreds of years white males were given positions that others were way more capable of simple because they were white males and not female/non-white.

https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/2022-01/Spatial%20Disorientation.pdf

Given that a safety report was filed and the pilots received additional training, it would seem the incident did occur.

Must not have bothered to read the article.

Look at the rate chart between 07:50:11 and 07:51:35

I'm wondering the same thing. I too looked at, and fail to see, the descent. Also, a descent and then climb of 1500' in each direction in less than a minute, at rates of over 8000 fpm (roughly 20 degrees down attitude), would have thrown items all over the cabin, likely injured people, and would have had a few hundred passengers saying something to the media the second they walked off the plane at SFO. But I don't recall hearing a thing about this at the time. That doesn't mean nothing happened, or that the crew didn't do something wrong (hence the report). But it also doesn't mean the airplane really actually plunged that low. I'm wondering, and purely speculating, if they didn't like momentarily accidentally change their altimeter setting or something. That could both cause an errant ADS-B reading, and also start to command the aircraft (within normal, less aggressive, flight parameters) to start to try to "correct" to the perceived change in barometric altitude. They would be far from the first pilot to accidentally spin the wrong knob on the autopilot control panel. Not saying that's exactly what happened, but it provides a more plausible explanation as to how a crew error that was momentary and relatively benign could cause some flight trackers to show Mr. Toad's Wild Ride.

Your track log is for the flight from the December 19th -- this is the correct flight:

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL1722/history/20221218/0045Z/PHOG/KSFO/tracklog

But even that doesn't show a descent to 800 feet.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

FA's data sample intervals are much longer than FR.