US Airways flight 1549 goes down in Hudson Rive

[Mitch Cronin]

You know what it is?... If Cap'n Sullenberger didn't do his job, they could all be dead... but he did his job. He did it right. He did exactly what he should be expected to do. [can't make it to an airport, do you drop it into buildings somewhere, or do you ditch it in that big long flat river that's almost right under you and has lots of people around to pluck you out?] He's not a hero, he's just a pilot whose been trained to look after things as best as they can be looked after, and he did so. You'd probably all do the same, given the same deck of cards.

Airline pilots are not overpaid button pushers. They are all highly trained professionals.

...and besides, they're gonna save their own butt, so the rest get to ride along.

Same for the flight attendants. They did a great job. ...exactly as they needed to.

Good to see another case where the cabin crew performed beautifully under the pressure of a real emergency.

And that's what ya'll get paid the big bucks for, ain't it?

[chockalicious]

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX I feel that I have the right to add my two cents worth to XXXXX  XXXXXXXXX comments  in his writeup on the flight of US Airways 1549 as referenced above, which appeared in your most recent email newsletter of January 16th, 2009. Please feel free to publish this under opposing points of view, if you so choose as I feel the article proper to be rather overly prejudice in favor of the Captain and to him alone in its overall content. In fact, I hope that you might also send this out as I may be seriously missing something here and I don't want to be..!.

Although, like everyone else, I too am very glad that there was no loss of life along with little or no injury, etc., in this incident. But, for me at least, the seemingly never ending media attention this has been getting has grown a bit nauseous for a few reasons. May I also humbly suggest that some of the success of this outcome can be attributed to plain old good luck and opportunity of the day. That, rather than the great, quote/unquote, "skills", of the Captain.

Assuming that both engines actually blew, which is a rare occurance, that rather than, in the mist of the confusion, one of them didn't get inadvertently shut down. Which I hesitate to be even saying  here. However, we all know, that there are documented cases where some, "less skilled pilots perhaps", have done just that. But apart from all of that, the weather that day had also co-operated and, as I understand it, you could see for miles. That, very obviously, being very much a contributing factor to the success of it all and hardly something that can be attributed to the skill and airmanship of the Captain. We must all wonder what the final outcome might have been if there had been a lot of cloud cover that day?.

As the author of your article would suggest, we all shiver at the thoughts of a water landing in a jet aircraft and indeed we all do. But if confronted with no other choice but landing on a river instead of a cabbage patch somewhere, I'm wondering if the Captain here didn't have many miles of very wide river to choose from? Albeit some of which may have had bridges or other obstacles, perhaps? But, since water landings are something we never practice in real life, all we can do is what the manuals would suggest and, in this case, the Captain got blessed with a very good measure of luck in doing so. To me at least, there were much higher degrees of skill, (along with some luck, no doubt), to be pondered when we think of Captain Pearson and his First Officer in Gimli incident, many years back. That, not to mention, the Air Transat Captain and FO who glided many miles to safe outcome in the Azors, both of which were at airports and, in the latter case, it was in the middle of the night.

Also, lest we all forget, "Captain Perfect", in this case also had a First Officer who, "presumably", wasn't sitting on his hands on that day, albeit a snotty nosed, "30 year old", perhaps . But I don't see him, (or her?), receiving any such acclamations in all of this media hoopla that's been going on since the event. We must also not forget that there were flight attendants onboard as well who, we must assume, were instrumental in that successful water evacuation without loss of life. Even though your author, along with the media, to me at least, seems to be subtly suggesting that the Captain did it all single handedly. Whatever happended to commending good old crew team concept here..?

I don't want to touch on the mandatory retirement issue as expressed in his newsletter article, except to say, hey, we can't all stay forever, can we! All of our personal financial situations, etc., at retirement being set aside, there are younger people who want, (and even deserve), our jobs. After over 30 years in the business myself, I learned a long time ago that many, (if not most), of these, so referenced, "30 year old pilots", are a whole lot more keen, up to date and knowledgeable than us, much older, types who have grown just simply a bit complacent and lazy, etc., over the years.  With all of our, "silver hair of experience, trimmed mustaches of precision and our twinkly fatherly eyes", etc., all notwithstanding. Wow; where did your author ever come up with that one and, I am, quite frankly, taken back by what I perceive to be such a lopsided take on it all here.

Geez...sour grapes or what? Always a rat turd in the rice.

[Maverick]

He's not a hero, he's just a pilot whose been trained to look after things as best as they can be looked after, and he did so.

I couldn't have said it better.

A "hero" does something to save others without regard to self. He saved is own a$$ along with the other folks onboard and good on 'em!

But, he ain't no "hero" any more than the ferry captain was for doing what any of us would have done in the same situation.

A "hero", by my definition has a choice between doing, or not doing something where

their own safety is then jeopardized.

I'm not disputing that he did a great job just the media for their overblown use of superlatives...

[BoomerPete]

...and not only did it hold together for that, but it's still pretty darned together I reckon more than a few people are re-examining their anti-Airbus prejudices these days.

320's are good little airplanes!

Mitch,

Pretty impressive seeing that A320 sitting on the barge looking like it's all ready to go at it again, isn't it?

There are a lot of folks who have a reflex habit of knocking the Airbus product as a "plastic plane" and not built tough like a Boeing, but we now have two recent examples of the Airbus product doing exactly what it was designed to do in an unfortunate situation and lives being saved as a result.

Do you recall watching the Air France A340 burn off the end of 24L? I sure do (on tv being out in here in YVR) and I thought that a serious loss of life had to be inevitable. But, the airplane did what it was designed to do, failing in ways that did not inhibit survivability and amazingly everyone came out in one piece. Same goes with this bird ... a combination of good piloting and good design permitted everyone to survive what could easily have been a deadly ordeal.

Now everybody is praising the captain and he surely deserves his kudos, but who's praising the designers and engineers who had to consider all these problems when they were designing and building the bird?

I think all of our passengers, and especially those of us who earn our living by flying aircraft or making them fly, owe a tip of the hat to those folks who are responsible for designing aircraft that give us a decent chance even when the worst things happen.

So, three cheers for Jean-Guy Airbus!

Pete

[Fester]

We allknow there were a hell of a lot of 'heroes' involved in the successfull outcome of this ditching. Of course Lady Luck was there. But for people to suggest they shut down the wrong engine, or what if the wx had been crap, or what if there were bridges or or or......just takes away from the man and his moment. Let's embrace a guy 'just dong his job'. He had is few seconds of sheer terror amongs the hours of pure boredom. Let him enjoy his moment in the sun. Sheesh!

[Vsplat]

Not surprising, this thread is attracting a lot of attention. And for good reason. It describes why we do what we do. when it counts.

I would like to speak to the 'hero' thing. Like many here, I was an instructor for part of my career. There were many, many times I saw a student do exactly the right thing in training, then something completely different when surprised. How many multi-instructors had a trick to make an engine cough to see if their student would stick to the drill? (Of course, with a hand at the ready just in case they wanted to join the double hush club)

So, to me anyway, there is a big difference between doing it right in training, and doing it right over NYC when surprised and having your senses assaulted by multiple bird strikes. It has been said that a hero is an ordinary person who does something extraordinary. Being trained to do what he did made him an ordinary pilot. Doing it right under the conditions, as well as he did make him an extraordinary one.

In my opinion

Vs

[handyman]

Who gives a crap about this hero stuff...he did his job and did it well! Nuff said!

I would however like to hear him speak on the actual landing and his technique used as he first touched the water. Was it an increasing pressure on the controls or did the aircraft just grab and drag itself in?

[blues deville]

I think everyone involved with this incident can be classified as a hero. Check out the guy who falls off the wing and is immediately pulled out by a fellow passenger.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9e6_1232166872

The A320 comes into view at about 2:02 from left to right and the camera zooms in to record the action. It almost looks like a training film...

[Specs]

Would the flight crew have even had the time to refer to the QRH procedure(s) or would they have tried a relight?

[Don Hudson]

Specs;

An engine relight drill from the QRH takes about four minutes or so to read through and do. The ditching drill assumes a planned ditching where time is available and would take about 5 minutes to complete. The Dual Engine failure "If Ditching Anticipated" drill would take about three minutes assuming no other distractions such as ATC asking for fuel, SOB's and intentions and coordinating with the cabin. It is different than the ditching drill in that it focusses on the approach speeds and cabin preparation. Approach speed here would have been approximately 155kts or so (60k kg's) at Config 3.

Given that it would take take a least one minute to pull the QRH out and find the drill(s) (after deciding which one to do first, starting engines or ditching, because time constraints are quickly going to preclude one of them) and then stated time to read and do, it is doubtful that either checklist could be completed.

Canadi>n had a superb notion in their "SNEL" drill - Short Notice Emergency Landing - mainly for the F/A's to prepare the cabin - not sure what was done for the SOPs up front but there is an active dialogue on this going on in the ACPA forum, (it isn't just for planning industrial actions and plotting against management, a view some here are stuck in). It will be interesting to see how it unfolds - the reliance perhaps has always been that circumstances are so varied that those and airmanship/experience would dictate the course of action.

[Fido]

Was the man a hero?

Not for his extremely good airmanship and extreme good luck. The man is a hero because he walked up and down the aisles of the aircraft making sure that everyone was off the airplane.

The Captain was the last man off the ship.

[Specs]

Thanks Don. I asked which would they have done first and then came to the same answer - with the amt of time they had - neither. It would have been - fly the glider and manage the situation as best they could. Would love to hear the CVR on this. I imagine it's gonna be a great learning study.

[Don Hudson]

Somewhere, perhaps even here, I read Bob Hoover's advice on forced landings..."Fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible". I think that advice was demonstrated here. The airplane was a tricycle-gear machine with the two engines and tail sharing the initial touchdown load, which of course very swiftly presented a large frontal surface buried in water. Great energy absorption by the left engine and rear fuselage.

Perhaps a similar thread can be started here, just to plumb everyone's notions of "how to do a SNEL"?

[Mitch Cronin]

It has been said that a hero is an ordinary person who does something extraordinary.  Being trained to do what he did made him an ordinary pilot.  Doing it right under the conditions, as well as he did make him an extraordinary one.

I've got a big problem with that. Only the "extraordinary" ones could do it right?

I don't think that's what the traveling public expect. That's not what they pay for, and I reeeealy hope that's not the case.

If you are right... if "ordinary" pilots couldn't have successfully ditched the damn thing, in that great big river... then just what is it they're getting paid for? All those hours of boredom in between the moments of terror that they won't handle properly? I can't believe that. Nor do I think he deserves any special praise for making sure everyone was out, and being the last one out himself... He's the flippin' captain and that's his flippin' job!

Remember why it is we still have pilots on these things eh? The machine can handle the ordinary just fine all by itself. If the extraordinary circumstances can't be handled properly by the ordinary pilot, then we should park all the damned airplanes until they can find a better batch of pilots. Or, maybe your training sucks and you should find ways to improve it right quick?

I don't want to take anything away from Captain Sully there... the man did his job well. Thank goodness he did! But if that's extraordinary then I guess the rest of you are just overpaid button pushers.

[Canus Chinookus]

What did the boys on that BA 777 flight do on that crash? Did they have even half the time, the USAir crew had?

[AME]

I've got a big problem with that. Only the "extraordinary" ones could do it right?

I don't think that's what the traveling public expect. That's not what they pay for, and I reeeealy hope that's not the case.

If you are right... if "ordinary" pilots couldn't have successfully ditched the damn thing, in that great big river... then just what is it they're getting paid for? All those hours of boredom in between the moments of terror that they won't handle properly? I can't believe that. Nor do I think he deserves any special praise for making sure everyone was out, and being the last one out himself... He's the flippin' captain and that's his flippin' job!

Remember why it is we still have pilots on these things eh? The machine can handle the ordinary just fine all by itself. If the extraordinary circumstances can't be handled properly by the ordinary pilot, then we should park all the damned airplanes until they can find a better batch of pilots. Or, maybe your training sucks and you should find ways to improve it right quick?

I don't want to take anything away from Captain Sully there... the man did his job well. Thank goodness he did! But if that's extraordinary then I guess the rest of you are just overpaid button pushers.

[Jumpy]

What's really interesting is that the same aircraft suffered compressor stalls two days before....

Incident: US Airways A320 near Newark on Jan 13th 2009, compressor stall

By Simon Hradecky, created Tuesday, Jan 20th 2009 00:22Z, last updated Tuesday, Jan 20th 2009 00:23Z

A US Airways Airbus A320-200, registration N106US performing flight US-1549 from New York La Guardia,NY to Charlotte,NC (USA), experienced compressor stalls while climbing towards cruise altitude abeam Newark. The crew considered to divert, but decided to continue the flight to destination, where the airplane landed without further incident.

Passengers reported, that they heard a series of loud bangs as the airplane was just passing Newark Airport. The cabin crew said in an announcement, that they'd turn around to La Guardia to check out, what had happened. About 10 minutes later the captain announced, that it was compressor stalls, nothing unusual, and that they'd continue to destination.

The airplane subsequently climbed to FL360 for an eventless further flight.

N106US was the same airplane, that was ditched in the Hudson River two days later following multiple bird strikes and total loss of engine power while performing the same flight US-1549.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/USA1549...2005Z/KLGA/KCLT

[Specs]

I've got a big problem with that. Only the "extraordinary" ones could do it right?

I don't think that's what the traveling public expect. That's not what they pay for, and I reeeealy hope that's not the case.

If you are right... if "ordinary" pilots couldn't have successfully ditched the damn thing, in that great big river... then just what is it they're getting paid for?

I don't know about that Mitch. He had to make a landing few have ever attempted and even fewer have made successfully. Was it extraordinary? I don't know - he certainly did set the standard.

The truth is that while the design may make something possible, a lot of other factors need to line up to take advantage of the design.

He had no script to follow. No checklists applied for a dual failure right after takeoff. At the critical moment, and that's all he had - a moment - based on his yrs of experience in the navy, his gliding experience, his professional safety and training activities, his knowledge and experience on type, this Commander's experience allowed him to make a life and death decision based upon a reasoned and realistic expectation of abilities and outcomes. He accepted the risks and he beat them. I find that extraordinary.

Many others would have have balked at ditching simply on principle. Many would have tried to RTB, or make Teterborough, some might have turned upriver, some might have got fixated on a relight until it was to late, or even have tried for a forced landing on a road or in a park. Would the outcome have been any better. I doubt it. Lets face it - you can't do any better than having everybody walk away.

[DEFCON]

“A "hero" does something to save others without regard to self. He saved is own a$$ along with the other folks onboard and good on 'em!

But, he ain't no "hero" any more than the ferry captain was for doing what any of us would have done in the same situation.

A "hero", by my definition has a choice between doing, or not doing something where

their own safety is then jeopardized.”

I'm with Fido.

The man was in a plane that could reasonably be expected to go straight to the bottom at any second, yet he was nothing short of courageous in conducting a thorough exploration of the cabin, twice! I also note; his searches took place in "ice" cold water that was at least waste deep.

I doubt there’s many a man out there today that’s capable of demonstrating a similar degree of moral conviction & character!

[handyman]

I don't know about that Mitch. He had to make a landing few have ever attempted and even fewer have made successfully. Was it extraordinary? I don't know - he certainly did set the standard.

The truth is that while the design may make something possible, a lot of other factors need to line up to take advantage of the design.

He had no script to follow. No checklists applied for a dual failure right after takeoff. At the critical moment, and that's all he had - a moment - based on his yrs of experience in the navy, his gliding experience, his professional safety and training activities, his knowledge and experience on type, this Commander's experience allowed him to make a life and death decision based upon a reasoned and realistic expectation of abilities and outcomes. He accepted the risks and he beat them. I find that extraordinary.

Many others would have have balked at ditching simply on principle. Many would have tried to RTB, or make Teterborough, some might have turned upriver, some might have got fixated on a relight until it was to late, or even have tried for a forced landing on a road or in a park. Would the outcome have been any better. I doubt it. Lets face it - you can't do any better than having everybody walk away.

I feel like puking!

[mo32a]

I have $100 that says "Sully" will be mentioned in Obamas speech tomorrow.

[Don Hudson]

I have a hundred that says Joe the Plumber won't be mentioned, thaaaaank heaven.

[Mitch Cronin]

Obama! Now there's an extraordinary man!

[handyman]

Obama! Now there's an extraordinary man!

and we have the white version right here in Canada!

[GDR]

Flight Attendants get praise as they should