What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Hats off to the crew of USAirways 1549

Status
Not open for further replies.
DeltaRomeo

DeltaRomeo

doug reeves: unfluencer
Staff member
...for a job well done on landing their A320 on the Hudson after dual engine failure (initial reports) due to bird strikes....and no fatalities (initial reports).

A great example of someone not forgetting to fly the airplane.

If the reports flesh out as true, then Well Done! and hats off to the crew. I suspect if this turns out as initially described this will be taught in ground school as 'how it is done'.

1. If YouTube video of the landing doesn't appear in the next few days I'll be surprised...given where it landed.
2. www.USAirways1549.com was purchased about ten minutes after it hit the news (old I.T. habit)
3. I hope if in an engine out situation I do half as well....


News reports:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/15/new.york.plane.crash/index.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,480078,00.html
 
Last edited:
Agreed....

A phenomenal job of "fly the airplane." Glad to see one of these turn out so well.
 
Agreed, well done and as certainly as good an outcome as could be hoped for.

Im curious about one thing - do you suppose putting the plane down IN the river was intentional? Certainly reduces fire hazard, but of course there are downsides. I dont know the local area - perhaps it was more a matter of minimizing the potential for injuries/deaths to those on the ground in the area.

erich
 
erich weaver said:
Agreed, well done and as certainly as good an outcome as could be hoped for.

Im curious about one thing - do you suppose putting the plane down IN the river was intentional? Certainly reduces fire hazard, but of course there are downsides. I dont know the local area - perhaps it was more a matter of minimizing the potential for injuries/deaths to those on the ground in the area.

erich
Click to expand...

The River WAS the best place!
Skyscrapers on the left, congested homes on the right. Some would argue that the outcome on water with ready boats and ferries, is better than if the landing was on a wide open unprepared field-little chance of fire, no divets to rip things off, etc. Remember right after takeoff, full fuel and no time to dump. I'm glad this pilot did not have an irrational fear of water.
 
Like DR said, and not matter what happened in the cabin, they remembered to fly the airplane.
 
chunt0 said:
Now we know where Osama has been hiding. He's been in Canada training suicide geese.
Click to expand...

Now that's funny!! And lets not judge...I read passenger reports that said both engines were on fire...who knows and who cares...great airmanship regardless...but how coincidental that is was on the coldest day of the year in NYC.
 
Just got home under Hudson River

Working in the City, living in Jersey. Tunnel was a bit stalled. Still lots of activity on the river. Helis, boats, police force on both river banks. Man those guys are professionals. To put that mass down safely. Hats off.
 
Any Other Successful Ditchings?

I believe it is rare for conventional passenger jets with low wings and underwing engine nacelles to ditch successfully. When they hit the water the engines dig in and the structure comes apart. Someone was watching over them today.

As to shutting down the wrong engine - there was a case in the UK about 20 years ago at Kegworth where a crew shut down the good engine on an emergency approach to East Midlands airport and crash landed short on the M1 motorway. They weren't so lucky as many on board perished.

Jim Sharkey
 
Last edited:
jsharkey said:
I believe it is rare for conventional passenger jets with low wings and underwing engine nacelles to ditch successfully. When they hit the water the engines dig in and the structure comes apart. Someone was watching over them to day.
Click to expand...
It's all in the flare.

If you listen to eyewitness reports of the landing, "the pilot pulled up" (exaggerated flare), just before touchdown. That and he was going a slow as possible. That's great piloting. The other not so successful ditchings were when the pilots tried to "land" on water as they would on hard surface. Also, I'm sure he kept the landing gear UP.
 
There was an accident in 1963

of Aeroflot's Tupolev 124 ditching in Neva river between bridges. All passengers survived.



jsharkey said:
I believe it is rare for conventional passenger jets with low wings and underwing engine nacelles to ditch successfully. When they hit the water the engines dig in and the structure comes apart. Someone was watching over them to day.

As to shutting down the wrong engine - there was a case in the UK about 20 years ago at Kegworth where a crew shut down the good engine on an emergency approach to East Midlands airport and crash landed short on the M1 motorway. They weren't so lucky as many on board perished.

Jim Sharkey
Click to expand...
 
According to reports...

This was according to the reports I read, the first fully successful water ditching of an airliner in 45 years. My hats off to all involved including all the ferry captains and water taxi's who were on the scene first. I'd love to buy them all a beer.
 
WilburD2 said:
This was according to the reports I read, the first fully successful water ditching of an airliner in 45 years. My hats off to all involved including all the ferry captains and water taxi's who were on the scene first. I'd love to buy them all a beer.
Click to expand...

I believe an RAF Nimrod, derived from the BAC Comet, ditched in the Atlantic ocean north of Scotland a few years ago but it's engines are buried in the wing root and don't "hang in the breeze".

Jim Sharkey
 
Ratings

More importantly he has a Commercial Glider rating, really.

Came in handy today. :eek:

John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
This incident effectively demonstrated the difference between a pilot and an aviator.

I am a little disgusted with all the hyperbole in the media though...everyone calling it a 'miracle' and such.

It was a textbook water landing. Yes, the captain had to act quickly and decisively to attempt the water landing, but everything else seems to have been by the book. Note that I'm not taking anything away from the crew...it was a spectacular job...but a miracle?

In addition to the flight crew and volunteer rescuers who are getting credit, I believe a lot of credit should be given to the Airbus engineers that designed the A-320. It held together and remained afloat for quite a while, giving the passengers time to escape.

Now I'm curious how they're going to lift an A-320 out of the river and where they'll take it? I'm assuming they'll try to lift it onto some sort of barge and then take it to a large dock where it will be scrapped?
 
IT'S NOT A CRASH

Somebody put a sock in some of the anchor folks mouths please. It' was not a crash landing.

It was a ditching
It was an off field landing
It was a forced off field landing
It was an emergency landing
It was a wheels up emergency landing on water
It was a dead stick landing (not so good for the media to use)

It was anything but a crash. Please call it something else other than the "c" word.

Hmmmm.....had it been a seaplane, I wonder what they would have called it.

My compliments to the flying skills of the pilot. We all train for emergencies and the pilot showed why. Somehow I also think the Man upstairs might have been sitting on his shoulder while this was going on.
 
I have always tried to give birds a wide berth. If all the initial reports prove true, this will be yet another reason why. The comparative size of an A-320 to a goose is about like an RV to a mosquito. Like Geico says, be careful out there.

Bob Kelly
 
Incredible.....

....heads-up flying. Man-oh-man that guy needs a medal!! Imagine......a heavily loaded airplane, full of fuel and you lose both engines at a low altitude with nowhere to go without taking out possibly hundreds on the ground, besides the river. Look at this Google Earth image of the surrounding areas. LaGuardia is on the right and the Hudson on the left.

GoogleEarth_Image.jpg


What a great job!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
pierre smith said:
....heads-up flying. Man-oh-man that guy needs a medal!! Imagine......a heavily loaded airplane, full of fuel and you lose both engines at a low altitude with nowhere to go without taking out possibly hundreds on the ground, besides the river. Look at this Google Earth image of the surrounding areas. LaGuardia is on the lower right and the Hudson on the left.

my.php
[/URL][/IMG]

What a great job!!

Boy I wish I could figure out how to post full sized images
Click to expand...

I flew out of LaGarbage dozens of times when I was working and the river is about the only option after the left turn off of runway 4 and a double engine failure. I can tell you it is an airline pilots worst night mare, just thinking about it, and this guy did what he had to do and did it very well. It was a kiss your butt good bye situation and hope for the best....
 
This took plenty of skill and cool heads from a lot of people; and some luck too, considering the pilot didn?t even crash into any boats which I imagine there were quite a few on the Hudson.

Besides the pilot, the airline stewardess, whom if I heard right on the news, kept others from opening the back door, thus keeping it afloat, which was probably a feat in itself, when the passengers seen the other door crammed with people trying to get out, and with the fear of everyone probably thinking they are going to drown.

I also understand the designers of Airbus itself had a special button the pilots could push in case of a ditching, so that it sealed off all air lines and such, which again, helped keep the thing afloat. Not sure if Boeing has that or not, but without that feature, they may not have had time.

The ferry boat captain and company also really did a great job, and it was just fortunately they were around too, and so quick.

Just everything fell into place quite nicely.
 
Just how does a bird take out a 300+ mph jet engine under full power? You'd think the bird would be either squished (like a bug) or sliced and diced immediately. Is it a imbalance issue, broken compressor teeth, etc?
 
So now will we see a move by politicians in NYC to ban commercial airliners and allow only experimentals in New York Airspace.
 
rtry9a said:
Just how does a bird take out a 300+ mph jet engine under full power? You'd think the bird would be either squished (like a bug) or sliced and diced immediately. Is it a imbalance issue, broken compressor teeth, etc?
Click to expand...

See links below. Birds have been know to take down everything from airliners to jet fighters. If they don't go through the windshield, they go through the engine and shred the innards causing catastrophic failure.
http://www.youtube.com/v/EtSlX7L0KB0&hl=en&fs=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gc-XiO4ojzk&feature=player_embedded
 
rtry9a said:
Just how does a bird take out a 300+ mph jet engine under full power? You'd think the bird would be either squished (like a bug) or sliced and diced immediately. Is it a imbalance issue, broken compressor teeth, etc?
Click to expand...

It was probably more than one, and I think geese weigh something like 10 lbs a piece.

I remember many years ago, my instructor taking me up to Lawton where this small passenger jet had hit some kind of bird. It completely crashed in the windwhield, and there was blood everywhere. Evidently he got the plane down, but can't remember the extent of his injuries. It made me realize just what kind of impact a bird can have on a plane at high speeds.

We prop folks should be thankful for our shreaders, which should make them mince meat before they hit our windshields.

wj
 
Thanks, Milt

N395V said:
So now will we see a move by politicians in NYC to ban commercial airliners and allow only experimentals in New York Airspace.
Click to expand...

LOL,


Bob, maybe we will get a hunting season on Canadian Geese.:D


Kent
 
Glider Pilot

I heard on the news the pilot is also Glider Pilot rated and he put it to good use.

The pilot is from Danville, CA and it's al over the news here. Giving him a key to the city and a heroes welcome.

The media has been all over his house and his poor wife is basically trapped inside because of them. U S Air has supposedly asked her not to speak with the press.

Ted
 
Amazing story that the press is really eating up today. Good TV, I guess. I've watched. I sure hope that it turns out like it has been reported for the crew.

Passenger's prayer - "God, please don't let me die."

Pilot's prayer - "God, if I'm gonna die, please don't let it be because of something I screwed up."
 
Ted RV8 said:
I heard on the news the pilot is also Glider Pilot rated and he put it to good use.

The pilot is from Danville, CA and it's all over the news here. Giving him a key to the city and a heroes welcome.

The media has been all over his house and his poor wife is basically trapped inside because of them. U S Air has supposedly asked her not to speak with the press.

Ted
Click to expand...


The MEDIA also showed his house numbers and named the street that he lives on. I'm sure they have cameras there 24/7. Very unprofessional.
tm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
wrongway john said:
Besides the pilot, the airline stewardess, whom if I heard right on the news, kept others from opening the back door, thus keeping it afloat, which was probably a feat in itself, when the passengers seen the other door crammed with people trying to get out, and with the fear of everyone probably thinking they are going to drown.
Click to expand...


I wanted to correct this part. After watching a segment on Dateline, I found out the airline stewardess was in fact, trying to get the back door open after all. Lucky for all, they couldn't get it to open, and only then did she direct them to the front.

wj
 
A question for you Airline drivers..

...Since both engines went TU, what drives the hydraulics for control of the airplane? Batteries or APU?

Thanks,
 
Possibly an Air Driven Generator

...a small windmill that drops out of the fuselage and spins in the breeze to generate enough power to keep essential controls working.
 
I was in the LAX terminal waiting for a flight while all this was unfolding, and I heard a couple pilots talking about systems and procedures on the A320. They SOUNDED like they knew what they were talking about....dunno....both these guys were corporate pilots with ATP experience.

Anyhow, the gist of the conversation was that coming out of that airspace, the crew would have still had the APU running at that point in time for hydraulic and electrical.
 
USN Award for pilot

As a former USN guy, I have decided that given the aquatic nature of this incident the Navy should give the pilot a special award.

I have not decided yet whether it should be US Naval Aviator's wings or Submariner's Dolphins!
 
wrongway john said:
We prop folks should be thankful for our shreaders, which should make them mince meat before they hit our windshields.

wj
Click to expand...

It is not really relative to this thread, but a propeller does nothing to protect us from birds. Particularly at high speed. In the 360 deg space covered by the propeller the blade cord only covers a very small portion of it. With the relatively slow RPM the propeller turns, a bird can easily get through without being hit.
 
pierre smith said:
...Since both engines went TU, what drives the hydraulics for control of the airplane? Batteries or APU?

Thanks,
Click to expand...

The later Boeings have a RAT....ram air turbine. The 707 was total manual control with cool aerodynamic balance chambers at each surface. The 727 was hydraulic with manual reversion.

The Douglas 9's and MD80's have manual controls with several thousand miles of cables. The rudder has a hydraulic boost package.

Don't know anything about the Airbus series except they are advanced electric. There was at least one Airbus accident at an air show where the crew got disconnected from controlling the airplane and it electronically flew into the ground. There was a story early on when the 320's began service in this country .... a crew entered a holding pattern and could not leave....that probably did not happen but it was a good story about automation in those days. :)

When I fly these days and file a report here I frequently refer to scanning for the enemy. That means birds like geese, turkey vultures, eagles, hawks and of course other airplanes. One has to scan constantly because one minute they are there and then they aren't. I get nervous just looking down long enough to change a radio frequency, the enemy is everywhere and very difficult to see, they are so relatively small. Generally, if an evasive maneuver is necessary, I climb as most of the time a bird will dive. He's probably thinking the airplane is a bigger carnivore and its time to hit the deck, not unlike a jumped fighter in WWII.
 
I believe those **** Canadian Geese took out an AF AWACs Boeing 707-320 in Alaska back in the mid-90's. They definitely have more kills against our Air Force than any adversary since Vietnam.
Chuck Olsen
Tehachapi
RV-7A
 
I flew the A320 for 8 yrs and think it's a very good airplane. Some airlines takeoff with the APU running. My airline does not. With the loss of both engines, the RAT (Ram Air Turbine) could be extended to provide hydraulic power to operate the flight controls. If the APU were not running, the RAT would also provide electrical power. Electrics would only be provided for the essential instruments for flight.
Most accidents involving the Airbus (all aircraft for that matter) are pilot error. As advanced as the aircraft is, it does exactly what you tell it to do.
 
David-aviator said:
Don't know anything about the Airbus series except they are advanced electric. There was at least one Airbus accident at an air show where the crew got disconnected from controlling the airplane and it electronically flew into the ground.
Click to expand...

In this particular case (I don't know about others) the crew did not get disconnected. The flight control computer was designed to prevent the crew from stalling the airplane. They were doing a slow flight (relative) fly by at an airshow...got it behind the power curve, and waited too long to push the power levers up. Because of spool up lag time, etc., the speed continued to decay and regardless of how hard both pilots pulled on the pilot control input devices (I don't know if they can really be called sticks) the computer would not let the AOA increase beyond a programed value.
I believe their was some major software rewrites after that accident.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top