Isnt it about time that airliners were fitted with video cams that focussed on key areas of the aircraft . Aviation seems to prefer indicators over reality as this technology ha been around for a few years, I know that anything fitted to an airliner cost 20 times as muchas the same thing fitted toa car and understand why but in the circumstances and many others where there is airframe damage out of sight from the flight deck is it too much to spend ratehr than relying on EGT indications and fire 'sensors'
if you spent $!00m plus ona building you would surely have some cctv in there but not it seems on a plane.
As to this incident , from a pax POV then I think the crew did pretty well, they functioned as a crew for a start despite the captain fast tracking a checklist item and as has been often said its all very well having procedures and following them but when the sh-t really hits the fan right in front of you then you may decide to act ina slightly different but still logical way and the key thing is the aircraft stopped quickly and safely , fuel was contained-not ideally but contained and the everyone got out quickly and safely. It struck me in the Sully film how much time the feds spent trying to prove that eh could have landed , well maybe he could if he had headed for Teterboro the same second the first goose struck -ignoring shut down and restart processes of course and . A lot of Monday morning quarterbacking on these issues -whats next VAR for the flight deck LoL