Originally Posted by
rubik101
Just after the accident, I posted my opinion, which was roundly condemned by most but not everyone,....
Your a pilot Rubik and I'm not. So on this esteemed forum I should just keep my fat mouth shut, but in this case have you ever wondered why you were the subject of such opprobrium and why you still continue to be? May I suggest you search for the missing logic in your argument since at the moment it seems like you would have taken this deeply stricken airliner and its precious cargo into a remote paddock and because physics is ...well physics, you would have suffered exactly the same low speed controlability issues that Captain Haynes and his erstwhile crew did. Except the unknowns of your cornfield probably would have solicited a much worse outcome and this is before we even consider that you have removed yourself from the life support systems that are encapsulated in our emergency response teams at the airfield. This aircraft should not have still been capable of being flown, but it was. Not to take anything away from Sully or the recent Russian A320 crash, but in contrast these events left the crews with quite flyable aircraft if you accept that flight time was extremely limited. Capt Haynes and the crew of AA96 (an earlieer DC10 cargo door blow out event) were both left struggling with aircraft that no longer wanted to remain in stable flight.The teamwork, ingenuity, personal skills and ability and most importantly, the 'don't give up' attitude, in both of these cases avoided complete disasters and saved far more lives than you give credit for Rubik. I throw your own quote back at you, 'there are often more than the obvious outcomes to such situations".
I'll close the flight deck door on my way out.