Originally Posted by
FullOppositeRudder
Perhaps they don't have these issues of which you speak. We've had just over a week now to 'consider all options'. We don't know that the highly competent crew on board the surviving aircraft didn't consider all options available to them, but given their vast experience, one can be confident that that did. They settled for the best option at the time in their judgement, and it turned out to be the right one. Subsequent and frequent protests by someone who wasn't there, and didn't have the information that they did (and still doesn't), that it wasn't the right one, are rather tiring and frankly pointless, and reminiscent of the ordeal which 'Sully' had to endure after his decision making process was under scrutiny by people who likewise weren't there, but knew he should have done something different - until it was proven that the alternatives would have been catastrophic. Please cut the guys a bit of slack on this one, and hope earnestly that none of us reading this are ever put in that situation ourselves.
Yeah, Sully, NOT. Sully could have chosen to turn back to the airport he took off from, but took the option to land in the river rather than risk crashing into a built up area.
It's not the pilot of the Viper I'm questioning, so there's no "slack to be cut". It's that people on the forum who refuse to consider the Avalon option. If you had some doubt about the integrity of the airframe you were flying, would you choose to fly over built up areas? Or would you maybe ditch in the river (like Sully)--or land at an aerodrome that didn't require flying over a built up area?