Capvermell
In such a circumstance one could easily see an NTSB report concluding that the pilot should have headed for one of the two potentially reachable nearby airports and that his chances of a more survivable outcome there were considerably better.
So the successful outcome is clearly influencing the conclusion about the wisdom of the original Hudson ditching decision, even though if the ditching had gone horribly wrong the actual decision to ditch, at the time it was taken by the pilots, would have been for precisely the same reasons.
But there still seems at least some remaining risk that whilst Captain Sullenberger clearly did a brilliant job of ditching in the Hudson safely (once he had taken his decsion to do so) that the NTSB may eventually determine that he need not have ditched in the Hudson at all
I would agree about the comments on GAPAN being a bit hasty - but being positive, maybe that more facts will emerge supporting the crew which would make their achievements even more remarkable, and adding value to a GAPAN award that is somewhat devalued by an award prior any formal investigation
I disagree with your comments above however... In my experience AAIB and NTSB reports are reluctant to state that A.N.Other course of action would have been better... unless it clearly would have been
at that time.. and not judged by the actual outcome...
I am an A320 Capt, and if my engines fail at low level, or even high level, I am unaware of any advice or training as to whether I should land on an airfield, or water, or snow, or.... There comes a time when the Airlines and Authorities have to leave the decisions to the crew on the day. Only after various accidents and experiences add evidence might they make recommendations for future such events. Double engine failures in modern twins are still so rare that such an experience database has not, IMHO, yet been built up
The USAir crew have added to that (limited) database in a very positive way, IMHO
NoD