I'm really sorry I have to insist. I agree with all professionals above, that the performance of crew 1539 was outstanding. I bow myself to Sully and lift my hat. Really. I just want to share some important information about this accident or similar ones. I talked to too many pilots who think that ditching is a sure thing now and that they would act from now on like Sully did. There will be a terrible accident soon, because those kind of all engine failures happen. I know that some members in this forum don't like somebody critizising a magnificent job of a fellow professional - the same mechanism that happens when a physician experience an incident in the emergency room, or another highly qualified professional gets under fire. This is poor CRM, because we all learn from experience from others, and we shouldn't close our eyes to important facts. Even when all turned out to be good.
BOAC, I highly respect you and your contributions. But you could bring on an endless lists of if's and when's. Of course he didn't know the state of his aircraft, of the path to go, of how much time left. That's why you have to stick to rules of thumbs and schematic thinking. You are looking in hindsight (not me) if you say that the ditching was succesful, that's why it was the best solution. What would you have said when something would have turned out slightly worse? What would happen if he wouldn't have made it over George Washington Bridge? Would he have flown under? Over and stalled? What if a ship would have blocked his touchdown area? At the moment he turned on HDG 220, he didn't know where he would land, and ditching was his last option (first was Teterboro).
HDG 220 was an instruction from a ATC controller who had no idea what happened. Taking on the initiative is the most important thing in a case where time factor is critical (something Captain Sullenberger did). He could never know if he would make it to Teterboro. But he knew exactly how far away he was from LGA.
As I said, if it still wouldn't have worked out back to the TO RWY, he could have ditched in the East River (the piece of water that surrounds LGA). At the time of the birds' impact, East River was closer than Hudson River (where he ditched finally). There is also better rescue service close to an airport.
From a real professional, I would expect that you can at least accept some points of my reasoning, and don't dismiss it in globo as some weird idea. It is assured that they would have made it back. So it cannot be weird. So please, all pilots in the world: Consider at least for a short moment that it is possible for some aircraft types to return to the starting point from a certain height (e.g. above thrust reduction altitude). And, please, consider ditching always as your last option. It has worked this time. Nearly never before. Never try this in the open sea (unless you have to). Try to have a plan you sit in your cockpit at all times, try to find out what you would do at a certain time at a certain point (when you don't need it yet). Ask your friendly sim instructor for a try if session time permits.
Thanks for sacrificing your valuable time to read this post,
Dani