Originally Posted by
KayPam
However, it should be noted that had the aircraft responded to the nose up order, it would have impacted the water with a higher pitch up angle and a lower vertical speed. Nobody can say for sure if the damages would have been worse or not.
There was an A320 water ditching study done (I lost the link for it, I'll see if I can find it again later) that said 10 to 12 degrees pitch angle is OK. (Sully hit at 9.5 deg pitch, so not bad, only a tad low.) Airbus also recommended strongly that you hit the water with a pitch angle of 11 degrees. This has been looked at, and I think you essentially want to do a 3-point landing on the 2 engine nacelles and tip of the tail at the same time.
If Sully could have used that last bit of 3.5 deg stall margin (pitch up) that the Airbus control laws denied him during the last 50 feet or so, he would have hit at about 12 degrees, with a lower vertical speed, all better.
To me the perfect landing would have been
11 degrees pitch,
1 degree stall margin remaining, and the slow airspeed that corresponds to, while hitting the water at
500 ft/min. Let's call perfect an "
11/1/500". Instead, Sully did it as an "
9.5/3.5/750" and I blame that on some unwanted feedback terms in alpha-protect below 50' AGL.