NTSB public hearings /Sully
 

Do not know if this has been covered already in another forum in here , but I just went to see " Sully" the movie. As a non-US person I was extremely surprised to see this NTSB "public hearing" sequence , looking like a tribunal, with the 2 pilots accused of possibly having done something wrong and have to find arguments to exonerate themselves. In other words the NTSB guys acting as prosecutors and the pilots as accused and having to prove they are innocent.

Anybody here who has been there ? Did this really happen as described in the movie and in general does the NTSB really work like this ? I find it difficult to believe.

Hollywood-ism, to give the movie a 'hook'.

It was a movie. Hearings are not held that way.

It is open to the public. You might find former hearings at ntsb.gov.

It didn't take them 13 or 17 tries before they made their first successful RTB to LGA. Overall success rate was 8/15. Turning for rwy 13 was 5/7.

It's a movie trying to tell s story.The movie was excellent but it's not completely accurate.

Thank you guys , in meantime I got word from someone in NTSB who confirm what you say . I am relieved, but the General public at large who does not know better will retain this impression of an accident investigation...:hmm:

"Sully": the verdict from Swindon UK
 

Last night I went to a pre-release viewing of Sully in Swindon UK. I am now left fuming and brooding about watching the new film.
The good bits about "Sully":
1. Superb video and sound in the iMax theatre.
2. Excellent performances from Tom Hanks (Captain Sullinberger), and Aaron Eckhart (Co pilot Jeff Skiles).
3. Depictions of the bird strike, water landing and rescue were all close enough to be informative and entertaining.
But that is it!
The bad side is simply deplorable.
1. The depiction of the inquiry is utter codswallop. It bears not a shred of accuracy and worse still it will send movie viewers away with a completely wrong understanding of the role of Air Accident investigators.
According to ICAO's (International Civil Aviation Organisation) guidance on investigations, the sole function of an air accident investigation is to learn what happened.
Specifically stated at the start of the guidance for investigators is:
( QUOTE from ICAO Annex 13 )
"3.1 The sole objective of the investigation of an accident or incident shall be the prevention of accidents and incidents. It is not the purpose of this activity to apportion blame or liability." UNQUOTE
The problem is that Clint Eastwood has mixed fact and fiction in the same film thus ruining it for all. The unknowing will come away with their heads full of rubbish and the knowing will come away feeling very disappointed and frustrated.
Why were the investigators all fictional characters while all the other protagonists were real and using the names of the real people.?
Apparently Clint has put a small sentence in the small print explaining the investigation is fictional, but who reads that? Certainly the people sitting near us last night came away utterly fooled. Such a pity.
Beware of believing the mixed messages conveyed in "Sully”.

As professional pilots we should actually read the NTSB report and compare it to the movie. It is a good read, dry as these things are.

The page narrative is an executive summary. The actual report is a pdf file mid page on the right side bar.

http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/a...s/AAR1003.aspx

Dr. Earl Wiener's Laws:

21. In aviation, there is no problem so great or so complex that it cannot be blamed on the pilot.