Plane Down in Hudson River - NYC
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Herts, UK
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not a pilot but the ditching appears to have taken considerable skill - getting rid of the energy whilst not stalling takes real airmanship.
Any fully held-off landing is equivalent to stalling at a height of 1 inch.
Skilfully flown, as would be expected, but brave, heroic being repeated ad nauseam on US media.. Ugh! Very skilfull but bravery is WW, Wrong Word...
Bravery and heroism is running at a machine-gun post on a hill, spouting bullets like raindrops...
Let's use the English language properly!
To the whole crew, congratulations, a demonstration of superb professionalism...
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: hawaii
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Curious as to why SLF's could not open Rear Cabin Doors?
One of the Interviewed Pasengers in row 24 stated that they tried to open the rear doors (when the water was only up to the bottom sill) and
could not budge them at all. He went on to say that one of the FC tried to help (still not able to open) then directed them all toward the front of the plane.
Does the ditching switch also disable the rear cabin doors??
Thanks
PS - Would the plane have floated as well with both engines still attached to the wing nacelles??
could not budge them at all. He went on to say that one of the FC tried to help (still not able to open) then directed them all toward the front of the plane.
Does the ditching switch also disable the rear cabin doors??
Thanks
PS - Would the plane have floated as well with both engines still attached to the wing nacelles??
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Maine
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a thread where the brevity shows throughout. The spirit of flight is somewhere within us all no matter where we are or when. The more the sequence of events is studied the more perhaps, the critical timing of acting and reacting is understood. The turn to come about down the Hudson with the loss of altitude, to then enable a glide path, is one interestingly critical aspect to say the least.
The direction the flock of geese are traveling and that they are not able to deviate from course perhaps suggest they were running with the wind?
I have not seen in this thread any such other speculation. It could be, the geese were flying away from the cold air (we are experiencing extreme cold) and that the winds aloft could perhaps shed more upon the actual flight conditions? Right or not, one would have to consider a proper avoidance course to begin with.
If it is purely a physical nature that caused this to happen, then it should be avoided. It is also a probability of a bird-strike and there again, the bird population is likely known for the area. But with cold air forcing its way in, perhaps more should have been done to understand the ecology of the area for flight, that a control center could factor. This is a tough way to become a hero.
The current BAM details the probability of BASH risks on a given day using historic trends. However, it cannot show when a large warbler flock actually passes over an airfield. NEXRAD (NEXt generation RADar) provides that capability (see the article on radar ornithology in this issue). In addition to a conservation tool, the DoD PIF BASH Working Group promotes NEXRAD as a safety tool. The BAM is being refined to ultimately provide real-time updates using Doppler radar technology. Naval Air Station (NAS) Whidbey Island, Washington, implemented an aggressive BASH prevention program in the winter of 1996 based on these three strategies. Between 1989 and 1995, NAS Whidbey Island recorded three to four damaging bird strikes each year within the local airfield environment. Since implementing the BASH prevention program, the station has suffered only two damaging bird strikes at the local airfield. Through ongoing communication and awareness programs, the number of non-damaging bird strikes reported actually increased. Exact airfield strike locations and species identification in these reports facilitate significant airfield modifications that reduce the attractiveness of the airfield to "problem" avian species.
The direction the flock of geese are traveling and that they are not able to deviate from course perhaps suggest they were running with the wind?
I have not seen in this thread any such other speculation. It could be, the geese were flying away from the cold air (we are experiencing extreme cold) and that the winds aloft could perhaps shed more upon the actual flight conditions? Right or not, one would have to consider a proper avoidance course to begin with.
If it is purely a physical nature that caused this to happen, then it should be avoided. It is also a probability of a bird-strike and there again, the bird population is likely known for the area. But with cold air forcing its way in, perhaps more should have been done to understand the ecology of the area for flight, that a control center could factor. This is a tough way to become a hero.
The current BAM details the probability of BASH risks on a given day using historic trends. However, it cannot show when a large warbler flock actually passes over an airfield. NEXRAD (NEXt generation RADar) provides that capability (see the article on radar ornithology in this issue). In addition to a conservation tool, the DoD PIF BASH Working Group promotes NEXRAD as a safety tool. The BAM is being refined to ultimately provide real-time updates using Doppler radar technology. Naval Air Station (NAS) Whidbey Island, Washington, implemented an aggressive BASH prevention program in the winter of 1996 based on these three strategies. Between 1989 and 1995, NAS Whidbey Island recorded three to four damaging bird strikes each year within the local airfield environment. Since implementing the BASH prevention program, the station has suffered only two damaging bird strikes at the local airfield. Through ongoing communication and awareness programs, the number of non-damaging bird strikes reported actually increased. Exact airfield strike locations and species identification in these reports facilitate significant airfield modifications that reduce the attractiveness of the airfield to "problem" avian species.
Last edited by E.Z. Flyer; 23rd Jan 2009 at 01:01. Reason: Reference data
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ilford
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any chance the aircraft, when lifted, will be taken to the old Floyd Bennett Field?
It's not far, its by the waterside, and, being used for other Federal purposes, is secure.
It's not far, its by the waterside, and, being used for other Federal purposes, is secure.
Last edited by Bighat; 16th Jan 2009 at 22:59. Reason: typos
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 68
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the people around me (non flyers) are all amazed by the fact that everybody survived this ditching.
I've noticed though that virtually all of them remember the ditching of another large jet near a beach, a jet whose pilots were being threatened with a knife during the last minutes of the power off (fuel exhaustion) ditching. This jet banked at the last moment, a wing hit the water first and the plane broke up. It was a very powerful image that stuck in people's minds, which explains the euphoria about this accident and especially it's outcome and the role of the crew therein.
In this thread it has slowly become clear that yesterdays ditching in not unique. I believe at least 8 ditchings took place where most or all survived.
So perhaps a ditching is much more survivable than we all assumed based on this powerful image of several years ago, and indeed the crew did an excellent job without having to be made the heroes they currently are made out to be.
It seems part of the euphoria over the saved lives. I in no way wish to minimize the performance of the crew, understand me right, I just want to take out the emotion out of the situation. I believe the crew did an excellent job and they should be an example to all of us.
1. quality piloting of the plane
2. calm water and free of obstacles
3. good visibility
4. calm winds
5. undamaged fuselage
6. ditch button on this type of plane
7. excellent SLF management by the cabin crew
8. immediate availability of rescue boats as well as helicopters with divers
Where an accident is often a sequence bad fortunes, perhaps this time saving the day was a sequence of good fortunes, not least a quality crew
I've noticed though that virtually all of them remember the ditching of another large jet near a beach, a jet whose pilots were being threatened with a knife during the last minutes of the power off (fuel exhaustion) ditching. This jet banked at the last moment, a wing hit the water first and the plane broke up. It was a very powerful image that stuck in people's minds, which explains the euphoria about this accident and especially it's outcome and the role of the crew therein.
In this thread it has slowly become clear that yesterdays ditching in not unique. I believe at least 8 ditchings took place where most or all survived.
So perhaps a ditching is much more survivable than we all assumed based on this powerful image of several years ago, and indeed the crew did an excellent job without having to be made the heroes they currently are made out to be.
It seems part of the euphoria over the saved lives. I in no way wish to minimize the performance of the crew, understand me right, I just want to take out the emotion out of the situation. I believe the crew did an excellent job and they should be an example to all of us.
1. quality piloting of the plane
2. calm water and free of obstacles
3. good visibility
4. calm winds
5. undamaged fuselage
6. ditch button on this type of plane
7. excellent SLF management by the cabin crew
8. immediate availability of rescue boats as well as helicopters with divers
Where an accident is often a sequence bad fortunes, perhaps this time saving the day was a sequence of good fortunes, not least a quality crew
Last edited by vanHorck; 16th Jan 2009 at 23:05.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Found in Toronto
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the British Airways 777 in LHR, everyone assumed that both engines had stopped running. They were all wrong.
It is reasonable to expect that even a severely damaged engine would still produce partial power. Even at idle power, the generator and hydraulic pump would continue to supply the aircraft systems.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: long island
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking of the tail, this from Associated Press, whom I thought knew better:
"One Boeing 737 pilot writing about a strike in a safety report described the smell of burnt feathers and seabird after a gull was sucked into his rear engine during a landing at LaGuardia in 2004."
"One Boeing 737 pilot writing about a strike in a safety report described the smell of burnt feathers and seabird after a gull was sucked into his rear engine during a landing at LaGuardia in 2004."
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Herts, UK
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. quality piloting of the plane
2. calm water and free of obstacles
3. good visibility
4. calm winds
5. undamaged fuselage
6. ditch button on this type of plane
7. excellent SLF management by the cabin crew
8. immediate availability of rescue boats as well as helicopters with divers
9. unlimited runway length
2. calm water and free of obstacles
3. good visibility
4. calm winds
5. undamaged fuselage
6. ditch button on this type of plane
7. excellent SLF management by the cabin crew
8. immediate availability of rescue boats as well as helicopters with divers
9. unlimited runway length
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: California
Age: 61
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst of course a professional ATPL would have the training and procedures for a ditching, maybe that added experience of flying 'sans moteur' helped him to be less fazed?
Join Date: May 2008
Location: In the mirror
Age: 91
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Found in Toronto
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the British Airways 777 in LHR, everyone assumed that both engines had stopped running.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Dublin
Age: 39
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Watched the pictures on TV last night and was amazing to see the aircraft remain in tact and the passengers being taken off from the wings.
Reading the entire thread I know that the pilots did an incredible job but also the cabin crew as others have pointed out. I see from the airline website that they are Sheila Dail, 57 with 28 years service; Doreen Welsh, 58 with 30 years service and Donna Dent, 51 with 26 years service.
I have read on here and (seen it on my last flight in the US) comments questioning the suitability of more mature people to be cabin crew but without knowing what happened in the cabin this may suggest that experienced cabin crew are a real asset.
Just a comment from a European piece of SLF.
Reading the entire thread I know that the pilots did an incredible job but also the cabin crew as others have pointed out. I see from the airline website that they are Sheila Dail, 57 with 28 years service; Doreen Welsh, 58 with 30 years service and Donna Dent, 51 with 26 years service.
I have read on here and (seen it on my last flight in the US) comments questioning the suitability of more mature people to be cabin crew but without knowing what happened in the cabin this may suggest that experienced cabin crew are a real asset.
Just a comment from a European piece of SLF.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: moving around
Age: 47
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just some info for ye.
the aircraft would probably been in ditching(landing on water) config meaning that it stayed a float a lot longer than if it had not been.
When the pushbutton switch 13HL is pushed (the ON legend comes on) and the aircraft goes into the ditching configuration. This closes:
.the outflow valve 10HL,
.the pack flow control valves of the flow control units 23HB (24HB),
.the avionics skin air inlet valve 15HQ, if open,
.the avionics skin air outlet valve 22HQ, if open,
.the emergency ram-air inlet, if open,
.the fwd cargo isolation valves 4HN (5HN), if installed.
This basically would have prevented the cabin from flooding through the air conditioning and avionic cooling system
also if APU had been running, assuming the APU generator was good, then all hyd systems would have been available to the crew via electric pumps to blue and yellow systems and green system via PTU
the aircraft would probably been in ditching(landing on water) config meaning that it stayed a float a lot longer than if it had not been.
When the pushbutton switch 13HL is pushed (the ON legend comes on) and the aircraft goes into the ditching configuration. This closes:
.the outflow valve 10HL,
.the pack flow control valves of the flow control units 23HB (24HB),
.the avionics skin air inlet valve 15HQ, if open,
.the avionics skin air outlet valve 22HQ, if open,
.the emergency ram-air inlet, if open,
.the fwd cargo isolation valves 4HN (5HN), if installed.
This basically would have prevented the cabin from flooding through the air conditioning and avionic cooling system
also if APU had been running, assuming the APU generator was good, then all hyd systems would have been available to the crew via electric pumps to blue and yellow systems and green system via PTU
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Where I'm pointing...
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is not normally the case on the Hudson River.
a) Normally the ferry and shipping traffic, and terrain, make it a pretty choppy, windy place, with a lot of traffic about, particularly where the aircraft reportedly landed.
b) Quite often there are large fuel oil and natural gas barges moored where the aircraft landed, any where south of Battery Park there are even more barges and ships moored (it is NY HARBOUR, after all), and South of that is the Verrazano Bridge.
All in all, a lot of factors came together, on the positive side, in this instance.
The coordination of all the subsequent rescue attempt shows strides of improvement since 9/11. Well done to all.
a) Normally the ferry and shipping traffic, and terrain, make it a pretty choppy, windy place, with a lot of traffic about, particularly where the aircraft reportedly landed.
b) Quite often there are large fuel oil and natural gas barges moored where the aircraft landed, any where south of Battery Park there are even more barges and ships moored (it is NY HARBOUR, after all), and South of that is the Verrazano Bridge.
All in all, a lot of factors came together, on the positive side, in this instance.
The coordination of all the subsequent rescue attempt shows strides of improvement since 9/11. Well done to all.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like a lot of posters on this site you seem to have a negative view of journalists. Your list of your 'pet' journalists suggest that you read a very limited number of aviation sources and your anti-French comments (a consistent theme) is an insult to those at Air et Cosmos.
Yes, I am a journalist. Yes, I am an aviation journalist. No, I am not on your pet list, but to you and the other posters who make comments like 'journalist scum', I would like to point out that I have just as much concern for this industry as others on this site.
In fact, those of us who have this point of view are much less likely to speculate about the cause of an accident than the threads here because we recognise that the best story is a careful analysis of the results, not the immediate knee-jerk reaction that allows people to pontificate and show off their (apparent) knowledge.
Yes, I am a journalist. Yes, I am an aviation journalist. No, I am not on your pet list, but to you and the other posters who make comments like 'journalist scum', I would like to point out that I have just as much concern for this industry as others on this site.
In fact, those of us who have this point of view are much less likely to speculate about the cause of an accident than the threads here because we recognise that the best story is a careful analysis of the results, not the immediate knee-jerk reaction that allows people to pontificate and show off their (apparent) knowledge.
Last edited by William Boot; 16th Jan 2009 at 23:53. Reason: This is addressed to Enderby-Browne
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
protectthehornet -
"I would think that anyone who had ever flown(as a pilot) into any airport near a huge city with waterways/rivers/lakes/bays/oceans had at least considered the possibility of ditching on takeoff or landing there."
I can't speak for all pilots, but I know that I did just that. Learning to fly in small single-engine bug smashers and having my instructor pulling the power off and saying, "Forced landing" on every flight (sometimes more than once on each flight), taught me to be thinking along those lines all the time. Even when I flew to Honolulu, I was always checking out the Primary and Secondary swells to pick a ditch heading. And I had FOUR engines! Fortunately, I never had to ditch.
"I would think that anyone who had ever flown(as a pilot) into any airport near a huge city with waterways/rivers/lakes/bays/oceans had at least considered the possibility of ditching on takeoff or landing there."
I can't speak for all pilots, but I know that I did just that. Learning to fly in small single-engine bug smashers and having my instructor pulling the power off and saying, "Forced landing" on every flight (sometimes more than once on each flight), taught me to be thinking along those lines all the time. Even when I flew to Honolulu, I was always checking out the Primary and Secondary swells to pick a ditch heading. And I had FOUR engines! Fortunately, I never had to ditch.
Guest
Posts: n/a
William Boot
Journalist, you probably don't write for the public. If you have a boss, he (she) is most likely an editor. Are we understanding the nature of the discussion? Free lance writers are generally the best, John Nance, the best of these, in my opinion. If you are kept, your perspective, knowledge of the industry, and composition are not yours. It is not in the best interests of the media at large to be honest and forthright in the dissemination of "news". Aviation is incredibly safe, and getting safer. This is bad news for the "news".