As with everything it is down to 'taste'. I have not yet seen any comment from the crew on the nature of the ditching in terms of what actually happened to the fuselage and that would be of interest. It is a 'toss-up' between high AoA to minimise speed and a lower one to reduce the 'pitchdown' and probable front-end 'smack' and 'dive' that tail impact would trigger - I guess, having never done it..................... Too flat and you could be a 'skipping stone' with bits falling off at each bounce. I had always 'assumed' that if I were to ditch I would rapidly have found myself drinking the whole ocean as it smashed through the windscreens. I have not checked the crash pics, but I think the screens were intact on this one? Interesting question, mud, and I would be interested to hear from the Hudson crew. Anyone seen any comments?

AOA for ditching
 

From what I read in the NTSB documents, the procedure from Airbus calls for a +11° pitch when ditching. Capt Sullenberg declared that he tried to maintain +10°

"moderators" should read posts before deleting them
 

Someone deleted my post of the Smithsonian results analyzing the remains of the ingested birds. The results were recent and had not been posted before, and included a link reference to a scienceNOW article. DNA and isotopic analysis showed they were Canadian geese from Labrador. NY is their normal winter grounds, but the scientists hypothesized that a recent snow storm had caused them to move again. I don't have the original link now. I am surprised that relevant results with important safety implications are being casually deleted by "moderators". Pilots, airport opertors and the public need to know of the increased risk in the aftermath of snowstorms that may mobilize migratory birds again.

I searched the thread for both "labrador" and "geese" in the thread and this recently published result hadn't been reported before.

Your posts (as mine and anyone else's for that matter) are subject to editorial control. Remember what you signed up for. Now, quit bleeting. :rolleyes:

Hudson co-pilot on airline issues. BBC interview with Jeff Skiles
 

BBC NEWS | Programmes | World News America | Hudson co-pilot on airline issues

3min 29 secs on various issues.

Sorry if this has already been posted ( if so Mods please delete )

Good Show
 

This FO is every bit as good in front of the camera as is his boss. Impressive. :D

Oh! Forgive me, in the stress of the moment I failed to fly to 1 deg. accuracy. Smack my wrist.

It is not that simple := . The point stating the 11° was very far down on their check-list, and they never arrived at that point (performed only the first page of the 4 pages long procedure). So the 10° was what the Capt decided to hold as the best option from his experience (vast :ok:) as given him the best compromise between sufficient speed for not stalling and sufficiently low speed for not breaking-up when hitting the water.

I hadn't seen that particular Skiles' interview- he does indeed join Captain Sullenberger as an eloquent spokesman for the profession.

I read that sully just held the ''stick'' full aft and the computer gave the right pitch attitude due to combo of airspeed etc.

indeed, there wasn't much left for the flare.

The stick full back was obviously not done until just before touchdown. My pilot friend who flies the airplane says you can pull full back on the stick at any altitude and it won't stall. I said yes but what will your sink rate be when you hit the water if you bring it all the way back at a significant altitude or balloon the aircraft? They were running slightly above idle thrust.

The airline´s insurance company, AIG, now denies liability regarding payment of compensation to the passengers "because the airline wasn´t negligent" :hmm:

That seems to mean the captain should have made a mistake or two instead of saving the day so the passengers would receive what´s due to them. Amazing.

AIG denies liability in Hudson River plane crash | InjuryBoard Greensboro

What is due to them? The airline should refund the cost of any lost item, and than claim to the insurance. If the insurance does not pay is a problem of the airline. However I do not see any big money on this, other than the value of the plane.
Why the passengers shall claim more?

FSLF

Captain Sullenberger pulled off a perfect ditching IMO, saving all souls on board, end of story.

Regardless of actual liability, or what is obvious to an outsider, it's only prudent for all parties to deny culpability, and let the courts sort it out.

AIG, American Insurance G...s, are just doing their job, minimizing liability. We have Billions of tax dollars invested in them, so they had better perform this one time, at least.

By the time they reached the water, in fact, well before that, one engine had gone to zero thrust (right), and the left had slowly died from idle thrust to zero by 1000'. Sully set mid-range flaps (15 degrees if I remember right), and never got around to the 'infamous' 'ditch switch'.

Would have been moot, as the water contact ripped open the fuselage aft anyway.

Not a source I usually trust, but Vanity Fair magazine had a first person interview and his recollection of the events. He also praised all of his crew, especially the F/O for professionalism under fire.

Hell of a job by all involved! Lotta people rip New York but the port authority guys are top notch. Remember the TWA Tritanic with the stall warning that aborted, fire and rescue saved that day.
Not to dis the crew, they were superb, but there was no decision to be made, no power, water ahead, thank God.

...and one of the nominees as "aviator of the year" by flightglobal.

voting page

Singpilot, Vanity Fair may be a source you don't normally trust, but the VF writer who deals with aviation subjects is William Langeweische, son of the much admired Wolfgang Langeweische ("Stick and Rudder") and an ATP with considerable experience. Trust him.

NY Post is reporting today Sully will return to flight deck soon.