"Sully" The Movie.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chedburgh, Bury St.Edmunds
Age: 81
Posts: 1,175
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
6 Posts
Whilst this was a very well executed water landing, I feel that the heroism bestowed on Mr. Sullenburger, and the associated hype was a little over the top. [Guess it would be, as it's America]. The event would have been the same, even if he had an empty aircraft, because he would still need to save himself. He had the whole of the Hudson to land on. In my opinion, the much better film would have been about the Air Transat A.330 that had a thin piece of concrete to land on, and made it, from a very long way away, after running out of fuel with a major leak.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JEM60
Wasn't there some hush-hush about the Transat case? I recall the Capt was interviewed once on camera but during and after the investigation he has been very silent.
I thought what that Capt did must have been equally amazing as the Hudson ditching, so I wonder what the hush is about.
Wasn't there some hush-hush about the Transat case? I recall the Capt was interviewed once on camera but during and after the investigation he has been very silent.
I thought what that Capt did must have been equally amazing as the Hudson ditching, so I wonder what the hush is about.
Compare that with the unknowns around US1549 - would they find an open space anywhere to land, would the A320 break up on impact, would it stay afloat long enough for the passengers to get off? While I'm sure the movie will take some liberties with events, I think we should wait to see it before making up our minds.
I recall the Capt was interviewed once on camera but during and after the investigation he has been very silent.
the Air Transat A.330 that had a thin piece of concrete to land on
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NI
Posts: 1,033
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't usually have much emotional budget for airframe drivers, but I do feel somewhat sorry for Mr Skiles. He is obscured by the 'Michael Collins Effect' which is frustrating in this allegedly-enlightened era of CRM and emphasis on teamwork.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RightWayUp
The reason Air Transat had to glide was an incorrectly installed fuel pipe of some sort, wasn't it? I remember the crew had some difficulties calculating the fuel because of this, but I don't recall the Capt being responsible for maintenance of fuel pipes.
El Bunto
Agree on Mr Skiles. I have seen interviews with him and he seems just as top notch as Sully himself.
Maybe something to do with the reason they lost all their fuel
El Bunto
Agree on Mr Skiles. I have seen interviews with him and he seems just as top notch as Sully himself.
Last edited by MrSnuggles; 1st Jul 2016 at 12:12. Reason: never forget Mr Skiles!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It will also be interesting so see if the rape of US Airways pilot's pension scheme is included. I think one if the reasons that Sully was not paraded in public by his employers after the event was that he gave them both barrels every time he did. Imagine being one of US Airways PR people. You have an incredible story that you'd like to tell but it will get stuffed up your bum if you try. You might even find that Sully insisted that reference to this this was included as a price for his help in making the film. It will be interesting to see.
The reason Air Transat had to glide
Paxing All Over The World
I'm now going to commit heresy so, first: The ditching with no minutes warning, at very low altitude whilst still in the intial stages of climb out AND whilst over a significant part of the world - was brilliant.
But, I could not help noticing that he was deeply fortunate that the Hudson was on the ebb and was heading in the same direction as he wanted to go. So the ditching was with the tide, not against it. Had the wind and tide been opposite, he might not have had the height to orientate to where it was going - even if that info was available to eyesight when you're doing so much else. I sit to be corrected on this.
I realise that the meedja folks want to make money out of anything but, I don't see how you make a whole movie out of an event that was less than 10 minutes start to finish? The actual time from strike to stopped in the water was, I think, even less?
I am sorry to hear that the First Officer has been sidelined by the flaming meedja. As to Cpt Sullenberger stuffing it to his employer? Go boy go. [They don't like it up 'em Captain]
But, I could not help noticing that he was deeply fortunate that the Hudson was on the ebb and was heading in the same direction as he wanted to go. So the ditching was with the tide, not against it. Had the wind and tide been opposite, he might not have had the height to orientate to where it was going - even if that info was available to eyesight when you're doing so much else. I sit to be corrected on this.
I realise that the meedja folks want to make money out of anything but, I don't see how you make a whole movie out of an event that was less than 10 minutes start to finish? The actual time from strike to stopped in the water was, I think, even less?
I am sorry to hear that the First Officer has been sidelined by the flaming meedja. As to Cpt Sullenberger stuffing it to his employer? Go boy go. [They don't like it up 'em Captain]
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RightWayUp, DaveReidUK
I checked it out on Wikipedia and yes, it seemed the crew made the fuel leak worse. Didn't read the report yet though. However, apparently the engine maintenance was really sub par, fitting a pipe of another dimension. This was the underlying cause for fuel leak. Unfortunately the crew failed to notice the leak. Will read the report, it may explain why they didn't notice/understand their fuel status.
I checked it out on Wikipedia and yes, it seemed the crew made the fuel leak worse. Didn't read the report yet though. However, apparently the engine maintenance was really sub par, fitting a pipe of another dimension. This was the underlying cause for fuel leak. Unfortunately the crew failed to notice the leak. Will read the report, it may explain why they didn't notice/understand their fuel status.
Hi MrSnuggles,
It is quite an interesting read.
Ultimately they didn't realise it was a leak and preferred to think it was a computer problem, and even more unfortunately carried out the fuel imbalance checklist by memory hence opening the XFEED.
If they had used the QRH as they should have done, the first line would have told them to not carry out the checklist if fuel leak suspected.
It is quite an interesting read.
Ultimately they didn't realise it was a leak and preferred to think it was a computer problem, and even more unfortunately carried out the fuel imbalance checklist by memory hence opening the XFEED.
If they had used the QRH as they should have done, the first line would have told them to not carry out the checklist if fuel leak suspected.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO: Sully's real skill was in making the decision to ditch in the Hudson and not make a 50/50 attempt at the beckoning runway ahead. That was the real skill; the ditching was a notch down on that. Skilful? Yes; something i hope all of us would expect to be able to execute. Would all of us have made the ditching decision/choice? I wonder.
The Air Transat scenario was a classic Swiss cheese affair. Many factors contributed to the crew being in a hole; some stupidity from engineers and from themselves. Pure luck put a runway within reach. They then executed a 'get out of the hole' manoeuvre excellently. Does that deserve medals and commendations? Not for me to comment, but they all survived. Without Lajes we'd be discussing the merits of Sully A320 on a calm river v A330 on a lumpy sea in the middle of nowhere. I suspect the latter would not have been fatality-less, and a deep sea rescue op would have involved more than a couple of ferries.
The Air Transat scenario was a classic Swiss cheese affair. Many factors contributed to the crew being in a hole; some stupidity from engineers and from themselves. Pure luck put a runway within reach. They then executed a 'get out of the hole' manoeuvre excellently. Does that deserve medals and commendations? Not for me to comment, but they all survived. Without Lajes we'd be discussing the merits of Sully A320 on a calm river v A330 on a lumpy sea in the middle of nowhere. I suspect the latter would not have been fatality-less, and a deep sea rescue op would have involved more than a couple of ferries.
Last edited by RAT 5; 2nd Jul 2016 at 07:08.