Chesley B Sullenberger III - NY plane crash

[Sureboss]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7835497.stm

New pictures have emerged of a US Airways plane crashing into the Hudson River in New York City.

The pictures, released by the New York City Harbour, show the plane hitting the water and passengers sitting on its wings, awaiting rescue.

Recovery teams are preparing to lift the fuselage of the plane and divers are searching for one missing engine.

The US Airways plane has been tied to a pier since Thursday's accident in which all 155 people on board were rescued.

Transportation officials said the river's strong current has hampered the search.

The plane is due to be lifted by a crane and placed on a barge.

Investigators say the right engine of the jet is still attached to the airplane. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said on Friday that both engines were missing.

It now says that visibility was so poor that divers had been unable to see the attached engine.

Officials said they want to avoid the plane breaking apart as it is salvaged.

The NTSB's Kitty Higgins said the flight recorder would be examined once the plane was lifted.

Also on Saturday, pilot Chesley Sullenberger and his co-pilot are expected to be interviewed by investigators.

While relieved passengers have spoken to the media of their ordeal in the freezing waters, Captain Sullenberger is not able to speak publicly while the inquiry continues.

He was widely praised for his skill in bringing down the stricken plane after both engines failed when birds apparently flew into them.

The city's mayor, Michael Bloomberg, also honoured the rescuers who pulled all the passengers and crew to safety.

One person suffered two broken legs in the crash and paramedics treated 78 patients, most for minor injuries.

'Controlled chaos'

Passengers and eyewitnesses have been speaking to the media about their experiences.

"I heard an explosion, and I saw flames coming from the left wing, and I thought, 'this isn't good'," said passenger Dave Sanderson.

"Then it was just controlled chaos. People started running up the aisle. People were getting shoved out of the way."

Another passenger, Billy Campbell, described water rushing into the plane as flight attendants did "a wonderful job" of evacuating everyone.

"It's good to be alive today," said Martin Sosa, a father who had been travelling with two young children and his wife.

After crashing on the water, the plane was pulled rapidly down the river, until it was guided to a halt by tug boats against a pier.

The temperature was almost -7C (19F) and the current in the Hudson was running rapidly.

A true hero. To use his experience to down the plane on the river, saved the lives of hundreds of people, not only in the plane, but potentially on the ground.

 

[Omnis]

Yeah, Sully is a great pilot. This was all over the news all day a few days ago. Damn bird strikes.

Also, cheers to Airbus for their ditching technology that kept the plane afloat.

 

[daan]

Yep, he does seem to be a great pilot even though his parents were unimaginative.

Damn bird strikes.

The birds don't exactly decide to strike.

and they have a word in airports- the airway industry, they have a thing called “Bird Strike.” It’s when a flock of birds is just flying along, “Oh, what a wonderful day! The sun is…” (sucking sound) They go straight through a jet engine! It’s called “bird strike,” and it’s a misnomer, it’s not true, because the birds are not striking; its an engine suck! The engine making bird soup mélange, you know? These birds aren’t going, “Who is for bird strike, eh? Johnny humans with these big metal buggers, they piss me off! I vote we go for a bird strike! Alfie, Ginger, Stevie, “Feathers” Stevens, “Big Beak” O’Reilly, Jimmy “The Penguin,” are you with me? No, you’re a penguin, so you just stay here… Come on, let’s do bird strike!” (singing “Dance of the Walkyries&#8221 “Faster, faster! 747!” (sucking sound) And just before they go through, do they go, “Look, it’s Rod Stewart on first class!” (sucking sound) We don’t know…

EDIT: Why didn't I think of youtube...

 

[Sage]

It’s much funnier to actually watch Izzard do his monologues than to read them.

 

[wrcsti]

So was the copilot fapping in the bathroom? He got no recognition at all. My dad flies A320s for Jetblue and he says it may be the crews fault. The bird strike could have been to 1 engine and they mis diagnosed the issue and turned the wrong engine off. We have to wait until the engines are pulled out of the hudson.
Also those people were incredibly lucky. This is the first time an airliner crashes in water and doesn't break into millions of pieces unlike the 767 in the indian ocean.

 

[Omnis]

The birds don't exactly decide to strike.



EDIT: Why didn't I think of youtube...

Jeez, I walked right into that one.

 

[McLaren]

So was the copilot fapping in the bathroom? He got no recognition at all. My dad flies A320s for Jteblue and he says it may be the crews fault. The bird strike could have been to 1 engine and they mis diagnosed the issue and turned the wrong engine off. We have to wait until the engines are pulled out of the hudson.
Also those people were incredibly lucky. This is the first time an airliner crashes in water and doesn't break into millions of pieces unlike the 767 in the indian ocean.

So far, many have believed that due to the pilot's experience, he instead pulled the nose up so that the tail was "forward". It's said most plane accidents end up really bad when the pilots try to come in leveled rather than this way.

 

[Famine]

My dad flies A320s for Jteblue and he says it may be the crews fault. The bird strike could have been to 1 engine and they mis diagnosed the issue and turned the wrong engine off.

Yes, it could be. It has happened before.

Alternatively, they could have flown through a 30-strong flock of Canada Geese and sucked one into each engine.

We have to wait until the engines are pulled out of the hudson.

Yeah, good luck with that. One snapped off and was last seen making best speed for Cuba. Not to mention the fact that they both hit about 90,000lb of resistance at 130mph when the plane splashed-down, probably shattering every single blade in the case.

The Flight Data Recorder, on the other hand, will show whether the engines both lost power suddenly.

Also those people were incredibly lucky. This is the first time an airliner crashes in water and doesn't break into millions of pieces unlike the 767 in the indian ocean.

It's not just luck - it's talent. There's an entire chapter on landing in water - starting with "Just don't. Okay?". There's a technique, some of which the video shows perfectly (the landing angle - waaaay less than you'd hit a runway at), and some of it is counter-intuitive (ask your dad - he'll know). The landing site in question was a good one - a relatively quiet, calm river, albeit a tidal one. This gives a "smooth" surface to splashdown, but even that won't see you home. You have to execute the water landing technique perfectly - even the slightest deviation and you're screwed beyond the telling of it (see the Indian Ocean for further reference).

 

[wrcsti]

Im not saying that he didn't do it right, I'm talking about how strong the airplane was to hold up and FLOAT on the water.
This is the last "water landing" that I remember about

Here is actual video of the landing

And they will most likely find the engines OK, they are strong mofos, heck the 767 that I posted above the engines floated to the shore.

And to people thinking this is way too stupid to happen the airplane doesn't say "hey buddy, you have some birds in the right engine, time to turn it off" Unless they see temps, rpms or any other thing going significantly wrong they have almost no way to figure it out in the time frame they had.

Also depending on the damage to the airplane we might see it flying again.

 

[Alex.]

Dude, it needs some engines for that.

 

[YSSMAN]

This is just something so unreal, matched with the incredible matter-of-fact things that all came together at once that made everyone on that plane so lucky. The pilot's military training, experience as a commercial pilot, and the fact that he is a consultant for airline safety... He was the right man for the job. Match that with the design, testing, and upkeep on the plane that held it together has it hit the water at a claimed 140 MPH. Then there were the first responders, not only those who were there helping out the best they could (God bless those ferrymen and tug boat captains), but also the official responders who had the training, equipment, and time to get to the people and bring them to safety.

So much went right in this event, and I know I'm very thankful for it.

 

[Jay]

So was the copilot fapping in the bathroom? He got no recognition at all. My dad flies A320s for Jetblue and he says it may be the crews fault. The bird strike could have been to 1 engine and they mis diagnosed the issue and turned the wrong engine off. We have to wait until the engines are pulled out of the hudson.
Also those people were incredibly lucky. This is the first time an airliner crashes in water and doesn't break into millions of pieces unlike the 767 in the indian ocean.

The engines have self diagnosis, with a major bird strike the the excess viabration and other sensors would have picked it up, there is a good possibility the turbofan could have failed causing the whole engine to fail. It is not easy for a Pilot to shut the wrong engine down unless it was a complete screw up, the aircraft has indicators to which engine is at fault at the fuel selectors or the fire selectors, he would have had his eyes closed or in complete panic to shut the wrong one down.

It could be both failed, and yes it is true these engines are very strong and are tested with pretty severes strikes to go into service, it must have been a crazy amount of geese to destroy both engines that quick.


Anyway great job by the pilots (two pilots, the first officer is never mentioned, captain doesnt do it all himself) and the crew.

 

[wfooshee]

The thing that impressed me was the ferry boats responding. Do you have any idea how hard it is to maneuver those things to get there quickly, stop in the right place, and not mow anybody down? In that current?

(You may think that all they have to do is float alongside, in the same current, but keep in mind that in a river that size, the current is not uniform at all.)

And yes, he's an experienced, military-trained pilot. But 99.959067% of airline pilots are experienced, military-trained pilots. Unless they grew up independantly wealthy, or had rock-solid credit in great heaping gobs, they didn't get there through civilian flight schools. My percentage is obviously an exaggeration, but calling this pilot's placement at this event "fortunate" due to his military training and experience is rather ludicrous. They all (almost) have military training and experience.

That is not intended to belittle this pilot. I am trying to point at that they're all that good!

Remember the 1989 DC-10 crash at Soiux City? One exploded engine and complete hydraulic failure, no roll, pitch, or yaw control. They had throttle only, and only on 2 of 3 engines. One engine up and the other down to steer, circling ever to the right to descend, because they couldn't get it to turn left. Raise the average speed to maintain altitude, slow down a little to descend. After every throttle adjustment the plane would oscillate pitch and yaw until it settled at the new setting. They did this for 45 minutes, successfully navigated to an airport and lined up with the runway, and the plane started its pitch oscillation just as they crossed the threshold, resulting in the crash we all saw on TV. More than half the people on board survived, because the crew was "that good."

And again, back to the present, those ferry-boat guys were just awesome!

 

[Jay]

All pilots are good, the amount of simulator training for these irregular events is quite extense, if they arn't good they arn't pilots. Coming from a military piloting background doesn't really mean anything, except many will experience less than perfect landing zones more often but that doesn't mean he is more qualified to land on water or to deal with other mishaps.

 

[Famine]

Im not saying that he didn't do it right, I'm talking about how strong the airplane was to hold up and FLOAT on the water.

If he hadn't got it spot on, the plane wouldn't have held up... Had he got the angle even slightly wrong it either the tail would have dug in, resulting in massive deceleration and possibly the fuselage snapping, or the nose would have gone under, flipping the plane and shattering it into a billion pieces. Or, remembering that 747 off the Kenyan coast, trailed a wingtip in the water - game over.

As for floating... They're designed to stay afloat for 30 minutes. Apparently the A320 betters this, even in a tidal river

And to people thinking this is way too stupid to happen the airplane doesn't say "hey buddy, you have some birds in the right engine, time to turn it off" Unless they see temps, rpms or any other thing going significantly wrong they have almost no way to figure it out in the time frame they had.

Not at all:

Yes, it could be. It has happened before.

I recall at least one incident where the pilots shut down the wrong engine after an engine was damaged, at Kegworth in 1989:

Also depending on the damage to the airplane we might see it flying again.

Just based on publicity alone, I doubt it. I have no doubt that the airframe - once dried out - would be in a close-to serviceable condition (though the fact it was subject to stresses waaay beyond normal use limits in a water landing may lead to the FAA refusing to give it flight certification), but I can't imagine many people would be willing to get onto a plane that has already crashed...


It'll probably find its way into the Intrepid museum. It's nearly there as it is...

 

[ExigeEvan]

It doesn't surprise me that it was capable of holding together, I'm just surprised a pilot got lucky enough to get it just right.

And it certainly won't help my lecturers brown nosing Airbus anymore

Also depending on the damage to the airplane we might see it flying again.

Doubtful. While the fuselage may be in half decent shape, the engine have gone and the engine mounts have fractured (as they are designed to do) which has probably ripped a nice big chunk out of the rear spar of the wings.

Wouldn't surprise me if the wing box (area of wing below the fuselage) has atleast got some stress marks beyound those permitted.

And to top it off the interior and any electronics are probably fried.

So what you've got left is a fuselage.

 

[wrcsti]

The engines have self diagnosis, with a major bird strike the the excess viabration and other sensors would have picked it up, there is a good possibility the turbofan could have failed causing the whole engine to fail. It is not easy for a Pilot to shut the wrong engine down unless it was a complete screw up, the aircraft has indicators to which engine is at fault at the fuel selectors or the fire selectors, he would have had his eyes closed or in complete panic to shut the wrong one down.

It could be both failed, and yes it is true these engines are very strong and are tested with pretty severes strikes to go into service, it must have been a crazy amount of geese to destroy both engines that quick.


Anyway great job by the pilots (two pilots, the first officer is never mentioned, captain doesnt do it all himself) and the crew.

Yeah the diagnosis is know as the pilot and FO. Engines are supposed to hold up to a number of bird strikes before they fail and most of the time they are ok. And it is very easy for it to happen. My dad had a engine fire in a embraer 145 but all instruments seemed normal exept for lots of fuel being used. He didnt know which one it was and the FO assumed it was the left for I don't recall what it had that wasn't working. They almost turned the left one off untill they noticed they had no idea and were close enough to land.

Ohh and there was a guy interviewed that said something allong the lines of "that pilot was not thinking of himself but only of every one of us, he was a hero. Sully was so good he even gave me his shirt to keep me warm and I still have it on" He then showed it to cameras and guess what? It had 3 stripes so it wasn't sully that gave it to him.

My rant here is that noone can be called a hero untill it is proven they were doing it by themselves, and if they had help their help should be mentioned as well.

 

[Jay]

Yeah the diagnosis is know as the pilot and FO. Engines are supposed to hold up to a number of bird strikes before they fail and most of the time they are ok. And it is very easy for it to happen. My dad had a engine fire in a embraer 145 but all instruments seemed normal exept for lots of fuel being used. He didnt know which one it was and the FO assumed it was the left for I don't recall what it had that wasn't working. They almost turned the left one off untill they noticed they had no idea and were close enough to land.

All modern aircraft have advanced fire detection and suppression systems, each engine has their own fire supression levers with two agent bottles. I admit I am not real familiar with Embraer aircraft (I know Boeings and mcDonnell Douglas very well, and not too bad with Airbus) but I seems very unusual a engine fire would go undetected.

I remember Air Transat had that problem with fuel consumption on a Airbus A330 on a Atlantic crossing and it turned out to be a fuel leak in the engine, and even that triggered level 0 alerts from high oil pressure and low oil temp.

 

[wrcsti]

But the airtransat flight had a fuel leak from a fuel line that was cut by a moving hydraulic line.

 

[Famine]

Yeah the diagnosis is know as the pilot and FO. Engines are supposed to hold up to a number of bird strikes before they fail and most of the time they are ok.

They're designed to withstand any number of impacts from a 3.7kg bird. This flew through a flock of Canada Geese, which practically come out of the egg at 7kg...

As it is, the NTSB confirm that the Flight Data Recorder shows both engine losing power simultaneously (though I don't recall hearing a specific cause for this yet).

My rant here is that noone can be called a hero untill it is proven they were doing it by themselves, and if they had help their help should be mentioned as well.

He took a crippled plane over one of the tallest, most densely populated cities on Earth, executed a perfect water-landing in a commercial jet - deliberately landing near to a large vessel to increase chances of rescue - and, once everyone was off the plane, checked the entire cabin twice, by himself, before he got off.

Hero. Along with anyone who assisted him.

 

[Sureboss]

The specific cause was that compressing feathers and guts doesn't work as well as air...

Yes, people aren't saying that no one else was a hero that day. But he was in charge of the plane and ultimate responsibility falls upon him, be it through great achievements, or mass failings.

 

[Danny]

The birds don't exactly decide to strike.

I'm guessing you never saw that Hitchcock documentary then...

 

[Swift]

It was a great job by a great pilot. This could have been a major event. Not just for the peole that could have lost their lives, but for the airline industry as well.

From all accounts that I heard, thepassengers didn't panic and the pilot walked the plane twice to make sure nobody was left behind.

Just an outstanding job. Both pilots deserve recognition for ssaving the lives of 150people.

 

[Pupik]

First off, this was amazing since so much could have went wrong, but nobody was killed. Everything worked out well, despite the short time frame in which to make a desperate maneuver like ditching an aircraft.

In 1972, Eastern Airlines Flight 401 crashed into the swampy Everglades and was salvaged into an airworthy craft once more. But, it also 1) Broke apart 2) Landed in shallower water (it was dry season in South Florida) 3) That was 1972.

 

[Jay]

In 1972, Eastern Airlines Flight 401 crashed into the swampy Everglades and was salvaged into an airworthy craft once more. But, it also 1) Broke apart 2) Landed in shallower water (it was dry season in South Florida) 3) That was 1972.

Yeah and turned into the plane that had a ghost crew. Though no one died here so that is not a possibilty.


But yeah, I don't doubt this aircraft could be put back into service if they really wanted to (cost effective).

 

[Omnis]

Some museum would probably buy it for more than it would cost to get it going again.

 

[ExigeEvan]

Some museum would probably buy it for more than it would cost to get it going again.

I'll be interested to see how they plan to move the plane, from the middle of NY, in its entirety short of floating it on a barge then somehow finding a way to do it over land.

 

[Jay]

It could be dismantled transported and re-assembled if they want, much like the way airbuses get assembled in the first place.

 

[Mark T]

I initially thought the whole hero thing was slightly exaggerated. But after reading how difficult it is to actually perform that landing I have to agree that he did an outstanding manoeuvre. The fact that he went back into the plane to check everyone was out when it was flooding is another credit to him.

I think Hollywood need to make a film about it. Could be called "Sullenberger on a plane".

 

[ExigeEvan]

It could be dismantled transported and re-assembled if they want, much like the way airbuses get assembled in the first place.

I believe ironic is a suitable term when a plane that stayed intact for a crash landing is then dismantled into parts only to be placed in a museum and remembered for its ability to stay in intact.