USAirways A320 Ditches In Hudson River

[B757300]

JANUARY 15--Meet Chesley B. "Sully" Sullenberger, III, the US Airways pilot who today amazingly crash-landed a US Airways jet in New York's Hudson River without any apparent fatalities. The heroic Sullenberger, 57, has worked for US Airways since 1980, and before that spent more than six years as a U.S. Air Force F-4 fighter pilot.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...5093hero1.html

[BoeingKing77]

Massive birdstrike damage into the flight.I'm really shocked that a flock of birds(geese at that,can do some real damage)were that high.Yes,that pilot was amazing to land that plane.Passengers report the pilot saying ''Brace for landing''.Thanks Dmmore for moving my post,wanted to get it on there but didn't notivce where I was.

[mawheatley]

CNN has obviously been dedicating a lot of time to this tonight. Seems passengers over the left wing say the left engine made a bang then started spitting out smoke etc., while people over the right wing say the same about the right engine. General consensus though is that this happened about 30secs after take off, and reports are also saying that is when the pilot called it in.

Here's my question: what is the climb rate of a fully laden A320? What kind of height would have been reached after 30secs? And is that altitude roughly in line with the operating ceiling of geese? Can they go that high?

[E-Diddy!]

Flightaware's max height had it at 3200 feet, right in waterfowl territory.

[Bok269]

Originally Posted by ATFS_Crash

I live close enough that I can hear the hush house 24H 7D when they’re running a test.


Sorry but you sound like a fascist liberal conspiracy nut (Big business = Jew) (Big business = neofascist/neoliberal rhetoric; Jew = legacy fascist/legacy liberal rhetoric). Do you think George Bush is a genius and that the WTC were hit by missiles, not airliners? Do you wear a tinfoil hat?

GE aviation does not have a history of systematic conspiracy to cover up. If they did they would no longer be in business. It is advantageous to them to find faults; the sooner that they find them they more the reduce the risk of ramifications and liability. In the aviation industry it is illegal as well as bad business to try to cover up any safety issues.

It is advantageous for their long life to find potential problems before they escalate into bigger problems.

Is that you Pat?

[AJ]

http://www4.passur.com/lga.html
In replay mode select January 15 at 1527 and hit start. AWE1549 is just north of LGA. You can select the aircraft icon and monitor the flight until 500' on descent.
It peaks at 3400' over Bronx Park.

[Cam]

Originally Posted by AJ

http://www4.passur.com/lga.html
In replay mode select January 15 at 1527 and hit start. AWE1549 is just north of LGA. You can select the aircraft icon and monitor the flight until 500' on descent.
It peaks at 3400' over Bronx Park.

Looks like it came pretty close to N461SA.

[beachfront]

Fox mentioned that sources have confirmed the flock of geese was large enough to be visible on radar..

Plane has multiple locations on the body and leading edges that are indicative of a bird strike..

Must have been raining geese in NYC today...

[Airbus_A320]

Originally Posted by Cam

Looks like it came pretty close to N461SA.

The Hudson corridor is very busy with GA traffic both airplane and helicopter.

Massive birdstrike damage into the flight.I'm really shocked that a flock of birds(geese at that,can do some real damage)were that high.Yes,that pilot was amazing to land that plane.Passengers report the pilot saying ''Brace for landing''.Thanks Dmmore for moving my post,wanted to get it on there but didn't notivce where I was.

3,200ft is not very high, why are are people so surprised that geese can fly that high.

Again not to beat a dead horse but I'm not an expert by any means, I just tend to question things a little beyond what information is initially given to me. Is anyone else familiar with these reports? http://www.airdisaster.com/news/article.php?id=41 I just find today's incident way too similar to discount.

So basically, you just said, "I don't really know what I'm talking about, but I'm going to say something anyway."

Sorry but you sound like a fascist liberal conspiracy nut (Big business = Jew) (Big business = neofascist/neoliberal rhetoric; Jew = legacy fascist/legacy liberal rhetoric). Do you think George Bush is a genius and that the WTC were hit by missiles, not airliners? Do you wear a tinfoil hat?

Pot calling the kettle black, eh?

[clouded]

Originally Posted by ATFS_Crash

I live close enough that I can hear the hush house 24H 7D when they’re running a test.


Sorry but you sound like a fascist liberal conspiracy nut (Big business = Jew) (Big business = neofascist/neoliberal rhetoric; Jew = legacy fascist/legacy liberal rhetoric). Do you think George Bush is a genius and that the WTC were hit by missiles, not airliners? Do you wear a tinfoil hat?

GE aviation does not have a history of systematic conspiracy to cover up. If they did they would no longer be in business. It is advantageous to them to find faults; the sooner that they find them they more the reduce the risk of ramifications and liability. In the aviation industry it is illegal as well as bad business to try to cover up any safety issues.

It is advantageous for their long life to find potential problems before they escalate into bigger problems.

After you insult me like that you expect me to reason with you? You're an ass hole and you muck yourself. Fascist? What for questioning big business for the obvious nobel piece prize winners they are? For looking at a plane 3 minutes into flight climbing out of 3000 and assuming it's a double bingo bird strike? For looking up facts on the history of Airbus A320's and A321's and realizing that this same thing happened 3 months ago? What kind of expert are you other than someone who's pretty good and being a dickless prick? Oh I forgot, I'm in the USA where apparently it's a crime to question anything and have critical thinking skills above a third grader.

[clouded]

Originally Posted by Airbus_A320

The Hudson corridor is very busy with GA traffic both airplane and helicopter.


3,200ft is not very high, why are are people so surprised that geese can fly that high.


So basically, you just said, "I don't really know what I'm talking about, but I'm going to say something anyway."


Pot calling the kettle black, eh?

Listen, I'm know I'm not a back slappin' good ol' boy and I just put a wedge in your little circle jerk but I figure a guy who names himself after the plane that went down would have a better response than: So basically, you just said, "I don't really know what I'm talking about, but I'm going to say something anyway." I was asking if the article I posted had any validity or if anyone was concerned over that.

[FlyingPhotog]

From msnbc.com:

"Sullenberger, who has flown for US Airways since 1980, flew F-4 fighter jets with the Air Force in the 1970s. He then served on a board that investigated aircraft accidents and participated later in several National Transportation Safety Board investigations.

He is president of Safety Reliability Methods, a California firm that uses "the ultra-safe world of commercial aviation" as a base for safety consulting in other fields, according to the firm's Web site."

Pretty impressive resume I must say! His FO also has 23 years with the airline.

[mawheatley]

Originally Posted by FlyingPhotog

Pretty impressive resume I must say! His FO also has 23 years with the airline.

Are they releasing the names of any other members of the crew yet? I have a lot of friends with USAirways, flying out of both LGA and CLT.

[tlove]

geese can fly as high as 20,000 feet. Flocks are frequently picked up on radar as very slow moving planes or helicopters (40 knots or so). They also apparently can fly ifr, which in general birds are unwilling to do.

I flew past a flock at 4,500 over Hartford CT. Just rolling along south. Called out by Bradley ("traffic 9 oclock, 4,500, slow moving south, may be geese).

3,200 over NYC? Probably descended to get a better view of tourist sites.

[Tanner_J]

So...

How long until a lawsuit against US Airways?

[Cam]

US Airways will now be charging "Mooring Fees" to all over-water flights.

[mzk49o1]

Originally Posted by mawheatley

Are they releasing the names of any other members of the crew yet? I have a lot of friends with USAirways, flying out of both LGA and CLT.

F/O was Jeff Skiles.

[ATFS_Crash]

Originally Posted by clouded

We've already had 2 confirmed incidents of this occurring in New Zealand and Tunisia, do we need another 427 before someone addresses the issue properly?

Did you even read the article that you linked and are referencing. Your posts seem somewhat vague and incoherent and contradictory.

On one hand you seem to be trying to single out the GE engines, yet you seem to be trying to connect mishaps that involved International Aero Engines. For all these cases to be related it would seem that there have to be some form of commonality; the only commonality is Airbus, the engines are different.

Sure it is possible that it is a problem that is unique to Airbus.

Sure it is possible that it is some sort of problem that is unique to GE engines in US Airways flight 1549.
.
I am sure that all of these possibilities will be investigated.

However like they say follow the evidence. So far the evidence seems to suggest multiple bird strikes.

I doubt that both engines would fail simultaneously if it was just a case of neglect and failing to inspect both engines. I think it would be more probable that both engines would fail simultaneously if they were flying through a flock of birds. It isn’t fully conclusive but it is logical and playing the odds.

I would think that the odds that the engine failures is related to the bird strike's is very high and much more probable; then an unrelated duel engine failure simultaneously while entering a flock of birds.

Originally Posted by clouded

To me a double bird strike, while possible, is not as probable when you consider the case history of those engines in similar aircraft.

I don’t think you would make a very good crash investigator or be very good at diagnosis. You seem to want to ignore the facts and logic.

Is it more logical to assume that there was a double simultaneous engine failure because of poor maintenance and inspection of the engines?

Or is it more logical to assume that there is a connection between the alleged eyewitness reports that the aircraft flew through a flock of geese. If an aircraft flew through a flock of geese I would think the odds that there could be a double engine failure would be fairly high. Not only do I think it’s possible that both engines were struck by geese; I think it’s possible that one or both of the engines may have ingested more than one goose each.

I was with my mother when she drove through a flock of starlings that were so fat on locusts that they couldn’t get more than a few feet off the ground; because they were so fat that they had to exploit the ground effect for much of their flight. I estimate that she hit about three starlings per second for about 15 seconds. Statistically in a lifetime it’s hard to believe hitting so many starlings; but considering that we were driving through a flock of them statistically it is very understandable. You have to take statistics in perspective and not be so blind about the statistics.


It’s much like my father that drove through a swarm of honey bees. Statistically you don’t get very many honeybees; however in 15 seconds he had so many honeybees that the car started to overheat because the radiator wasn’t receiving fresh air because it was clogged with honeybees. The windshield was so covered with honeybees guts and honey that we had to pull over and clean the windshield. We had to get a garden hose and clean out the radiator at the next exit. In a lifetime statistically it is very rare to hit more than a few honeybees in a day; however driving through a swarm it is understandable that statistically you’re going to hit a lot of honeybees. Once again it’s a matter of exercising common sense and using statistics in proper perspective; rather than as a shallow child. Context and circumstances can make all the difference in the world.

Originally Posted by clouded

What for questioning big business

No. For making insinuation that all the big business conspires to cover up their mistakes; despite the fact that to do so would jeopardize their existence and freedom.

Despite the fact that the evidence would likely implicate them to some extent General Electric Aircraft Engines offered a huge reward for public members to search and find and turn in any such evidence; not hardly the type of behavior that I would expect from a big corporation that is trying to cover up any embarrassing facts. On the contrary I it think demonstrates that General Electric Aircraft Engines has a history of trying to find the truth and is more concerned about public safety and their long-term existence; than short-term embarrassment.

Janice Sorenson, the farmer who found the fan disk suspected of causing the DC-10 crash in Sioux City, Iowa, in July, received a $116,000 reward check yesterday from the engine's manufacturer, the General Electric Company….. reward fund of $271,000 that the company established for the recovery of various parts.

Source
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...53C1A96F948260

Sure some individuals and companies due have cover ups; however they have a tendency not to last very long. The companies tend to go out of business; the individuals often end up fired or otherwise terminated, unemployed or and imprisoned. You seem a bit paranoid to imply that coverups are commonplace in the aviation industry.

Conspiracy to cover up safety issues is not very common in the aviation industry, particularly in the West and particularly not the big aviation businesses in the West.

Originally Posted by clouded

unless pilots and pax confirmed to see a flock of birds hit the aircraft

The rumors (media reports) suggest that already is the case; something that you seem to want to ignore.

the flight crew ran into problems as the US Airways plane approached a flock of geese, reported WNBC’s Tim Minton.

Source
http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/...son-River.html

"There were eyewitness reports the plane may have flown into a flock of birds," said Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman Laura Brown

Source
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local...son-River.html

Shortly after takeoff, the pilot radioed flight controllers that he had hit birds, law enforcement sources said.

Source
http://www.reuters.com/article/BROKE...54429720090116

A US Airways pilot reported a "double bird strike" less than a minute after takeoff Thursday and was headed for an emergency landing in New Jersey when he ditched into the Hudson River, an air controllers union spokesman said.

Source
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...2GnmQD95NTDH00

[T.O.G.A.]

I wouldn't say this had there been a fatality but I was watching this unfold on NBC, they had a passenger on the phone talking about what happened with footage of the aircraft floating down river surrounded by rescue boats. It was absolutely the best TV I have ever seen! Hollywood will never be able to duplicate the excitement.

And the pilot lived up to the image pilots have as cool and collected under fire! The Daily News has a great profile on the Captain!

I can't remember if the pilot age limit has been repealed but if it hasn't been, I'd say give it the heave Ho!

[Alpha Sierra]

Thumbs up to both pilots of this aircraft for bringing the aircraft safely down in such difficult circumstances. I'm sure the F/O had his role to play as well in ensuring the safe return of PAX and crew.

Credit also to the A320 for being the amazing aircraft it is and, significantly, performing exactly as it was designed to do in such a situation.