Why I have not commented on the US Airways Hudson River ditching ..

[DemoTex]

Most DUers know that I am a retired US Airways captain. I have withheld comment on the Hudson River ditching for several reasons:

1. I know the captain.
2. I know the first officer.
3. I know a member of the NTSB on the case.
4. I am an ALPA-trained accident investigator with bird-strike expertise.
5. I am an aviation writer with articles on bird-strike potentials.

I'll chime in later .. when I can. Busy now.

[Hawkeye-X]

1. Do you hang out at AVHerald.com?

Bird strikes are a common thing - I think. Tailstrikes, etc.

That's cool you know the captain and the first officer - both are the heroes, seriously.

Hawkeye-X

[madrchsod]

2. i`ll be interested in reading what ya got to say....

[greguganus]

51. Terrorists are using trained Canadian geese? Does the Canadian government know about this? n/t

[proud patriot]

3. got it

:patriot:

[KoKo]

33. ditto.....

[Subdivisions]

37. deleted. sorry, wrong place. n/t

[lonestarnot]

39. Roger that.

:patriot:

[aquart]

4. Then I expect you are very relieved.

As are all of us here in NYC.

[DemoTex]

10. I am indeed.

US Air/Airways has put three in the rivers now. A Fokker F28, a Boeing 737-400 (USAir 5050) (that I was involved in the investigation) and now an Airbus. I am very relieved and very busy in this whole investigation.

[aquart]

26. I heard they were all safe from a transit cop.

He was grinning from ear to ear, not an expression you often see in cops.

My mom said it reminded her of 9/11 when all the little boats turned toward the smoke, towards the people massing at the Battery, and went to help.

[Lasher]

5. I've been wondering about the chicken test.

And why at least one of the engines couldn't keep working long enough for them to land.

[liberalmuse]

7. There is something odd about that.

I'm not talking conspiracy, but what are the odds that birds would be sucked into both engines?

[MH1]

41. Geese often fly in flocks, so I suspect the odds aren't that high

against both engines being struck in a relatively short time.

It seems the key would be for a pilot to know when there was a flock in the area and be able to avoid it. I don't know if that's possible, but seems as likely as designing an engine that can always survive sucking in a large bird (or two or three).

[TrogL]

29. A Canada goose is a hell of a lot bigger than a chicken

...and sucking practically anything into an engine is a recipe for disaster.

[Carni]

48. I was in a rollover car accident because of a GOOSE :(

Hell yes they are big...We had one pop out of no where into our lane on a freeway about four years ago and it was of such a size that my husband swerved to avoid it -- we should have just hit it
(I guess) because the next thing we knew we were rolling over in the car.

Canadian geese can be quite large (as ridiculous as it may sound!)

[liberalmuse]

6. When you are able to chime in...

can you drop me a line? I'm very interested in what you have to say.

[Blue_In_AK]

8. Bird strikes can be so serious.

We lost 24 Elmendorf airmen here in 1995 when their AWACS jet sucked up a bunch of geese. It was very sad.

[scarletwoman]

9. What I really hope comes out of all this is some kind of way of mitigating the "bird strike" danger.

An interesting bit that's been on the local news here in Minnesota is that the MSP International Airport has been utilizing a coyote decoy since 2000 to keep Canadian geese away from the runways. Apparently, it's been a largely successful strategy.

sw

[Suich]

11. I was wondering where you were!

I did a "search" yesterday in case I had missed your post.

I'll be interested to hear what you think.

:)

[Dover]

12. Question - Is it feasible to build a a convex shaped screen across the engine to deflect birds?.n/t

[DemoTex]

15. No

[Dover]

18. Well thanks for the response. ...I guess.

Why so short and blunt? If it's not feasible, can you briefly explain why?
If I were to guess, perhaps even a fairly open screen would create too much drag on the air intake?

[Tesha]

31. Various engineering problems

(I'm not DemoTex, but...)

The screens would have to enormously strong; a big bird hitting the
plane at 200-300 (relative) miles per hour packs a lot of kinetic energy.

Meanwhile, the screens would have to be very "open"; those engines
are sucking a huge volume of air into themselves and every bit of
resistance that the screen adds decreases the power available from
the engine as well as its fuel economy.

And the screens would have to resist ice buildup. If they iced up
and those ice chunks then break off and fall into the engines, that's
a worse event than having a nicely-thawed tender bird fall into the
engines.

So, in short, "No, screens aren't feasible".

Tesha

[KoKo]

34. Thanks for that explanation. I had wondered why screens couldn't be placed.

What you say makes sense. I'm worried that there's going to be a witch hunt to kill large flocks of birds..given how the media likes to obsess over things like this...and that the RW will use this as an anti-environment attack to make sure that Canada Geese are eradicated because golfers and corporate office park owners hate them for the poop they leave around.

[IDemo]

69. What about something like this?

http://www.bugspray.com/catalog/products/page1732.html

[starroute]

47. I've been wondering if the cold snap was connected with the bird problem

At least my own experience here in Pennsylvania is that you often see increased Canada geese movement during cold spells -- presumably because whatever pond they've been hanging out at has frozen over and they're looking for a place where there's still open water.

It may not be possible or cost efficient -- but it would seem like these are times to be particularly on the alert.

[riderinthestorm]

13. I heard an NPR story tonight who credited the captain's glider experience

with the near perfect landing on the water without engines.

He also mentioned that noone can actually practice simulating ditching planes on water because it's impossible to recreate in a simulator because the ditched planes that MAY be able to provide data for that kind of future simulation are often never recovered. I wonder if this plane (and it's data recording information) could/would provide some real information for future pilots since it appears the pilot handled it near about perfect.

The person on NPR also said that encountering birds on take off is common. And that it's always a crapshoot whether you're going to hit them. Also that there's no way to avoid them as birds just do what birds do and simply fly into the flight path and a jumbo jet especially does not have the maneuverability to get out of their way.

It was an interesting convo. Did you hear it?

[DemoTex]

14. Like old DemoTex, Sully is a glider instructor.

It is worth it's weight in gold. I've always said that. Nothing like understanding best L/D ratios in a jet when the motors quit!

[lostnotforgotten]

I Thought So - I've Been A Glider Pilot For Years - Every Time I Do Engine Out Training

In power planes the power-only instructors are amazed at how cool and collected I am and how smooth the landing is.

I agree, glider training is priceless simply because every landing, in effect, is an emergency landing!

[csziggy]

21. That is probably why the expert from the NTSB that gave the presser today was excited

She was thrilled about the access they will have to the plane and obviously is looking forward to what they will learn from it.

I hope they can learn a lot about how to avoid situations like this and if similar events happen, the knowledge will help save many more lives.

[LakeSamish706]

16. Nice to hear from someone that has the experience that this pilot was able to carry out.....

I certainly hope that the next time I fly I am lucky enough to have a pilot like the two of you.

[grantcart]

17. and I sent my wife to the airport yesterday and saw lots of planes and birds

see Sarah Palin's path to expertise is a lot easier.

[K Gardner]

32. Grant.. LOL !!

[hay rick]

58. What- no Superman?

[janx]

19. I'm looking forward to your posts. n/t

[Oregone]

20. "Why I have not commented..."

You just did.

[tabatha]

22. Great captain and first officer on that flight.

Looking forward to the comments - your experience seems very appro. for commentary.

[garybeck]

23. I have one question

If both engines went out, why didn't they go into a nose dive?

I watched the flight path animation

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2009/01/15/vo.google.flight.path.google

And was amazed at how far they traveled, at a fairly level incline, and with control of direction, with abolutely no engines.

Can a big jet like that really fly and steer like that on the way down, with on engine power at all?I always thought, that with a big heavy jet, if you lose all power you basically go straight down.

[TrogL]

30. Planes are heavy

Flight surfaces work whether the engines are on or not. I believe the auxiliary power unit in the tail continues to provide power to the hydraulics and instruments even if the main engines flame out.

[lostnotforgotten]

40. Every Plane Without Engines Running Becomes A Glider

The Captain probably flew at the Best L/D speed which resulted in a glide ratio of probably 15/1 or so.

The reason that one could assume that planes fall out of the sky when the engines quit is because Hollywood over dramatizes everything without regard to physics.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

49. Airplanes will continue to glide if the engines are not producing thrust.

If you have ever flown on an airplane you've probably experienced it and didn't even know it. To descend, the pilot will normally reduce power on the engines to flight idle, which means they are not producing thrust and the airplane is gliding. Depending its design and other factors, even a very large airplane can glide unpowered for a considerable distance. A B767 ran completely out of fuel some years ago and was able to glide many miles to land on an abandoned airfield: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider

[Tesha]

56. Every plane design has what's called a "glide ratio" that describes how it behaves...

...when the power's off.

Basically, the glide ratio describes how many feet/miles you can go forward
for every foot/mile that you drop. For real gliders, the ratio can be *VERY*
high, say 35:1. So if you're 5280 feet high flying over level ground in no
wind, you can travel *35 MILES* before touching down on the ground!

A jet transport isn't nearly as good but still ain't bad; some recent web
postings say 20:1 for an A320. So if the plane had reached 2,000 feet
of altitude before hitting the birds, the plane could go 40,000 feet
(8 miles) before reaching the ground. And if you're traveling at 180 miles
per hour (just to make the calculations simple), you've got 8/3 minutes
(2 minutes and 40 seconds) to make your plans and get back to ground
level/water level.

Tesha

[garybeck]

62. thank you for the answer. n/t

[Buns_of_Fire]

64. I used to think that, until the story of the Canadian Airbus that glided for 18 minutes...

...from 32,000 feet.....and managed to make an emergency landing in the Azores. Pilot tells of flying crippled jet as glider

No go-around allowed. No missed approach. Situations like that are when these guys earn their lifetime salary in one flight.:patriot:

[havocmom]

24. Was thinking about you & trof a lot last evening

and today, as I worked on this
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4841780&mesg_id=4841780

So many amazing pilot out there, and flight crews, and responders, and just plain folks who work and do the right things. What a pale imitation of human beings bush/cheney and their ilk are in comparison.

[Missy Vixen]

25. Please tell your friends

they kicked ass and took names. One hundred fifty three other people could go home to their families because their preparation and professionalism met a lifesaving opportunity yesterday.

We need more of them, in all areas.
Julie

[illuminaughty]

27. Looking forward to posts. That accident reminded me

of Air Florida Flight 90 out of Washington National almost 27 years ago to the day. A friend of mine was leaving out of that airport that night, so I remember it pretty well. It was a de-icing problem and they never really got airborne...hit the 14th St. Bridge and into the Potomac killing 78 people.

It was horrible watching them try to rescue survivors out of that icy river.

As I commented on another thread, I'm a TWA brat...Dad was hired in '45. I flew many times with John Testrake, another pilot who saved many lives by acting calmly during a high jacking to Beirut.
You guys never get enough credit for a job well done. Salute to you all.

[all.of.me]

67. I had two layovers at Washington National over Christmas break just before that accident.

I don't like to fly anyway, but after I got home and saw that, I was totally spooked. You know, the what if question, which I don't normally ask myself. I have not flown since. Sorry to all you awesome pilots, but it is just not my favored mode of transportation. And it's been the family joke for 50 years...

[stevedeshazer]

28. Can't wait to read what you have to say about it.

Your perspective is much appreciated.

[babylonsister]

35. So is this a warning post? I don't get your intent.

I'm happy there were no boats 'in the way' in the river. What were the odds of that?

[The Backlash Cometh]

36. Well, thanks for the heads up. But now I'm curious as hell.

[Subdivisions]

38. This is why I love DU...

Makes one wonder about all the varied talent that resides on this board.

I look forward to hearing more from you on this, DemoTex.

[SidDithers]

42. Look forward to your comments...

when you've got time, and when you think it's appropriate, to post them.

Sid

[Dennis Donovan]

43. Looking forward to your input, Mac...

:hi:

[rug]

44. Why are they charging for peanuts?

[Stephanie]

54. Because the Bush admin jacked up the price of fuel

[lostnotforgotten]

45. Brief CV On Captain Sullenberger In Article On Accident - Praise Be To Glider Pilots

January 16, 2009
Flight 1549 Pilot A Glider Instructor
By Russ Niles, Editor-in-Chief

The pilot who guided a US Airways A320 to arguably the most successful airliner ditching in history on Thursday would appear to be well drilled in deadstick landings. Capt. Chelsey Burnett Sullenberger III holds commercial and instructor glider ratings, along with ground instructor, single engine and muli-engine instructor ratings, according to the FAA's airman certificate database. He does not have a float rating, however. Sullenberger is being hailed a hero for putting the airliner, with a total of 155 people on board, into the river without any fatalities after the aircraft reportedly lost both engines to multiple bird strikes. The most serious injuries appear to be broken bones, although at least half of those on board were treated for hypothermia after being dunked in the 40-degree water in air temperatures hovering around 20 degrees. "It would appear that the pilot did a masterful job of landing the plane in the river, and then making sure that everybody got out," New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg told reporters.

According to FlightAware, Flight 1549 was climbing northbound after taking off from La Guardia Airport for Charlotte, N.C. and was at 3,200 feet when it made a descending turn south to the river. Witnesses told various media outlets the airliner made a controlled descent to the river and doors and emergency chutes deployed immediately afterward. Passengers were quoted as saying at least one engine exploded and caught fire and that they were warned to brace for a hard impact. Passing commuter ferries were on the scene quickly to pick up passengers and it was reported that women and children were the first to be taken off the sinking airliner. Bloomberg said Sullenberger inspected the interior of the airliner twice to ensure everyone got off.

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Flight1549Pilot_GliderInstructor_199588-1.html

[Aviation Pro]

46. My boss and a colleague know the captain.....

...consummate professional.

[greguganus]

50. Why don't we have laws that say all airports must be built beside bodies of water for emergencies?

And why DO they charge for those peanuts?
And are you a member of the Mile High Club?
If so, were you the pilot or a passenger when you joined?

[Festivito]

52. Any solution resides in the engine. We need those lost engines.

Do well for US. Godsped.

[Ediacara]

57. I read in the NYT that the right engine is still on the wing

They didn't realize it until to day because the water is so fast and murky and that wing had gone under the dock. They're still searching for the other engine.

[Stephanie]

53. DemoTex, a friend has photos where the plane is completely submerged

She was in a building around 28th Street and watched the whole thing. In her photos, after the rescue, the plane completely disappears under water. Then, she said, the tugboats wrapped ropes around the wings and pulled it back up to the surface. She said no one is talking about this. In the photos you can see that it is fairly early on, the whole complement of fireboats, etc, have not arrived yet. The tugboats and ferries surround the site but the plane is not there. Then in the next photos it's back. Which leads me to believe that the passengers' escape was much more amazing than we already know. They were minutes from being underwater.

[pengillian101]

61. Here's a video showing the whole thing.

At about two minutes in, the plane arrives from the left of the screen. It briefly(!) goes under water then bobs back up on its own. The first ferry arrives in just a few minutes when folks were standing on the wings.

Such an amazing ordeal all around by everyone. O8)

****************

This video apparently comes from a Coast Guard surveillance camera. It's a static scene until just after 2 minutes into the video when the plane, apparently just having touched down, comes into the field of view as a splash line from the left. A few moments later the camera zooms in and you can see the first moments of the passengers coming out of the plane.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/01/this_video_apparently_comes_from.php

[Stephanie]

65. I am talking about after the rescue

In the photos the ferries are all surrounding the area but the plane has disappeared. Then it comes back up.

[pengillian101]

70. OK and thanks.

I wonder if they towed it out of the main waterway if the empty plane submerged for a bit. That would make sense to me.

What a wonderful survival rescue by all involved!

[roguevalley]

55. so basically you got it going on. :) Impressive resume. My family used to fly

dc-3's and 6's into the Alaskan bush to bring out fish. I appreciate good flying. I look forward to what you have to say about this amazing thing.

[Marrah_G]

59. I was thrilled to see the outcome of that accident.

I was watching it unfold at the gym and couldn't believe anyone would survive that in that weather. For everyone to survive? WOW

Kudos to the pilots, the flight attendants and the extraordinarily calm passengers.

My fiance (as of tonight I can call him that) has worked for Delta for 27 years. I know how the employees become like a big family.

I've hear of the bird strike thing before, just didn't realize it could take down such a big plane.

I look forward to your thoughts when you are able to share them.

[Fire1]

60. Nice to know bloggers in 'high places' lol!

[Blue_Tires]

63. kick for DemoTex

[11 Bravo]

66. I eagerly await your comments.

And here is yet another reason to love DU. What a wealth of talented people we have here!

[lumberjack_jeff]

68. So... when will "when I can" be?

I'd love to hear your perspective on this but, like a couple of others, I'm unclear about the purpose of this post.