Plane Crashes into Hudson River

[IJ Reilly]

(Warning - geekery ahead intended for IJ Reilly. Read only if you're curious, or in need of sleep)

Oh no, not the FAR/AIM -- the ultimate soporific!

Probably everybody had a CFI at one time or another who bellowed at them, "You mean you can't recite Part 91 chapter and verse?"

The worst thing about this was, they could. Learning to fly can be an exercise in humiliation.

So true.

Considering the Hudson river is very busy, both on the water and above, they were very lucky to be able to come down without hitting anything along the way.

He done good!

One scenario that the NTSB will doubtless be examining is whether the flight crew lost one engine then accidentally shut down the good one. Apparently this happens fairly often in simulated flame-out exercises.

 

[r.j.s]

One scenario that the NTSB will doubtless be examining is whether the flight crew lost one engine then accidentally shut down the good one. Apparently this happens fairly often in simulated flame-out exercises.

If that were the case, he'd go from hero to nothing in no time.

 

[irmongoose]

Student pilot here.

Cheers for the explanation!

The New York mayor is honoring the pilot and crew as heroes - great news.


irmongoose

 

[bradl]

For those of you who would like to SEE what happened, point your browser at:

http://www4.passur.com/lga.html

Set the time to yesterday at 15:26, and look for USA1549 departing runway 4 at LGA. You'll see it depart, climb out, drop like a brick after being struck by the birds, barely maintain 1400ft while going over the GW Bridge, then setting down in the Hudson as everyone has seen. The only UPS soiled pants moment was when a single engine plane or heli was over the bridge at 900ft, sees the A320 coming, turns right and gets the hell out of the way.

Another bit of food for thought: recall the JBU292 incident a couple years ago at LAX. It's the one where the nosegear was down, but the wheels were perpendicular to the rest of the plane. When it landed, the pilot rotated the aircraft so the nosegear was the last to hit the runway (as normal). But he kept it up until he got slow enough on the ground to cause minimal damage (that plane is back in the air). My guess is that the pilot here did the same exact thing except wheels up.

There are videos out there with JBU292, have a look.

BL.

 

[dmr727]

Interesting that the media hasn't said a word about the First Officer. He was up there too.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Interesting that the media hasn't said a word about the First Officer. He was up there too.

True. Credit is also due to certain passengers who reportedly helped calm down their more hysterical fellows and kept the movement out of the plane orderly. Had there been mass panic inside the plane we could have had some drownings or a stampede.

 

[dmr727]

True. Credit is also due to certain passengers who reportedly helped calm down their more hysterical fellows and kept the movement out of the plane orderly. Had there been mass panic inside the plane we could have had some drownings or a stampede.

Oh definitely - it was a good job by everyone. It's nice to see stories like this!

Interesting take on the future of aviation safety, given that flying for the airlines ain't what it used to be:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0116/p25s30-usgn.html

 

[jzuena]

I applaud the pilot, the crew, and all those involved in the rescue. However, two questions:

- Was ditching the best possible action at the time?
- Could the "bird situation" have been prevented?

I guess these will be answered in the next few days/weeks, but seeing that it is New York City, there must have been plenty of runways to land at, and plenty of other planes that might have been (but weren't) subjected to the sudden onslaught of birds that caused it to go down.

Interesting, nonetheless.

irmongoose

If you look at the area via Google Maps you will see that there aren't many flat spots to land in Manhattan or New Jersey in that area. Lots of tall buildings. TEB was just about the only flat area other than the Hudson and the pilot determined he could not make TEB safely, so...

The amazing thing is they couldn't know how the airplane was designed to perform in a glide since this is never tested for an airplane of this kind.

I'm sure Airbus had to calculate the theoretical V speeds and put something in the manuals. The pilots had to have some airspeed to shoot for to "glide" the Airbus as far as possible.

Oh no, not the FAR/AIM -- the ultimate soporific!

Probably everybody had a CFI at one time or another who bellowed at them, "You mean you can't recite Part 91 chapter and verse?"

And its usually right after they pull your power and ask you "what is your Vg speed, and what is your target landing spot and why (and why haven't you already trimmed off to that Vg speed?)".
They need to do something to get your stress level somewhere near where it would be on a real emergency like yesterday's.

 

[dmr727]

I'm sure Airbus had to calculate the theoretical V speeds and put something in the manuals. The pilots had to have some airspeed to shoot for to "glide" the Airbus as far as possible.

You're close. In a jet, you're not looking for an airspeed - you're looking for an angle of attack. The angle of attack indicator will have a marking for max L/D (best glide). The pilot merely needs to pitch for that. It's better than using an airspeed because AOA will work regardless of aircraft configuration, weight, CG, etc. Plus you never have a number to remember.

 

[iParis]

How do you know he's related to the pilot? Did you have a driving lesson yesterday or something?

Also, quick question for you: what's your driver instructor's first name?

Actually yes I did have class yesterday. It was the first day we had that particular driving instructor since we have about 3 different ones.
I have no idea what his first name is.

Like I said, I may have been mistaken. His son may have been the co pilot but I'm pretty sure I rememeber him saying his son's the pilot.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

The angle of attack indicator will have a marking for max L/D (best glide). The pilot merely needs to pitch for that.

When did this become standard equipment in airliners?

 

[dmr727]

When did this become standard equipment in airliners?

I have no idea. I'm not sure that it's even necessarily standard. I don't know much about airliners, although I know a couple things about the Airbus 320 because my wife flies one. I think she gets tired of all my questions, though.

AOA indicators have been standard on everything I've flown over on my side of the fence - the oldest airplane being from 1979. But again, dunno about the airliners.

 

[Consultant]

You have to distinguish between crashes where the pilot had control of the plane, trying to land on the water - and crashes where the plane ended up in the water due to pilot error, or out of control due to mechanical difficulties that seriously compromised control. There was a case of a plane landing in Puget sound 50 years ago. Most of the other examples I came up with the pilot was not attempting a water landing.

See my note above, I'm not trying to downplay the seriousness.... I'm trying to point out that things worked really really well.

Yes it went really well.

Survival lessons learned from previous jet ditchings
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/16/air.crash.ditching/index.html

 

[IJ Reilly]

I'm sure Airbus had to calculate the theoretical V speeds and put something in the manuals. The pilots had to have some airspeed to shoot for to "glide" the Airbus as far as possible.

I don't know for certain, but I think not. I'm pretty sure flying an airplane of this kind with no power makes you a test pilot.

And its usually right after they pull your power and ask you "what is your Vg speed, and what is your target landing spot and why (and why haven't you already trimmed off to that Vg speed?)".
They need to do something to get your stress level somewhere near where it would be on a real emergency like yesterday's.

Or the real stress level you will experience on your check ride.

You've got to have just a little bit of a mean streak to be a CFI.

 

[Abstract]

72. Thank God we have more than one instructor.
I could be mistaken, but I don't think so. I'll ask him about it when I see him next.

He's a 72 years old driving instructor, who has a 57 year old son? I guess he was 14 when he conceived him.

Actually yes I did have class yesterday. It was the first day we had that particular driving instructor since we have about 3 different ones.
I have no idea what his first name is.

Like I said, I may have been mistaken. His son may have been the co pilot but I'm pretty sure I rememeber him saying his son's the pilot.

Right. Find out what his name is, and I'll tell you if he's the pilot's father.

 

[dmr727]

I don't know for certain, but I think not. I'm pretty sure flying an airplane of this kind with no power makes you a test pilot.

You're pretty much right. And really, they probably weren't thinking about best glide anyway. With the Hudson right there and no way to get to an airport, I'd guess the pilot flying (we don't necessarily know it was the Captain) just pitched for Vref (again, using AOA to do so) and hoped for the best.

You've got to have just a little bit of a mean streak to be a CFI.

CFIs aren't all mean, dammit! Right rudder! Right rudder!

 

[IJ Reilly]

You're pretty much right. And really, they probably weren't thinking about best glide anyway. With the Hudson right there and no way to get to an airport, I'd guess the pilot flying (we don't necessarily know it was the Captain) just pitched for Vref (again, using AOA to do so) and hoped for the best.

I wonder how they chose flap settings. Do you extend full flaps to minimize stall speed? Something less to preserve more maneuverability? How many seconds do you have to decide? Yikes.

For those who don't get the reference to being a test pilot, all aircraft are flown during testing by pilots who determine the performance envelope for that airplane, which is then published and learned by everyone who flies the airplane thereafter. Anyone who by reason of choice or necessity flies outside that envelope becomes a "test pilot" for all intents and purposes, because they can no longer have any expectations for how the airplane will perform.

CFIs aren't all mean, dammit! Right rudder! Right rudder!

Spoken like a true CFI? No, the other right rudder! (Shouted by CFI in unusual attitude training as an incipient spin develops.)

 

[Thomas Veil]

I wonder if the birds that took the plane down are the same that damaged a gas station and some cars.

Until I checked the link, I thought you were talking about this.

 

[dmr727]

Spoken like a true CFI? No, the other right rudder! (Shouted by CFI in unusual attitude training as an incipient spin develops.)

Yep - I instructed for a couple of years. I still keep the certificates (MEI,CFII,CFI) current, but in reality I haven't done that kind of flying in quite some time.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Yep - I instructed for a couple of years. I still keep the certificates (MEI,CFII,CFI) current, but in reality I haven't done that kind of flying in quite some time.

Time-building towards your ATP, I presume.

 

[dmr727]

Time-building towards your ATP, I presume.

Do I detect a certain amount of derision in that post?

But yes, I was instructing to build experience, and see where the career would take me. This was at a time where the regionals were gobbling up commercial pilots with stupidly low hours - 250TT and 50 multi. I had no desire to go that route.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Do I detect a certain amount of derision in that post?

But yes, I was instructing to build experience, and see where the career would take me. This was at a time where the regionals were gobbling up commercial pilots with stupidly low hours - 250TT and 50 multi. I had no desire to go that route.

Oh, no, no, no, no. Yes.

You know how common it is for prospective ATPs to work their way up through being a CFI. Most of the instructors at my flight school were doing that.

Speaking of CFIs, I need to get with one soon. I've been inactive for quite a long stretch.

 

[Counterfit]

For those of you who would like to SEE what happened, point your browser at:

http://www4.passur.com/lga.html

Set the time to yesterday at 15:26, and look for USA1549 departing runway 4 at LGA. You'll see it depart, climb out, drop like a brick after being struck by the birds, barely maintain 1400ft while going over the GW Bridge, then setting down in the Hudson as everyone has seen. The only UPS soiled pants moment was when a single engine plane or heli was over the bridge at 900ft, sees the A320 coming, turns right and gets the hell out of the way.

I can't get that to work.

 

[jzuena]

I don't know for certain, but I think not. I'm pretty sure flying an airplane of this kind with no power makes you a test pilot.

You would definitely be a test pilot, since they are not tested for their glide, but I'm sure the engineers do run calculations to determine what the plane should do and how you would theoretically set the plane up for best performance. That information must be available to pilots somewhere and I would expect good pilots to seek that kind of info out and keep it in the back of their mind, just in case.

Or the real stress level you will experience on your check ride.

Tell me about it. On my first check ride it was 35C (95F - see, we do use the Metric system for some things in the US) with strong thermals causing light to moderate turbulence. The plane was going up and down like a yo-yo depending on what terrain we flew over; way more than the +/- 100' max. I figured I had to have failed right there. Then we landed on the little-used runway that is preceded by a long parking lot generating lots of thermals of its own. I thought I was done for, but the DE said that he took the weather into account and everything else was fine so I passed. Definitely the nicest DE I've flown with, but on both my helicopter and instrument check-rides it seemed like the DE was going out of his way to make the flight as stress-free as possible.

You've got to have just a little bit of a mean streak to be a CFI.

It seems like you need a mellow streak to be a Designated Examiner, although I've heard getting a check-ride directly with an FAA employee is a "slightly" different experience.

 

[IJ Reilly]

My checkride came on a very warm day also, with some low level windshear. I'd have been sweating anyway.

It was so nerve-wracking. My DE was an ex-military guy. Silent most of the time, barking at me the next. After a landing he just says, "Okay, taxi in." I keep glancing over at him. He's just sitting there, stone-faced. I'm thinking I flunked. I shut down, wait. He says nothing. Finally I ask him. He tells me I passed.

To this day I don't know if he was messing with me or was trying to decide.