248 replies to this topic

[kenair744]

My hat's off to the commercial ferry / tour boats to help rescue those passengers...

[Cactus]

kenair744, on Jan 16 2009, 06:39 AM, said:

My hat's off to the commercial ferry / tour boats to help rescue those passengers...

Agreed, those pasengers wouldn't have survived more than 5 - 10 minutes if it wasn't for their quick response. A number of actions in this chain of events that need to be commended.

[Niick]

I don't see why there isn't a video from the inside. My first thought would be get the video camera out and then record it for YouTube.  

[jetblast787]

Not sure, but I think this is the first proper ditching in these circumstances of a commercial airliner safely with no fatalities. I love how the british media go after Eric Moody (BAW009, search wiki) as soon as there is a thing like this
Hats off to the pilots though, looks like he was trying to aquaplane it

[suddste]

Heh, they've started using FSX to show people now:

http://news.sky.com/...ight_simulation

[Mr. Schutte]

That has to be the worst re-enactment I have ever seen! Wrong aircraft type, they were overspeed on the climbout, descended far too quickly and as a result were far too fast above the water, you can see just as they were about to touchdown they were about to plow into a cruise ship. Not too mention the frame rates !

Edited by Mr. Schutte, 16 January 2009 - 09:06 AM.

[franthree]

Mr. Schutte, on Jan 16 2009, 09:06 AM, said:

That has to be the worst re-enactment I have ever seen! Wrong aircraft type, they were overspeed on the climbout, descended far too quickly and as a result were far too fast above the water, you can see just as they were about to touchdown they were about to plow into a cruise ship. Not too mention the frame rates !

Yea--lousy FPS on that vid --he should have used FS 2002---any one here at FSW doing a sceenshot of the water landing?--

[kenair744]

THBatMan8, on Jan 16 2009, 02:15 AM, said:

THBatMan8, on Jan 15 2009, 06:21 PM, said:

Cudos to the pilots and flight crew for bringing that plane down safely.

Airbuses have a RAT that deploys (similar to Boeing's) in the event of a complete engine failure. If you note the news shots and screenshots, the flaps are still fully extended meaning they had some hydraulic power. Maybe the flight crew also had the APU running from takeoff.

What impressed me the most is the plane stayed in one piece (generally speaking) during that hard landing. That says alot about the durability of the Airbus fleet if anyone had any doubt.

My hats off to the entire flight crew and the builders of the Airbus fleet. The situation could have been much worse.

The RAT will deploy in the event of a multiple engine failure as a hydraulic fail safe.

(I saw a made for TV movie about this incident)

It DID happen to an Air Canada Boeing 767 [Flight # 143] on July 23, 1983. Known as the The Gimli Glider.

http://www.wadenelson.com/gimli.html

Quote

At 1:21 GMT, the forty million dollar, state-of-the-art Boeing 767 had become a glider. The APU, designed to supply electrical and pneumatic power under emergency conditions, was no help because it drank from the same fuel tanks as the main engines. Approaching 28,000 feet the 767's glass cockpit went dark. Pilot Bob Pearson was left with a radio and standby instruments, noticeably lacking a vertical speed indicator - the glider pilot's instrument of choice. Hydraulic pressure was falling fast and the plane's controls were quickly becoming inoperative. But the engineers at Boeing had foreseen even this most unlikely of scenarios and provided one last failsafe&emdash;the RAT.

The RAT is the Ram Air Turbine, a propeller driven hydraulic pump tucked under the belly of the 767. The RAT can supply just enough hydraulic pressure to move the control surfaces and enable a dead-stick landing. The loss of both engines caused the RAT to automatically drop into the airstream and begin supplying hydraulic pressure.

There is ONE thing in common for BOTH pilots is that they have gliding experience

Air Canada Pilot
http://www.wadenelson.com/gimli.html

Quote

The avoidance of disaster was credited to Capt. Pearson's "Knowledge of gliding which he applied in an emergency situation to the landing of one of the most sophisticated aircraft ever built."

USAir Pilot
http://www.nytimes.c...on/16pilot.html

Quote

Airliners are not meant to glide, although occasionally they have to. The pilot of this one, Capt. Chesley B. Sullenberger III, is certified as a glider pilot, according to Federal Aviation Administration records.

[AmericanAirFan]

franthree, on Jan 16 2009, 10:22 AM, said:

Mr. Schutte, on Jan 16 2009, 09:06 AM, said:

That has to be the worst re-enactment I have ever seen! Wrong aircraft type, they were overspeed on the climbout, descended far too quickly and as a result were far too fast above the water, you can see just as they were about to touchdown they were about to plow into a cruise ship. Not too mention the frame rates !

Yea--lousy FPS on that vid --he should have used FS 2002---any one here at FSW doing a sceenshot of the water landing?--

I could've made a better video being half asleep in FS9

[89-LX]

kenair744, on Jan 16 2009, 10:19 AM, said:

THBatMan8, on Jan 16 2009, 02:15 AM, said:

THBatMan8, on Jan 15 2009, 06:21 PM, said:

Cudos to the pilots and flight crew for bringing that plane down safely.

Airbuses have a RAT that deploys (similar to Boeing's) in the event of a complete engine failure. If you note the news shots and screenshots, the flaps are still fully extended meaning they had some hydraulic power. Maybe the flight crew also had the APU running from takeoff.

What impressed me the most is the plane stayed in one piece (generally speaking) during that hard landing. That says alot about the durability of the Airbus fleet if anyone had any doubt.

My hats off to the entire flight crew and the builders of the Airbus fleet. The situation could have been much worse.

The RAT will deploy in the event of a multiple engine failure as a hydraulic fail safe.

(I saw a made for TV movie about this incident)

It DID happen to an Air Canada Boeing 767 [Flight # 143] on July 23, 1983. Known as the The Gimli Glider.

http://www.wadenelson.com/gimli.html

Quote

At 1:21 GMT, the forty million dollar, state-of-the-art Boeing 767 had become a glider. The APU, designed to supply electrical and pneumatic power under emergency conditions, was no help because it drank from the same fuel tanks as the main engines. Approaching 28,000 feet the 767's glass cockpit went dark. Pilot Bob Pearson was left with a radio and standby instruments, noticeably lacking a vertical speed indicator - the glider pilot's instrument of choice. Hydraulic pressure was falling fast and the plane's controls were quickly becoming inoperative. But the engineers at Boeing had foreseen even this most unlikely of scenarios and provided one last failsafe&emdash;the RAT.

The RAT is the Ram Air Turbine, a propeller driven hydraulic pump tucked under the belly of the 767. The RAT can supply just enough hydraulic pressure to move the control surfaces and enable a dead-stick landing. The loss of both engines caused the RAT to automatically drop into the airstream and begin supplying hydraulic pressure.

There is ONE thing in common for BOTH pilots is that they have gliding experience

Air Canada Pilot
http://www.wadenelson.com/gimli.html

Quote

The avoidance of disaster was credited to Capt. Pearson's "Knowledge of gliding which he applied in an emergency situation to the landing of one of the most sophisticated aircraft ever built."

USAir Pilot
http://www.nytimes.c...on/16pilot.html

Quote

Airliners are not meant to glide, although occasionally they have to. The pilot of this one, Capt. Chesley B. Sullenberger III, is certified as a glider pilot, according to Federal Aviation Administration records.

Glider pilot or not doesn't mean crap in this situation. Completly different aspect radios, glide ratios, etc. I have killed engines and glided them before, which is all the experiance you need to fly a plane powerless. I am willing to bet that his skill comes in from the USAF, where they are taught how to ditch into water if shot down. After that, basic pilot knowledge will step in and tell you what to do. After that gets processed, the higher knowledge, what this individual has, will come into play on how far they have to glide, procedures, how to land in the water to minimized the drag/impact of when the underwing engines hit, etc.

[bigflyersmallbyer]

Duke, on Jan 16 2009, 03:25 AM, said:

THBatMan8, on Jan 15 2009, 09:49 PM, said:

Erm.... I hate to tell you but the pilots and flight crew probably wouldn't get more than a ataboy or a pat on the back from the company.

Quote

Hero crash pilot Chesley Sullenberger offered key to city of New York

http://www.timesonli...icle5531881.ece

Edited by bigflyersmallbyer, 16 January 2009 - 11:57 AM.

[Cactus]

There was also an A330 that ran out of fuel over the Atlantic

The Gimli Glider was over land

[kenair744]

Duke, on Jan 15 2009, 11:25 PM, said:

THBatMan8, on Jan 15 2009, 09:49 PM, said:

Erm.... I hate to tell you but the pilots and flight crew probably wouldn't get more than a ataboy or a pat on the back from the company.

Doing that would be a gigantic slap in the face. Every major carrier has some type of employee recognition program, as well the pilot associations and union will very likely award these pilots the highest awards of heroism and excellence for their demonstration of ability.

It isn't just "something pilots train for". Ditching isn't something you do on your sim eval. Smoke in the cockpit, emergency diversion, engine fire, yes -- but a dual shutdown and emergency ditching in WATER?! You are a fool if you brush this off as "just another day in the flight deck" not deserving any additional credit.

In event of ditching, an override switch on the overhead allows the crew to close the outflow valve and all valves below the flotation line.

Airbus confirms that such a switch exists:

http://abcnews.go.co...=6656804&page=2

Quote

"It is true the plane has a ditching switch, which closes the outflow valve and the avionics ventilation ports - in other words, those openings below what would be a theoretical float line," said Mary Anne Greczyn, a spokeswoman for Airbus.

Edited by kenair744, 16 January 2009 - 01:00 PM.

[Cactus]

kenair744, on Jan 16 2009, 01:00 PM, said:

Airbus confirms that such a switch exists:

You mean a picture from an AOM and a screencap of a real-world major carrier's QRH isn't good enough for Kenair744?

[spitfir3]

LOL anyone watching the BBC news report? They used FSX + The Wilco Airbus Volume 1 etc.. default terrain and actually flying it down into the water.. poor

[Battle_Penguin]

must be a Video on youtube of that by now!   

[franthree]

suddste, on Jan 16 2009, 08:53 AM, said:

Heh, they've started using FSX to show people now:

http://news.sky.com/...ight_simulation

Already is mate

[Max.]

Terrible frames...

[cactidust]

BBC News showed a flight sim video 'Provided by Justflight' re-enacting the landing too.

[THBatMan8]

FL050, on Jan 15 2009, 09:38 PM, said:

FYI, The MD-11 also has a 'Ditch' button - essentially does the same thing as the one on the Airbus a/c.

One of my colleagues that is ATC in the NY area said the pilots hit the birds at about 3,000 MSL.  On the way down, they almost collided with 2 helicopters that were descending over the Hudson; missed them by about 2-300 feet.

Just to reconfirm the 'Ditch' button on the MD11 the PMDG MD11 has it also. Note the screenshot below: