Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong.

[John200]

http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/05/miracle_on_hudson_plane_could.html

It's tear down the hero time again.

I had a feeling this was coming.

 

[John Picard]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/05/miracle_on_hudson_plane_could.html

It's tear down the Hero time again.

I had a feeling this was coming.

Did you bother to read the article? It clearly states that he *could have* returned to La Guardia, but just barely; therefore, his decision to land in the Hudson was most appropriate.

"Although an emergency return to La Guardia Runway 13 was technically feasible from an aircraft flight performance point of view, the emergency landing on the Hudson seems the most appropriate decision," Airbus said in an assessment submitted to the board.

Which is further bolstered by this statement:

But that scenario would have required Sullenberger to make an immediate decision with little or no time to assess the situation. He also would have had no way of knowing that he would be successful, and therefore would have been risking the possibility of a catastrophic crash in a densely populated area.

Reading comprehension -- it isn't just a good idea.

 

[Lindley]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

Takeoffs and landings within the distances published in the Pilot's Operating Handbook for a given plane are "technically possible" too, but most pilots routinely add 10% when computing runway limitations anyway. It's just not a good idea to bank on doing everything perfectly.

 

[RedShirt]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

The article seems pretty clear Sullenberger was between a rock and a hard place so he made the only feasible choice he could in the very limited time he could make it.

The once in a lifetime landing that he made could have easily turned catastrophic.

I saw calls to improve engine construction to better withstand large bird impacts as well as more simulated water landing training for pilots in the article, but I didn't see any tearing down of anybody.

 

[Marc]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

For better reading on the report can I suggest The Aviation Herald - the finds mentioned in the news article are there in full without the spin from the media.

The bit the news paper left out was that the return path to La Guardia took them over a populated area - not a good place for an jet liner imitating a glider.

Airbus computed, that the crew would have had the option of returning to La Guardia's runway 13 in an immediate reaction and turn without assessing the aircraft status. The crew would have had no knowledge whether the return over populated area could have been successful. Airbus therefore concluded their report, that although the return to runway 13 appeared possible, the ditching in the Hudson river seemed to be the most appropriate action.

http://www.avherald.com/h?article=41370ebc/0030&opt=0

 

[Teelie]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

They were pointing out the facts in a hindsight way and made it clear that it was such. Even had he been able to determine he could land at the runway, it's a "barely" make it situation and you can't anticipate what other obstacles or dangers might be encountered making that "barely" an "impossible." What if he hit another flock of geese or if the amount of damage to the engines became worse as a result of flying further?

The man made the right choice and I don't see anyone claiming otherwise in that review.

 

[John200]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/05/miracle_on_hudson_plane_could.html

It's tear down the Hero time again.

I had a feeling this was coming.

Did you bother to read the article? It clearly states that he *could have* returned to La Guardia, but just barely; therefore, his decision to land in the Hudson was most appropriate.

"Although an emergency return to La Guardia Runway 13 was technically feasible from an aircraft flight performance point of view, the emergency landing on the Hudson seems the most appropriate decision," Airbus said in an assessment submitted to the board.

Which is further bolstered by this statement:

But that scenario would have required Sullenberger to make an immediate decision with little or no time to assess the situation. He also would have had no way of knowing that he would be successful, and therefore would have been risking the possibility of a catastrophic crash in a densely populated area.

Reading comprehension -- it isn't just a good idea.

Yes I read the damn thing.

I put it there as more of a point of reference.

But why put it out there to begin with?

What purpose does this serve other then to cast doubt?

 

[Mr. B]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

Even if he had successfully landed the plane at the airport, he probably would have caught shit for flying a powerless plane over Queens.

 

[John Picard]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/05/miracle_on_hudson_plane_could.html

It's tear down the Hero time again.

I had a feeling this was coming.

Did you bother to read the article? It clearly states that he *could have* returned to La Guardia, but just barely; therefore, his decision to land in the Hudson was most appropriate.



Which is further bolstered by this statement:

But that scenario would have required Sullenberger to make an immediate decision with little or no time to assess the situation. He also would have had no way of knowing that he would be successful, and therefore would have been risking the possibility of a catastrophic crash in a densely populated area.

Reading comprehension -- it isn't just a good idea.

Yes I read the damn thing.

I put it there as more of a point of reference.

But why put it out there to begin with?

What purpose does this serve other then cast doubt?

You may have read it; however, you appear NOT to understand it. As others have pointed out, the report analyzed what happened, and *could have been done differently*, and indirectly praises Captain Sullenberger. Overall, this report states that he made a remarkable split-second decision that could have otherwise been disastrous.

Nothing in the report casts doubt over his actions.

 

[Lindley]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

But why put it out there to begin with?

What purpose does this serve other then to cast doubt?

The NTSB has this bad habit of actually investigating crashes to the best of their ability, and then reporting the results. When the investigation is of a high-profile accident, the media has a bad habit of printing the summary findings.

 

[John200]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

lol I may have overreacted.

Just don't understand why after all this time they would even mention this.

Oh well.

 

[TheBrew]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

The whole point of action reports like this is to try and analyze other possible outcomes to provide a more complete picture for training purposes. I think that it would be a bad idea just to tell all pilots to land in the Hudson, especially if they they aren't in NYC.

 

[scotpens]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

Didn't the pilot also consider making an emergency landing at Teterboro Airport, but decided against it because it would have meant flying further without power over populated areas, and making a dead-stick landing at a general-aviation facility not equipped to handle large commercial jets?

(What actually happened is, the passengers were given a choice between ditching in the Hudson and landing in New Jersey. They took a vote and decided they preferred the river.)

 

[Teelie]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

lol I may have overreacted.

Just don't understand why after all this time they would even mention this.

Oh well.

These reports are not instant or even fast. When they investigate an accident, they take their time doing it. One of the few instances I'm actually glad the government is so slow to move.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

lol I may have overreacted.

Just don't understand why after all this time they would even mention this.

Oh well.

First of all, there is no "tear down the hero" going on here.

Second, incidents like this are learning opportunities for current and future pilots. The results of these investigations lead to better training for similar situations in the future.

Nowhere was it claimed that Sully made the wrong decision. He had no way of knowing how damaged the plane was. He managed to land safely in the Hudson with no loss of life. No one can or will take issue with that.

 

[FPAlpha]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

lol I may have overreacted.

Just don't understand why after all this time they would even mention this.

Oh well.

Everytime something goes wrong, no matter how brilliant it may be resolved by someone, investigations will always ask "Was it the best way to solve the problem and how can we learn from it?"

If i recall correctly not even a pilot the class of Sullenberger could be sure that the plane would land "smoothly" in the river and not topple of and break apart.. it was experience together with a bit of luck that everything went well.

However, on general, not every pilot has decades of experience so methods have to be researched and tested that all pilots, regardless of age and experience, can perform.

It is in no way diminishing Sullenberger's feat.. in fact the report praises him for making the best decision possible in a very chaotic phase and with limited time.

 

[Kirby]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

Sullenberger put the least amount of people at risk by going into the Hudson, and managed a very difficult landing, and saved every life on that plane. The guy is a hero all the way around.

Frankly I'm surprised that PETA didn't come out with some bullshit about how many fish he killed by landing in the river.

 

[Trekker4747]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

He chose to "land" in the Hudson. He did so and the only loss was of the aircraft. I'd say he made the right decision.

 

[Teelie]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

Sullenberger put the least amount of people at risk by going into the Hudson, and managed a very difficult landing, and saved every life on that plane. The guy is a hero all the way around.

Frankly I'm surprised that PETA didn't come out with some bullshit about how many fish he killed by landing in the river.

Or how he didn't just crash into the ground to save those geese instead.

 

[M'Sharak]

Re: Apparently some people think the Hudson River hero Pilot was wrong

http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/05/miracle_on_hudson_plane_could.html

It's tear down the hero time again.

I had a feeling this was coming.

Let's see, now:

An Airbus A320 could have made it back to New York's LaGuardia Airport after colliding with geese last year, but under the circumstances the captain's decision to ditch into the Hudson River was the better choice, documents released today by a federal safety panel said.

Seems to me that the panel concluded that Sullenberger was pretty smart and in the limited time he had chose the best and safest option available. How is this "tear down the hero time"?