Simviation Forum - US AIRWAY AIRBUS A320 CRASH

Jan 15^th, 2009 at 4:10pm

Sean_TK Offline
Colonel
Hello
USA

Gender:
Posts: 1620

Just seeing the news now:

US Airways A320, bird strike after departure from La Guardia, New York. Crashed in Hudson River.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/15/new.york.plane.crash/index.html

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #1 - Jan 15^th, 2009 at 4:19pm

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

Hopefully the initial reports are true, and they've been able to evacuate the aircraft.

Pictures being shown now on British TV show it intact.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #2 - Jan 15^th, 2009 at 4:47pm

Mobius Offline
Colonel
Highest Point in the Lightning
Storm
Wisconsin

Posts: 4369

Apparently everyone got out. Amazing piloting job there. Smiley

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/15/new.york.plane.crash/index.html?eref=rss_topsto...

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #3 - Jan 15^th, 2009 at 5:10pm

CD. Ex Member

Mobius wrote on Jan 15^th, 2009 at 4:47pm:

Amazing piloting job there. Smiley

Indeed..

Amazing.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #4 - Jan 15^th, 2009 at 5:13pm

Craig. Offline
Colonel
Birmingham

Gender:
Posts: 18590

Interesting Press conference, sounded like a pre flight briefing from flight crew. Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #5 - Jan 15^th, 2009 at 5:22pm

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

Craig. wrote on Jan 15^th, 2009 at 5:13pm:

Interesting Press conference, sounded like a pre flight briefing from flight crew. Roll Eyes

Everyone will be covering their backs. Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #6 - Jan 15^th, 2009 at 6:03pm

Sean_TK Offline
Colonel
Hello
USA

Gender:
Posts: 1620

Excellent job by the pilots. Case in point: The media is actually calling it a forced landing, rather than using the term "crash".

Looks like everyone survived, and only one or two minor injuries, besides being wet and cold.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #7 - Jan 15^th, 2009 at 6:18pm

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

Sean_TK wrote on Jan 15^th, 2009 at 6:03pm:

Excellent job by the pilots. Case in point: The media is actually calling it a forced landing, rather than using the term "crash".

That's because it was a forced landing - it didn't "crash" as such, and it appears there was some degree of control until the aircraft was on the water.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #8 - Jan 15^th, 2009 at 6:26pm

Alonso Offline
Colonel
Love airliners...
Lima, Peru

Gender:
Posts: 3326

So good that everyone survived..

that's a true miracle for a water landing!!!

oh wait... is it a water LANDing?

Undecided

Core i5 2500k @ 3.8 - 8GB DDR3 - GTX 560 OC - 60GB SSD - 1TB HDD - Cyborg V.1 stick

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #9 - Jan 15^th, 2009 at 6:42pm

C Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144

Alonso wrote on Jan 15^th, 2009 at 6:26pm:

So good that everyone survived..

that's a true miracle for a water landing!!!

oh wait... is it a water LANDing?

Undecided

I think the correct English would be to say the aeroplane performed a water alighting, or maybe more correctly, alighted on the water.

Quote:

Alight

a·light 1 (-lt)
intr.v. a·light·ed or a·lit (-lt), a·light·ing, a·lights
1. To come down and settle, as after flight: a sparrow alighting on a branch.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #10 - Jan 15^th, 2009 at 7:28pm

Sean_TK Offline
Colonel
Hello
USA

Gender:
Posts: 1620

Yes, I'm aware of the differences between a "crash" and a "forced-landing", I'm just saying that the media actually is not jumping on this as a cataclysmic entry into the water, as they usually do.

It's very obvious that the pilots did an excellent job ditching the aircraft, and the media is actually making a point of saying that for once. It just surprised me.

The only stupid questions on television that I've heard yet is why the pilot did not turn to avoid the birds. Grin

(This stuff happens in the literal blink of an eye, and at such a high closure rate, once you see the flock of birds, it's too late.)

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #11 - Jan 15^th, 2009 at 7:41pm

beaky Offline
Global Moderator
Uhhhh.... yup!
Newark, NJ USA

Gender:
Posts: 14187

Initially, they did call it a crash... along wth the usual eyewitness blurbs about the plane "falling out of the sky" and "hitting the water". Roll Eyes

Their job is not to inform the public, but to feed anxieties. Grin

They also described it initially as a "small plane that holds about 150 people"... and NBC, who pretty much only had to turn a camera in their studio towards the window to cover it, put their "aviation expert" on about an hour after the ditching, and he promptly explained that it was a CRJ. Cheesy

BTW, the correct term is "ditching", although I have no idea what it has to do with ditches... Huh

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #12 - Jan 16^th, 2009 at 1:25am

expat Offline
Colonel
Deep behind enemy lines!

Gender:
Posts: 8499

An outstanding piece of airman ship. I would be most surprised if (after the price has been agreed) some interesting video of this does not surface. It landed in front of the Intrepid in view of the Empire State, both places full of people and camcorders. It would also be interesting to see if the engines are still on the wings or not. This would indicate what sort of landing it made. If it "landed" on the water they would normally be ripped off, as they are designed too or if they are still on, possibly indicating that the pilot stalled her onto the water tail first. I think I am also right in saying that this is the first ditching of an airliner where the aircraft did no break up and all walked/floated away.

Matt

PETA People Eating Tasty Animals.

B1 Boeing 737-800 and Dash8 Q-400

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #13 - Jan 16^th, 2009 at 4:52am

pepper_airborne Offline
Colonel
Voorhout - The Netherlands

Posts: 2390

expat wrote on Jan 16^th, 2009 at 1:25am:

An outstanding piece of airman ship. I would be most surprised if (after the price has been agreed) some interesting video of this does not surface. It landed in front of the Intrepid in view of the Empire State, both places full of people and camcorders. It would also be interesting to see if the engines are still on the wings or not. This would indicate what sort of landing it made. If it "landed" on the water they would normally be ripped off, as they are designed too or if they are still on, possibly indicating that the pilot stalled her onto the water tail first. I think I am also right in saying that this is the first ditching of an airliner where the aircraft did no break up and all walked/floated away.

Matt

Yes, a ex-pilot explained the landing on dutch television, he explained the trouble with a single wing tip hitting the water and the outstanding flying of the pilots, first thing i would try and do is landing with the tail first so the plane eases into the water, although i have no idea what the correct procedure would be.

http://white-line.org/&&;

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #14 - Jan 16^th, 2009 at 5:26am

BigTruck Offline
Global Moderator
Former Sergeant of Marines
Tuscaloosa, AL

Gender:
Posts: 7161

pepper_airborne wrote on Jan 16^th, 2009 at 4:52am:

[quote author=the-ex-pat link=1232053811/0#12 date=1232087140] although i have no idea what the correct procedure would be.

Scream a string of cuss words while wildly yanking at the yoke and stomping the rudder pedals and smashing the throttle through the quadrant....well that's how I would save everybody. Smooth and professional. That's right. Just like Top Gun. Captain Truck.

Back to top

IP Logged

	Search the archive: