Search the archive:
 YaBB - Yet another Bulletin Board
 
   
 
  Simviation Forum › Real World › Real Aviation › US AIRWAYS CRASH HAPPENING NOW
(Moderators: Mitch., Fly2e, ozzy72, beaky, Clipper, JBaymore, Bob70, BigTruck)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Pages: 1 
Send Topic Print
US AIRWAYS CRASH HAPPENING NOW (Read 1034 times)
Jan 15th, 2009 at 4:17pm

skoker   Offline
Colonel
Jordan never wore his
safety goggles...
1G3

Gender: male
 Posts: 4611
 *****
 
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/USA1549

US Airways 1549 an A320 LGA-CLT has crashed into the Hudson. 151 onboard.  Reported all made it out safely.  AFTER TAKEOFF PLANE HIT BIRDS AND LOST BOTH ENGINES.  The reported temperature was 41*F in the water.  Reported that people were waiting on top of the plane.  The plane was in the air for 6min.  Should be ABC right now.
 

...
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #1 - Jan 15th, 2009 at 4:21pm

C   Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144
 *****
 
Anyone else wanting to start a new thread on this. This is thread #4...
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #2 - Jan 15th, 2009 at 8:53pm

B-Valvs   Ex Member

*
 
C wrote on Jan 15th, 2009 at 4:21pm:
Anyone else wanting to start a new thread on this. This is thread #4...


I was about to start a new one until I saw all of them.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/plane_in_river

I was watching this live and I got in a big fight with my mom because I was trying to tell her about how the plane would be able to float for a while due to the less dense than water jet fuel in the unreptured fuel tanks. She was trying ot tell me that density had nothing to do with it and that little theory didn't make sense. I tried to explain it wasn't theory, it was fact, then she flipped out and started screaming at me. Geeze I think I would have rather been on the plane.  Wink I hate ignorance. Just cause I'm younger doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about. Oh. by the way, did anyone every see it sink before they had it hooked up to the boats, nope.  Wink

Seriousness aside, the passengers were incredibly lucky and the crew was amazing.

By the way, there's acutally 5 threads going on right now. It takes something big to have that happen.

Cool






 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #3 - Jan 15th, 2009 at 9:57pm

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

Gender: male
 Posts: 14187
 *****
 
Quote:
[quote author=Hot_Charlie link=1232054247/0#1 date=1232054505]
I was watching this live and I got in a big fight with my mom because I was trying to tell her about how the plane would be able to float for a while due to the less dense than water jet fuel in the unreptured fuel tanks. She was trying ot tell me that density had nothing to do with it and that little theory didn't make sense. I tried to explain it wasn't theory, it was fact, then she flipped out and started screaming at me. Geeze I think I would have rather been on the plane.  Wink I hate ignorance. Just cause I'm younger doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about. Oh. by the way, did anyone every see it sink before they had it hooked up to the boats, nope.  Wink




Show her this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathyscaphe_Trieste

Bathyscapes like this used gasoline in water the same way a hydrogen balloon or airship uses hydrogen in air (which is mostly nitrogen).



Funny you should mention this- one aviation "expert" on some news program this evening was going on about how it was amazing the plane remained buoyant despite the fact that there was more fuel than air in the tanks...  Roll Eyes 

Air works better, but fuel is definitely helpful in such a situation.

 
...
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #4 - Jan 15th, 2009 at 10:21pm

B-Valvs   Ex Member

*
 
beaky wrote on Jan 15th, 2009 at 9:57pm:
Quote:
[quote author=Hot_Charlie link=1232054247/0#1 date=1232054505]
I was watching this live and I got in a big fight with my mom because I was trying to tell her about how the plane would be able to float for a while due to the less dense than water jet fuel in the unreptured fuel tanks. She was trying ot tell me that density had nothing to do with it and that little theory didn't make sense. I tried to explain it wasn't theory, it was fact, then she flipped out and started screaming at me. Geeze I think I would have rather been on the plane.  Wink I hate ignorance. Just cause I'm younger doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about. Oh. by the way, did anyone every see it sink before they had it hooked up to the boats, nope.  Wink




Show her this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathyscaphe_Trieste

Bathyscapes like this used gasoline in water the same way a hydrogen balloon or airship uses hydrogen in air (which is mostly nitrogen).



Funny you should mention this- one aviation "expert" on some news program this evening was going on about how it was amazing the plane remained buoyant despite the fact that there was more fuel than air in the tanks...  Roll Eyes  

Air works better, but fuel is definitely helpful in such a situation.



Obviously air works better, but when gas is all that you got...

It doesn't matter anyway, she won't listen to me and I'm in trouble, as usual. I don't know why I keep trying to teach people things, it always ends like that.
Technically I'm not supposed to be typing this right now, so if anyone asks I'm typing an essay for school (finshed 45 minutes ago). Hmmm, mabey ignorance is a good thing in some situations.  Grin Grin
 Wink

Cool
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #5 - Jan 15th, 2009 at 10:32pm

B-Valvs   Ex Member

*
 
Check this out:

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/US-Airways-plane-crashes-into-Hudson-River-flock-o...

Wow.

Cool

 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #6 - Jan 15th, 2009 at 10:42pm

BFMF   Offline
Colonel
Pacific Northwest

Gender: male
 Posts: 19820
 *****
 
THe one time I don't watch the evening news, I miss this.... Roll Eyes
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #7 - Jan 15th, 2009 at 11:14pm

yancovitch   Offline
Colonel
effortless effort
born montreal, live vancouver

Gender: male
 Posts: 1897
 *****
 
the thing i really want to know is....will they be able to salvage the plane?...or is it toast?......
 
intel i7 950.....asus p6t delux v2....asus gtx 285......raptor 150g...raptor300g (fsx)......liquid cooled cpu cooler.....6gb corsair 1600-777........windows 7......antec 900 case.....
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #8 - Jan 15th, 2009 at 11:36pm

Ang2dogs   Offline
Colonel
No matter where you go,
there you are.
black mountain hills of Dakota

Gender: male
 Posts: 848
 *****
 
BRAVO, to the Captain for saving life and limb, BRAVO to the whole crew, BRAVO job welldone Smiley
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #9 - Jan 16th, 2009 at 1:25am

expat   Offline
Colonel
Deep behind enemy lines!

Gender: male
 Posts: 8499
 *****
 
Quote:
beaky wrote on Jan 15th, 2009 at 9:57pm:
Quote:
[quote author=Hot_Charlie link=1232054247/0#1 date=1232054505]
I was watching this live and I got in a big fight with my mom because I was trying to tell her about how the plane would be able to float for a while due to the less dense than water jet fuel in the unreptured fuel tanks. She was trying ot tell me that density had nothing to do with it and that little theory didn't make sense. I tried to explain it wasn't theory, it was fact, then she flipped out and started screaming at me. Geeze I think I would have rather been on the plane.  Wink I hate ignorance. Just cause I'm younger doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about. Oh. by the way, did anyone every see it sink before they had it hooked up to the boats, nope.  Wink




Show her this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathyscaphe_Trieste

Bathyscapes like this used gasoline in water the same way a hydrogen balloon or airship uses hydrogen in air (which is mostly nitrogen).



Funny you should mention this- one aviation "expert" on some news program this evening was going on about how it was amazing the plane remained buoyant despite the fact that there was more fuel than air in the tanks...  Roll Eyes  

Air works better, but fuel is definitely helpful in such a situation.



Obviously air works better, but when gas is all that you got...

It doesn't matter anyway, she won't listen to me and I'm in trouble, as usual. I don't know why I keep trying to teach people things, it always ends like that.
Technically I'm not supposed to be typing this right now, so if anyone asks I'm typing an essay for school (finshed 45 minutes ago). Hmmm, mabey ignorance is a good thing in some situations.  Grin Grin
 Wink

Cool


I think we are also forgetting a few other things here. Three large air storage devices..................aft cargo, forward cargo and as it was only flying to North Carolina, a very empty center tank ,not to mention nose avionics bay and main avionics bay, AND most importantly a small pushbutton on the overhead panel that has a label under it marked "Ditching". Pushing this closes all "orifices" to the outside world, ram air, overboard vent valves, cabin pressurisation etc thus keeping water out for quite a while. Rather clever is the Airbus.


Matt


 
PETA ... People Eating Tasty Animals.

B1 Boeing 737-800 and Dash8 Q-400
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #10 - Jan 16th, 2009 at 1:51am

Jeff.Guo   Offline
Colonel
Hello!

Posts: 283
 *****
 
Quote:
I think we are also forgetting a few other things here. Three large air storage devices..................aft cargo, forward cargo and as it was only flying to North Carolina, a very empty center tank ,not to mention nose avionics bay and main avionics bay, AND most importantly a small pushbutton on the overhead panel that has a label under it marked "Ditching". Pushing this closes all "orifices" to the outside world, ram air, overboard vent valves, cabin pressurisation etc thus keeping water out for quite a while. Rather clever is the Airbus.


I do question how long those systems remain functional though, especially with no APU power and with the batt shut off.

My hat does go off to the pilot though, with all that fuel on board, the ditching attempt could've easily turned into complete disaster. Most pilots wouldn't have been comfortable landing a perfectly good aircraft with that much fuel, let alone ditch a unpowered one.
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #11 - Jan 16th, 2009 at 5:35am

expat   Offline
Colonel
Deep behind enemy lines!

Gender: male
 Posts: 8499
 *****
 
Jeff.Guo wrote on Jan 16th, 2009 at 1:51am:
Quote:
I think we are also forgetting a few other things here. Three large air storage devices..................aft cargo, forward cargo and as it was only flying to North Carolina, a very empty center tank ,not to mention nose avionics bay and main avionics bay, AND most importantly a small pushbutton on the overhead panel that has a label under it marked "Ditching". Pushing this closes all "orifices" to the outside world, ram air, overboard vent valves, cabin pressurisation etc thus keeping water out for quite a while. Rather clever is the Airbus.


I do question how long those systems remain functional though, especially with no APU power and with the batt shut off.


They remain very functional, they are "power off closed" items.

Matt
 
PETA ... People Eating Tasty Animals.

B1 Boeing 737-800 and Dash8 Q-400
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #12 - Jan 16th, 2009 at 3:20pm

B-Valvs   Ex Member

*
 
expat wrote on Jan 16th, 2009 at 5:35am:
Jeff.Guo wrote on Jan 16th, 2009 at 1:51am:
Quote:
I think we are also forgetting a few other things here. Three large air storage devices..................aft cargo, forward cargo and as it was only flying to North Carolina, a very empty center tank ,not to mention nose avionics bay and main avionics bay, AND most importantly a small pushbutton on the overhead panel that has a label under it marked "Ditching". Pushing this closes all "orifices" to the outside world, ram air, overboard vent valves, cabin pressurisation etc thus keeping water out for quite a while. Rather clever is the Airbus.


I do question how long those systems remain functional though, especially with no APU power and with the batt shut off.


They remain very functional, they are "power off closed" items.

Matt


I was talking about this with my Business teacher today aand he asked me if there was a button like that, I told him I didn't think so. Oops. I'll tell him there is if the subject comes up again.

Cool
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #13 - Jan 16th, 2009 at 3:28pm

B-Valvs   Ex Member

*
 
I just told my mom about that switch and she is still arguing with me. She thinks that it would've sunk immediatley if it hadn't been tetherd to the ships because there was water in it and that's what the news guy said. Yeah, the news guy was also holding a model of an A320 and was calling it a 737 for a while.  Roll Eyes I don't understand why people can't admit it when they're wrong.

Cool
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #14 - Jan 16th, 2009 at 5:56pm

B-Valvs   Ex Member

*
 
Now they have found that both engines are missing. So, not exactly a perfecty executed ditch, but better than a cartwheel effect.

Cool

 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #15 - Jan 16th, 2009 at 6:00pm

Hagar   Offline
Colonel
My Spitfire Girl
Costa Geriatrica

Posts: 33159
 *****
 
Quote:
Now they have found that both engines are missing. So, not exactly a perfecty executed ditch, but better than a cartwheel effect.

Cool


According to expat that's intentional. Probably the reason it was successful.

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

Founder & Sole Member - Grumpy's Over the Hill Club for Veteran Virtual Aviators
Member of the Fox Four Group

Need help? Try Grumpy's Lair

My photo gallery
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #16 - Jan 16th, 2009 at 7:16pm

C   Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144
 *****
 
Hagar wrote on Jan 16th, 2009 at 6:00pm:
According to expat that's intentional. Probably the reason it was successful.


Indeed. If they both shear almost instantaneously then the deceleration will be hopefully linear and less abrupt.
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #17 - Jan 16th, 2009 at 7:18pm

Ravang   Ex Member

Gender: male
 ***
 
I was watching BBC news, and they said the plane will try to be raised tomorrow morning. They also used FSX to show a "reenactment" of what happened (got better fps then my computer Grin).
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #18 - Jan 16th, 2009 at 7:48pm

skoker   Offline
Colonel
Jordan never wore his
safety goggles...
1G3

Gender: male
 Posts: 4611
 *****
 
Quote:
Now they have found that both engines are missing. So, not exactly a perfecty executed ditch, but better than a cartwheel effect.

Cool


Here are the engines in the second shot:

http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1232149816
 

...
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #19 - Jan 16th, 2009 at 10:25pm

B-Valvs   Ex Member

*
 
C wrote on Jan 16th, 2009 at 7:16pm:
Hagar wrote on Jan 16th, 2009 at 6:00pm:
According to expat that's intentional. Probably the reason it was successful.


Indeed. If they both shear almost instantaneously then the deceleration will be hopefully linear and less abrupt.


Oops. I should have read more carefully.  Embarrassed

Cool
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #20 - Jan 17th, 2009 at 4:15am

Hagar   Offline
Colonel
My Spitfire Girl
Costa Geriatrica

Posts: 33159
 *****
 
Quote:
C wrote on Jan 16th, 2009 at 7:16pm:
Hagar wrote on Jan 16th, 2009 at 6:00pm:
According to expat that's intentional. Probably the reason it was successful.


Indeed. If they both shear almost instantaneously then the deceleration will be hopefully linear and less abrupt.

Oops. I should have read more carefully.  Embarrassed

Cool

That's the problem with having 4 separate topics on the same subject.
 
...

Founder & Sole Member - Grumpy's Over the Hill Club for Veteran Virtual Aviators
Member of the Fox Four Group

Need help? Try Grumpy's Lair

My photo gallery
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #21 - Jan 17th, 2009 at 5:01am

expat   Offline
Colonel
Deep behind enemy lines!

Gender: male
 Posts: 8499
 *****
 
Hagar wrote on Jan 17th, 2009 at 4:15am:
Quote:
C wrote on Jan 16th, 2009 at 7:16pm:
Hagar wrote on Jan 16th, 2009 at 6:00pm:
According to expat that's intentional. Probably the reason it was successful.


Indeed. If they both shear almost instantaneously then the deceleration will be hopefully linear and less abrupt.

Oops. I should have read more carefully.  Embarrassed

Cool

That's the problem with having 4 separate topics on the same subject.



Exactly Grin I have just written in one of them that all cigar tubes have this. The engine to wing pylons have shear pins designed to shear on impact and shed the engines. This is for two reasons. If the aircraft lands on water and the engines do not come off, then they will cause the aircraft to nose over and/or rip the wings off (this goes for a wheels up on rough ground too, though, personally I would go for the water option......drowning has more appeal than burning to death Sad) . Also just like Indy car and F1, they are designed to come off in the form of energy dissipation. As many of you know I spanner on 737 and A320. During engine change we have specific maintenance orders to make a visual inspection of these shear pins for seating and corrosion. I have to say I was always skeptical and thought that this function was a water tank testers dream..............Hats off to Airbus and the Captain of course. Without very level wings it would have ended in tears like the Hijacked Ethiopian Airliner.

Matt  

 
PETA ... People Eating Tasty Animals.

B1 Boeing 737-800 and Dash8 Q-400
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #22 - Jan 17th, 2009 at 10:00am

B-Valvs   Ex Member

*
 
You're refering to the one that ran out of fuel, ditched near a beach, and cartwheeled right?

Cool
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #23 - Jan 17th, 2009 at 12:20pm

expat   Offline
Colonel
Deep behind enemy lines!

Gender: male
 Posts: 8499
 *****
 
Quote:
You're refering to the one that ran out of fuel, ditched near a beach, and cartwheeled right?

Cool


Yes, pretty much the same thing. Non working engines are non working engines however the Ethiopian 767 was effected by shore breeze at the last second which caused it to drop a wing. Nothing that the pilot could do about it in that case.

Matt
 
PETA ... People Eating Tasty Animals.

B1 Boeing 737-800 and Dash8 Q-400
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #24 - Jan 17th, 2009 at 1:50pm

DaveSims   Offline
Colonel
Clear Lake, Iowa

Gender: male
 Posts: 2453
 *****
 
New video just out on MSNBC showing the plane hitting the water.  It looks like a surveillance camera on one of the docks there.
 
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Reply #25 - Jan 17th, 2009 at 3:17pm

expat   Offline
Colonel
Deep behind enemy lines!

Gender: male
 Posts: 8499
 *****
 
DaveSims wrote on Jan 17th, 2009 at 1:50pm:
New video just out on MSNBC showing the plane hitting the water.  It looks like a surveillance camera on one of the docks there.



Can't quite believe that in such a tourist rich environment that no one noticed an A320 on final approach into the river, yet when a celeb drops the ball the whole world seems to get it on film.

Matt
 
PETA ... People Eating Tasty Animals.

B1 Boeing 737-800 and Dash8 Q-400
Back to top 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 
Send Topic Print
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
  « Home ‹ Board Top of this page

Simviation Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5 AE!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2010. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge