Simviation Forum - Amazing reconstuction of the "Hudson landing"

Oct 29^th, 2011 at 2:32pm

JBaymore Offline
Global Moderator
Under the curse of the
hombuilt cockpit!

Gender:
Posts: 10261

This may have already been posted here... but I never saw it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tE_5eiYn0D0#t=109

WOW! Nicely done. Video.... and handling of the situation Wink

.

best,

..............john

Intel i7 960 quad 3.2G LGA 1366, Asus P6X58D Premium, 750W Corsair, 6 gig 1600 DDR3, Spinpoint 1TB 7200 HD, Caviar 500G 7200 HD, GTX275 1280M, Logitec Z640, Win7 Pro 64b, CH Products yoke, pedals + throttle quad, simpit

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #1 - Oct 29^th, 2011 at 10:39pm

Jayhawk Jake Offline
Colonel
Wichita, KS

Gender:
Posts: 483

I will say, this confirms my opinion that putting the captain on a pedestal like the media has done and calling this a miracle is absurd.

Yes, he did a great job, but I'm confident that ANY pilot flying in the US today would have safely ditched in the Hudson. Very professional on his part, but I at least like to think that anyone in the same situation would handle it just as well.

I liked in one of the related videos with more audio you hear a few interesting things: Someone in the room at Teterboro goes 'Airbus? He can't land here' which is kinda funny, and someone at the Port Authority didn't understand that 'Cactus' is US Airways.

AMD Athalon X6 1090T 3.2Ghz::EVGA nVidia GeForce GTX 560Ti 2GB GDDR5::8GB RAM
*The opinions expressed above are my own and are in no way representative of fact or opinion of any other person, corporation, or company.*

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #2 - Oct 30^th, 2011 at 10:57pm

Webb Offline
Colonel
Go 'Noles!
Morningwood Golf Resort

Posts: 1068

The Wadsworth Constant must die.

A bad day at golf is better than a good day at work.

Jim

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #3 - Nov 1^st, 2011 at 8:28pm

Dave71k Ex Member

I was quite surprised how the guy on the departure radio was suggesting airports so far away surely he could see their air speed and altitude combined with the fact he knew they had no power. So suggesting Newark 7 miles away seems like a waste of time.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #4 - Nov 1^st, 2011 at 8:35pm

Dave71k Ex Member

Jayhawk Jake wrote on Oct 29^th, 2011 at 10:39pm:

I will say, this confirms my opinion that putting the captain on a pedestal like the media has done and calling this a miracle is absurd.

Yes, he did a great job, but I'm confident that ANY pilot flying in the US today would have safely ditched in the Hudson. Very professional on his part, but I at least like to think that anyone in the same situation would handle it just as well.

I liked in one of the related videos with more audio you hear a few interesting things: Someone in the room at Teterboro goes 'Airbus? He can't land here' which is kinda funny, and someone at the Port Authority didn't understand that 'Cactus' is US Airways.

I totally agree it was a case of pointing the plane at the huge expanse of water and trying to hit as softly as possible.

It pales in comparison to the pilots on European Air Transport OO-DLL, which was a DHL cargo A300 which got shot with a SAM just after take off blowing off a large part off one wing. The pilots managed to get the plane down safely with no hydraulic systems what so ever!

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #5 - Nov 9^th, 2011 at 3:12am

-Crossfire- Offline
Colonel
Northern Canada

Gender:
Posts: 954

Jayhawk Jake wrote on Oct 29^th, 2011 at 10:39pm:

I will say, this confirms my opinion that putting the captain on a pedestal like the media has done and calling this a miracle is absurd.

Yes, he did a great job, but I'm confident that ANY pilot flying in the US today would have safely ditched in the Hudson. Very professional on his part, but I at least like to think that anyone in the same situation would handle it just as well.

WRONG. I guarantee there are a lot of pilots out there who would have panicked in this situation and made things even worse. Sullenberger and Skiles made all the right decisions. There are guys who would have made the wrong decisions.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #6 - Nov 9^th, 2011 at 7:25am

wahubna Offline
Colonel
WMU Bronco
Michigan

Gender:
Posts: 1064

-Crossfire- wrote on Nov 9^th, 2011 at 3:12am:

Jayhawk Jake wrote on Oct 29^th, 2011 at 10:39pm:

I will say, this confirms my opinion that putting the captain on a pedestal like the media has done and calling this a miracle is absurd.

Yes, he did a great job, but I'm confident that ANY pilot flying in the US today would have safely ditched in the Hudson. Very professional on his part, but I at least like to think that anyone in the same situation would handle it just as well.

WRONG. I guarantee there are a lot of pilots out there who would have panicked in this situation and made things even worse. Sullenberger and Skiles made all the right decisions. There are guys who would have made the wrong decisions.

WRONG, I know of many many many pilots personally that were not surprised at all about the landing. The airbus lost both engines over a populated area, he knew he would have to put it down off-field, the options were either plow into buildings or take a crack at the river....not that hard of a choice. Did you know that the SAME week this happened a twin engine piston (Cessna I believe) also had both engines fail and again, the pilot had to put it in the river? Guess what, he did it too.

I agree with Jayhawk completely. At one time Capt "Sully" said in response to being called a hero: "these people [passengers] need a hero, I will be that hero for them."
What an arrogant prick.

Just imagine yourself over a populated area with a large river running through it then you get total engine failure. What are your options? A) try to make it to the nearest field B) rough field landing (by plowing into buildings) and C) trying to land on a large river with minimal obstructions compared to option B....yep, I would do it too.

‎"At that time [1909] the chief engineer was almost always the chief test pilot as well. That had the fortunate result of eliminating poor engineering early in aviation."- Igor Sikorsky

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #7 - Nov 9^th, 2011 at 7:34am

wahubna Offline
Colonel
WMU Bronco
Michigan

Gender:
Posts: 1064

This is what ALL pilots should be able to do in an emergency, most commercial and corporate pilots can and many private pilots. You want to see a miracle on a river?
Here is one of pure skill on the part of the pilot:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkwKqD9ylLo

‎"At that time [1909] the chief engineer was almost always the chief test pilot as well. That had the fortunate result of eliminating poor engineering early in aviation."- Igor Sikorsky

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #8 - Nov 9^th, 2011 at 7:40am

wahubna Offline
Colonel
WMU Bronco
Michigan

Gender:
Posts: 1064

Here is another example of a more "average joe" pilot doing the same albiet he ended up on a sand bar. Listen to the reporter's questions and the pilot's response:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwSniutk7nU

‎"At that time [1909] the chief engineer was almost always the chief test pilot as well. That had the fortunate result of eliminating poor engineering early in aviation."- Igor Sikorsky

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #9 - Nov 11^th, 2011 at 8:00pm

-Crossfire- Offline
Colonel
Northern Canada

Gender:
Posts: 954

wahubna wrote on Nov 9^th, 2011 at 7:25am:

-Crossfire- wrote on Nov 9^th, 2011 at 3:12am:

Jayhawk Jake wrote on Oct 29^th, 2011 at 10:39pm:

I will say, this confirms my opinion that putting the captain on a pedestal like the media has done and calling this a miracle is absurd.

Yes, he did a great job, but I'm confident that ANY pilot flying in the US today would have safely ditched in the Hudson. Very professional on his part, but I at least like to think that anyone in the same situation would handle it just as well.

WRONG. I guarantee there are a lot of pilots out there who would have panicked in this situation and made things even worse. Sullenberger and Skiles made all the right decisions. There are guys who would have made the wrong decisions.

WRONG, I know of many many many pilots personally that were not surprised at all about the landing. The airbus lost both engines over a populated area, he knew he would have to put it down off-field, the options were either plow into buildings or take a crack at the river....not that hard of a choice. Did you know that the SAME week this happened a twin engine piston (Cessna I believe) also had both engines fail and again, the pilot had to put it in the river? Guess what, he did it too.

I agree with Jayhawk completely. At one time Capt "Sully" said in response to being called a hero: "these people [passengers] need a hero, I will be that hero for them."
What an arrogant prick.

Just imagine yourself over a populated area with a large river running through it then you get total engine failure. What are your options? A) try to make it to the nearest field B) rough field landing (by plowing into buildings) and C) trying to land on a large river with minimal obstructions compared to option B....yep, I would do it too.

Wow.. either you are one hell of an optimist, or you don't work in the aviation industry. I'm telling you right now, there are bad pilots out there. You honestly don't think there is one guy who would've tried to make it back to La Guardia? Well, there is. I don't want to be insensitive, but look at Colgan 3407... the captain didn't even use proper stall recovery procedures.

And what pilots do you know that were not suprised by the landing? Every pilot I know was suprised. How could you not be?

Back to top

IP Logged

	Search the archive: