LiveATC Discussion Forums

Air Traffic Monitoring => Listener Forum => Topic started by: T_N_T on January 15, 2009, 03:49:43 PM

Title: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: T_N_T on January 15, 2009, 03:49:43 PM
Breaking NEWS:

U.S. Airways Flight crashes in the Hudson River, appears to be a commuter plane.

Fox 5 WNYW Live Feed
http://mfile.akamai.com/23042/live/reflector:45282.asx (http://mfile.akamai.com/23042/live/reflector:45282.asx)

ABC 7 WABC Live Feed
mms://a1388.l5671331387.c56713.g.lm.akamaistream.net/D/1388/56713/v0001/reflector:31387  (http://mms://a1388.l5671331387.c56713.g.lm.akamaistream.net/D/1388/56713/v0001/reflector:31387)

http://wm5.spacialnet.com/jetcast-WOR710 (http://wm5.spacialnet.com/jetcast-WOR710)

WOR 710 HD AM New York Live Feed



Title: Re: Plane headed to LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 15, 2009, 03:52:27 PM
USA1549 an A-320 took off out of LGA, headed for CLT.  Went down into Hudson river just off of LGA.  Aircraft is still floating in the water.
Title: Re: Plane headed to LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: T_N_T on January 15, 2009, 03:53:25 PM
Ok sorry, I thought it was headed to LGA. Mods if you can correct would appreciate.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: NoMad on January 15, 2009, 03:55:56 PM
I'm watching this now.  The ferry boats are rescuing people off the wings of the plane.  Incredible.
Title: USAir A320 ditches in Hudson river
Post by: SkanknTodd on January 15, 2009, 03:59:16 PM
USAir 1549 A320 just crashed into the Hudson after leaving LGA at 3:26pm.  Apparently hit a flock of geese and probably lost both engines.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 15, 2009, 04:00:39 PM
No LGA feeds anymore?
Title: Re: USAir A320 ditches in Hudson river
Post by: Cessna154 on January 15, 2009, 04:00:50 PM
We have live feeds out there, right?
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: dave on January 15, 2009, 04:06:36 PM
Not right now...some heli traffic on JFK Tower.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: NoMad on January 15, 2009, 04:07:04 PM
I'm listening to the app/dep recordings now hoping to catch something
Title: Re: USAir A320 ditches in Hudson river
Post by: SkanknTodd on January 15, 2009, 04:08:46 PM
doesn't look like there's anything for LGA.  Maybe someone knows if there's a feed for the departure freq.

Here's the flightaware map:

Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 15, 2009, 04:09:40 PM
They probably never made it off of tower.  If they indeed hit birds, then they most likely never made the switch to dept.  

LGA tower is 118.7
LGA dept is 120.4
Title: Re: USAir A320 ditches in Hudson river
Post by: raogden on January 15, 2009, 04:11:11 PM
i'm listening to the departure archive right now but can't find anything
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 15, 2009, 04:15:08 PM
It's hard to believe the plane is still floating.  Many airplanes have a floater valve that closes over top of the outflow valve in the water, but with the pax door and the overwing exits open, they're lucky it is still floating.  Except it is floating down the river, so they have to keep up with it.
Title: Re: USAir A320 ditches in Hudson river
Post by: aevins on January 15, 2009, 04:15:22 PM
I've been told (preliminarily) that he never switched from the local freq, of course unconfirmed
Title: Re: USAir A320 ditches in Hudson river
Post by: jsapyta on January 15, 2009, 04:20:15 PM
There should be a feed for LGA

Title: Re: USAir A320 ditches in Hudson river
Post by: rabirza69 on January 15, 2009, 04:20:56 PM
there isnt
Title: Re: USAir A320 ditches in Hudson river
Post by: kea001 on January 15, 2009, 04:31:12 PM
If this was Air Canada Regional (JAZZ), they wouldn't have had those nice little yellow inflatable life jackets. :roll:
I hope they take note.

http://avherald.com/h?article=41370ebc&opt=1 (http://avherald.com/h?article=41370ebc&opt=1)

(-7) degrees Celsius = 19.4 degrees Fahrenheit air temp.

Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: marcoleon on January 15, 2009, 04:31:54 PM
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AWE1549/history/20090115/2026Z/KLGA/KLGA/tracklog

Track log says that they made it to the TRACON and even Center
Title: Re: USAir A320 ditches in Hudson river
Post by: cessna157 on January 15, 2009, 04:37:02 PM
"Jeff" on the news seems to be getting assaulted by the reporters:

"Jeff, spell your last name"
"Jeff, where are you from?  Conneticut.  WhaR are you doing here then?"
"Jeff, was the water cold?"
"Jeff, what is your favorite color?"


Reporters are morons.  The news is full of morons.  Apparently it was an Airbus A-737.  That's a new one....
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: dave on January 15, 2009, 04:37:32 PM
In this case I wonder whether they even contacted NY Departure or were too busy.  Fly the plane first.  :-)
Title: Re: USAir A320 ditches in Hudson river
Post by: deverette on January 15, 2009, 04:39:11 PM
What irks me the most is Jeff, on his golfing trip is asked:

"Do you think the pilot did a good job landing and avoiding the buildings"?

His reply "I don't know. I can't say if he did or didn't"

sigh.... :-(
Title: Re: USAir A320 ditches in Hudson river
Post by: Candyman on January 15, 2009, 04:42:44 PM
They need to get people that know something about aviation. Screens over the engines? One bird went through both engines? People are idiots for those comments!!!

From the looks of it and myself being an airline pilot, I would say the crew did an outstanding job. The aircraft came down intact and a lot if not all people are safe.
Title: Re: USAir A320 ditches in Hudson river
Post by: KSYR-pjr on January 15, 2009, 04:44:06 PM
Reporters are morons.  The news is full of morons.  Apparently it was an Airbus A-737.  That's a new one....

An AirBoeing, huh?   I'll bet folks in Washington are happy about that conglomerate. 
Title: Re: USAir A320 ditches in Hudson river
Post by: bfogelstrom on January 15, 2009, 04:50:30 PM
I can't believe there is no feed for LGA.  The talking heads are total idiots.
Title: US1549 ATC Recordings
Post by: RandyWaldron on January 15, 2009, 04:50:44 PM
Does anyone have or know where to find the recordings of AWE1549???

Thanks
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: marcoleon on January 15, 2009, 04:54:03 PM
Port Authority is reporting that there were no major injuries. Awesome job by the pilots and the cabin crew.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: dave on January 15, 2009, 04:54:37 PM
There is no feed for LGA at this time.  As far as we can determine we do not have any recordings of the incident., from any source.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: KSYR-pjr on January 15, 2009, 04:55:45 PM
There is no feed for LGA at this time.  As far as we can determine we do not have any recordings of the incident., from any source.

Types the man who, as we all read, is scrambling to put together an LGA feed.  :-)
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: dave on January 15, 2009, 04:56:03 PM
Port Authority is reporting that there were no major injuries. Awesome job by the pilots and the cabin crew.

Amazing, truly amazing.  I love it when an aviation incident story ends this way.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: tyketto on January 15, 2009, 04:57:40 PM
Keith, if you're reading this, how far are you from Chelsea Peak? You're probably too far away from the city to have seen or heard this? My experience in the area only goes as far as EWR, so I'm not familiar. Also, isn't there a controller at N90 that frequents here? I can't remember. And which sector of N90 handles that area?

At least it's safe to say that an Airbus floats! :)
BL.

Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 15, 2009, 04:58:45 PM
Incredible job by the crew.  I have never been prouder to be an airline pilot.  Yes, that is what we are trained to do.  Save everyone's butt when things go bad.

But also, good job by the ferry boats.  They said the statue of liberty ferry boats were racing to the plane the instant it hit the water.  Boats were there less than 5 minutes after impact.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 15, 2009, 05:01:41 PM
Keith, if you're reading this, how far are you from Chelsea Peak? You're probably too far away from the city to have seen or heard this? My experience in the area only goes as far as EWR, so I'm not familiar. Also, isn't there a controller at N90 that frequents here? I can't remember. And which sector of N90 handles that area?

BL.



glancar and I believe someone else here are N90 controllers.
LGA departure would have been handling this flight.  Noone knows if they made the switch to departure, most likely not.  They took off Rwy 4, turned north, which is normal procedure from 4.  Sounds like they hit the birds on climbout, and started a left turn, maybe being vectored to TEB.  They were probably too high for HPN.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: KSYR-pjr on January 15, 2009, 05:05:06 PM
The SmokingGun.com has two pictures of very cold looking passengers taken by citizens with cellphone cameras on one of the rescue boats:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0115092hudson1.html
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: iiifly on January 15, 2009, 05:07:44 PM
Keith, if you're reading this, how far are you from Chelsea Peak? You're probably too far away from the city to have seen or heard this? My experience in the area only goes as far as EWR, so I'm not familiar. Also, isn't there a controller at N90 that frequents here? I can't remember. And which sector of N90 handles that area?

BL.



glancar and I believe someone else here are N90 controllers.
LGA departure would have been handling this flight.  Noone knows if they made the switch to departure, most likely not.  They took off Rwy 4, turned north, which is normal procedure from 4.  Sounds like they hit the birds on climbout, and started a left turn, maybe being vectored to TEB.  They were probably too high for HPN.



Negative, they were at this location at the moment of engine failure (according to the highest alt reported in flightaware):

http://www.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=40.860000,+-73.880000&jsv=141e&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=32.252269,79.101563&ie=UTF8&geocode=FWB5bwIdQK6Y-w&split=0

Too far for HPN but they might have made it to TEB, but that would've been risky.  Based upon the descent profile, 9nm to splashdown from engine failure.  TEB looks like it was at 10nm.

Edit:  Dual engine failure at 3200ft, 195kts at the location above.

Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Candyman on January 15, 2009, 05:09:27 PM
I would guess they were talking to departure if they got above acceleration altitude (1,000ft). LGA hands you have pretty quick to departure. 400ft or so usually.  Depends on when they got into trouble though.  Seems like they turned towards the west then south. I'm guessing they got to about 2,000 feet or so.  


I know I would get a hold of ATC quick to give me vectors and let them know something is wrong.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: dave on January 15, 2009, 05:11:10 PM
Citizen journalism - gotta love it:

http://www.alleyinsider.com/2009/1/us-airways-crash-rescue-picture-citizen-jouralism-twitter-at-work

Title: US Airways crash in Hudson River
Post by: binger on January 15, 2009, 05:12:02 PM
Anybody have a link or archive of this crash today in the Hudson? I think it was around 4:00PM Eastern. I'm a controller and would like to hear the exchange they had after the bird strike.

Thanks!

DA
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: dave on January 15, 2009, 05:14:20 PM
As mentioned several times here there are no archives of the incident...unless someone out there caught it and is willing to post it.  We do not have a feed at LGA.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: oreotsi on January 15, 2009, 05:17:47 PM
so was this a USair flight or a Cactus?


Glad everyone got out ok
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 15, 2009, 05:20:25 PM
so was this a USair flight or a Cactus?

Haha, ouch.  Hopefully no USA pilots are on here.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: ndpitch on January 15, 2009, 05:31:06 PM
Stinks that we don't have a feed.  Hopefully the recordings were caught somewhere.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: delta092b on January 15, 2009, 05:32:49 PM
Another good CNN quote just on the TV:

"It's not clear whether a bird hit one engine and then the pilot shut down the 2nd engine...."
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: laylow on January 15, 2009, 05:39:58 PM
Another good CNN quote just on the TV:

"It's not clear whether a bird hit one engine and then the pilot shut down the 2nd engine...."
Ha, right.  Oh crap, we lost an engine.  Let's shut the good one down too!
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: deverette on January 15, 2009, 05:42:22 PM
Incredible job by the crew.  I have never been prouder to be an airline pilot.  Yes, that is what we are trained to do.  Save everyone's butt when things go bad.

But also, good job by the ferry boats.  They said the statue of liberty ferry boats were racing to the plane the instant it hit the water.  Boats were there less than 5 minutes after impact.

I've been staring at a map for the past 20 minutes, digesting the more credible media reports and pax interviews. "Incredible job" only scratches the tip of the iceberg. I'm not sure how much of this was "discussed" (or even briefed) or how much was instinct by the crew, but consider that after the failures, immediate options that present themselves:

- Continue straight and put it down in a neighborhood in Yonkers. We know how that would turn out.

- Continue straight, contend with the Tappan Zee, land in the river northbound. How would that end? Given the location, would take an hour to get enough assets on scene to get everyone off safely.

- Turn right, clear Hart Island, put down in the Sound near Sands Point. How would that end? Same result, an hour until there were enough assets on scene.

- Turn left, see if you can make TEB (there was a report on the new along those lines), see you won't make it. Continue the turn and put down in the only stretch of area in New York with no real obstructions and the highest probability of instantaneous onscene assistance by dozens of agencies. We all know how that turned out. :)

Absolutely phenomenal job by the entire crew!
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: RatOmeter on January 15, 2009, 05:43:30 PM
Another good CNN quote just on the TV:

"It's not clear whether a bird hit one engine and then the pilot shut down the 2nd engine...."

uhhh, yes. Shut down the other engine, that should do the trick.

Some people just shouldn't be given a mic ;)
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Acey on January 15, 2009, 05:45:10 PM

 :roll: If you want one then provide it. All feeds are provided by volunteers.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Candyman on January 15, 2009, 05:46:20 PM
Another good CNN quote just on the TV:

"It's not clear whether a bird hit one engine and then the pilot shut down the 2nd engine...."
Ha, right.  Oh crap, we lost an engine.  Let's shut the good one down too!

Unfortunately, that did happen before on an Airbus.  The crew was not trained properly and was getting a vibration on one engine and shut it down but it was the other engine that was going bad. Crashed short of the runway.

There was not enough time to that in this situation nor do I think that happened but it has happened.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: RatOmeter on January 15, 2009, 05:46:29 PM
Some chatter on this topic on the FlightGear.org IRC channel. Consensus is that we all ought to give the flight crew a hearty pat on the back for a job well done.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Fryy/Avocadoflight on January 15, 2009, 05:46:48 PM
does lga handoff to 135.9 for departure or is that just jfk?
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Acey on January 15, 2009, 05:47:38 PM
Every single landing clearance at Kennedy now, "birds reported on a two mile final..."
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: delta092b on January 15, 2009, 05:48:40 PM
Another good CNN quote just on the TV:

"It's not clear whether a bird hit one engine and then the pilot shut down the 2nd engine...."
Ha, right.  Oh crap, we lost an engine.  Let's shut the good one down too!

Unfortunately, that did happen before on an Airbus.  The crew was not trained properly and was getting a vibration on one engine and shut it down but it was the other engine that was going bad. Crashed short of the runway.

There was not enough time to that in this situation nor do I think that happened but it has happened.

I think that was the British Midland 737 at East Midlands airport (UK) ?
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 15, 2009, 05:49:34 PM
does lga handoff to 135.9 for departure or is that just jfk?

No, 135.9 is JFK departure (and I think FRG?). LGA dep is 120.4
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Candyman on January 15, 2009, 05:50:07 PM
does lga handoff to 135.9 for departure or is that just jfk?

No, 120.4.  LGA 2 departure.  Off unway 4 is runway heading to 044 to 600 then heading 055 up to 5,000.  
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Candyman on January 15, 2009, 05:55:35 PM
Another good CNN quote just on the TV:

"It's not clear whether a bird hit one engine and then the pilot shut down the 2nd engine...."
Ha, right.  Oh crap, we lost an engine.  Let's shut the good one down too!

Unfortunately, that did happen before on an Airbus.  The crew was not trained properly and was getting a vibration on one engine and shut it down but it was the other engine that was going bad. Crashed short of the runway.

There was not enough time to that in this situation nor do I think that happened but it has happened.

I think that was the British Midland 737 at East Midlands airport (UK) ?


That might of been it. It was the UK but I thought it was a airbus.  They looked at the VIB meter to determine which one to shut down? I just remember watching that at the US Airways training center during indoc.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 15, 2009, 05:56:02 PM
Here's a video of basically what happened to this plane.  This is a fairly popular video of a Thompson Fly 757 take one into the engine just during rotation.  Obviously this is just 1 engine, not both.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EReN9K9qWvQ
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: kea001 on January 15, 2009, 05:56:18 PM
More pix - Fotoglif / Reuters

http://www.fotoglif.com/f/35todsv3iezy (http://www.fotoglif.com/f/35todsv3iezy)
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: eclipse500 on January 15, 2009, 05:59:00 PM
Someone reported somewhere that this would have been handled by N90 TRACON - is that correct? If so, would it be on the KEWR coverage on liveatc?

does lga handoff to 135.9 for departure or is that just jfk?

No, 120.4.  LGA 2 departure.  Off unway 4 is runway heading to 044 to 600 then heading 055 up to 5,000.  
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: atsugi on January 15, 2009, 06:00:20 PM
what are the procedures for that?do you do a flaps up landing, to prevent "digging in"? and what speed would you land that at? Excellent job by the pilot and crew. Getting that plane out is going to be interesting.
Title: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: r22pilot on January 15, 2009, 06:06:35 PM
Has anyone found a clip of the USAir crash in the Hudson River in New York today? All 150 survived!!!  :-D
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: SkanknTodd on January 15, 2009, 06:06:58 PM
does lga handoff to 135.9 for departure or is that just jfk?

No, 135.9 is JFK departure (and I think FRG?). LGA dep is 120.4

FRG departure and approach is 125.7 which is also a JFK approach freq
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 15, 2009, 06:07:27 PM
what are the procedures for that?do you do a flaps up landing, to prevent "digging in"? and what speed would you land that at? Excellent job by the pilot and crew. Getting that plane out is going to be interesting.

Ditching or forced landing imminent:

Approach speed: Vref
Descent rate (if thrust available): 200-300 fpm
Landing gear: retracted
Flaps: 45

checklist follows:

1) L PACK and R PACK - OFF
2) EMER DEPRESS - ON
just before impact:
3) EMER DEPRESS - OFF

4) Thrust levers - SHUT OFF
5) APU, LH ENG, and RH ENG FIRE PUSH - SELECT
6) Water/terrain - Contact with minimum forward speed, above stall speed, minimum sink rate, wings level

When airplane is stopped:
7) APU BOTTLE - SELECT
8) Both engine BOTTLES - SELECT
9) Doors and overwing exits - Open
10) Passenger evacuation procedure - Accomplish



The planned ditching checklist is a lot different, with preparations for crash, emergency equipment, etc.  This checklist is the "Oh no, we're going down right now!" checklist
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: atsugi on January 15, 2009, 06:09:46 PM
Wow, thanks for the quick response, I appreciate it.  interesting.
Title: Re: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: oneup1982 on January 15, 2009, 06:16:44 PM
No clip here, I just thought I would say I am very proud of these pilots. A double bird strike, water landing, no fatalities and no serious injuries. These pilots made an exceptional water landing judging by what I was told by a witness. Congratulations for overcoming damage to both engines. I look forward to hearing what US Airways does to congratulate this flight crew for their exceptional job.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: gdrapp on January 15, 2009, 06:17:18 PM
what are the procedures for that?do you do a flaps up landing, to prevent "digging in"? and what speed would you land that at? Excellent job by the pilot and crew. Getting that plane out is going to be interesting.

With flaps up you'd be landing fast.  I assume you'd want it all hanging out so you touch down right above stall speed.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: kea001 on January 15, 2009, 06:24:13 PM
Chesley B. “Sully” Sullenberger, III - Pilot

Highlights of his resume:
* Executive Safety/Reliability Management Professional

   USAIRWAYS           1980 to Present
* Pilot – Captain on Airbus A319/320/321
* President & CEO, Safety Reliability Methods, Inc.  Expert in applying safety and reliability methods in a variety of fields.
* Visiting Scholar, University of California, Berkeley, Center for Catastrophic Risk Management

    U.S. AIR FORCE                1973 to 1980
* F-4 Pilot

    EDUCATION
B.S., Psychology – United States Air Force Academy, Colorado
M.S., Industrial Psychology – Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
M.A., Public Administration – University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:tpHOou4HNEgJ:safetyreliability.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/Sullenberger_Profile.317143407.doc+chesley+sullenberger&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=10&gl=ca (http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:tpHOou4HNEgJ:safetyreliability.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/Sullenberger_Profile.317143407.doc+chesley+sullenberger&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=10&gl=ca)

Safety Reliability Methods, Inc. (SRM) website:
http://safetyreliability.com/about_us (http://safetyreliability.com/about_us)

One cool cat.  8-)
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: atsugi on January 15, 2009, 06:27:31 PM
With flaps up you'd be landing fast.  I assume you'd want it all hanging out so you touch down right above stall speed.

I thought so, but since the leading edge of the wing also extends, then I was curious if that could cause unwanted turbulence upon touchdown of the water. But I guess decreasing speed is more important :-)
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 15, 2009, 06:28:17 PM
Haha, its kinda funny that next to Capt. Sullenberger's name is a picture of the revered Dr. Strangelove
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: kea001 on January 15, 2009, 06:33:08 PM
Haha, its kinda funny that next to Capt. Sullenberger's name is a picture of the revered Dr. Strangelove

Actually it's Donald Rumsfeld's face on Dr. Strangelove's head.  :wink:

Smokinggun.com recommends 'Sully' for New York Senator.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: kittyranma on January 15, 2009, 06:33:34 PM
5) APU, LH ENG, and RH ENG FIRE PUSH - SELECT

Is that APU stop and extinguish?  This looks to be the first step to PUSH TO DISCH, right?

And with no hydraulic pressure from either engine, taking your flaps from 15 (takeoff) to 45 takes a bit, yes? So that assumes the APU is powered up? And last, that's a lot of flaps to have and keep a nose level landing without stalling.


Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Chananya Freedman on January 15, 2009, 06:40:41 PM
Does anyone know how many persons were on-board the flight?
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Fryy/Avocadoflight on January 15, 2009, 06:40:52 PM
any reports of the birds surviving the impact?  :roll:
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Acey on January 15, 2009, 06:53:07 PM
Does anyone know how many persons were on-board the flight?

CNN - "The plane had 148 passengers, Brown said, and either five or six crew members on board when it took off at 3:26 p.m. It was airborne for less than three minutes, she said."
Title: Re: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: Junior P on January 15, 2009, 06:55:06 PM
+1

so true! they did a great job, hats off to them both!
lets hope they get a raise or nice holiday!!
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: GuessWho08 on January 15, 2009, 07:00:50 PM
US Airways reporting 150pax 5crew - Still no reports of any serious injury's. 
One possibly fractured leg, and apparently there was an infant on board as well (no report of that specific child's status)
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Eagle 1 on January 15, 2009, 07:07:49 PM
The mayor of NYC said the infant is safe on the Jersey side.

Photos of this can be seen and uploaded at:
http://wnyw.4wmt.com/packages/templates/anonymous/album/browse.aspx?pageid=5c5d440b-5fbc-4395-bd69-4749c289c7a5 (Fox 5 New York)
Title: Re: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: flygirltammy on January 15, 2009, 07:20:50 PM
Oh, I was hoping there would be a clip. Birds taking out both engines on takeoff and ditching in the water and only 1 serious injury. Wow. Amazing job by the pilots! I want to be like them when I grow up  :-D
I'll look around on some other pilot sites to see if I can find a clip.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Dimitris on January 15, 2009, 07:21:52 PM
Departure route out of LGA.  Looks like the possible bird strike may have happened over the Bronx park.

http://www4.passur.com/lga.html


Change time to 15:26 and click start.  Click on aircraft to see altitude.
Title: Re: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: Hollis on January 15, 2009, 07:26:21 PM
The flight was US Airways Flt 1549, an Airbus 320,  to Charlotte, NC.
Departed LaGuardia at 3:26 p.m. EST on 15 January, 2009.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Аэрофлот Jr. on January 15, 2009, 07:27:07 PM
any reports of the birds surviving the impact?  :roll:

lol not yet
Title: Re: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: r22pilot on January 15, 2009, 07:28:26 PM
It's now being said that the pilot (one of them at least) has over 19,000 hours flight experience, including time in an F-4 Phantom. Simply amazing!
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: darry2385 on January 15, 2009, 07:32:28 PM
a webcam looking at the USS Intrepid caught a few images of the crash. 

http://www.earthcam.com/usa/newyork/intrepid/

click the link, then click on the "Hall of Fame" tab right under the bow of the ship in the banner image.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: kea001 on January 15, 2009, 07:49:06 PM
Departure route out of LGA.  Looks like the possible bird strike may have happened over the Bronx park.

http://www4.passur.com/lga.html


Change time to 15:26 and click start.  Click on aircraft to see altitude.

N461SA had a front row seat. 

Imagine being in a helicopter at 800 ft. near ground zero and you see an Airbus coming down at you.
Title: Re: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: PC12FO on January 15, 2009, 07:50:31 PM
NOPE BUT I CANT WAIT TO HEAR THE AUDIO CLIP,BUT THOSE PILOTS DID A WONDERFUL JOB THRU THE WHOLE PHASE OF THE FLIGHT DOWN TO THE WATER
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Chananya Freedman on January 15, 2009, 07:55:45 PM
Did the helicopter pilot try to help?  Is there any way he could have?

Chananya
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: kea001 on January 15, 2009, 08:03:46 PM
Did the helicopter pilot try to help?  Is there any way he could have?

Chananya

I just noticed that Passur might not be that accurate. It's got two aircraft with the same tail number.
Title: Re: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: Аэрофлот Jr. on January 15, 2009, 08:05:25 PM
I wanna be a pilot like that in the future  :-)
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: rsbaker on January 15, 2009, 08:15:12 PM
On a completely unrelated topic, from your "photo", it looks as though Dustin Hoffman could be a dead ringer for Dr. Strangelove or Rummie! :-D
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: KSYR-pjr on January 15, 2009, 08:23:40 PM
Departure route out of LGA.  Looks like the possible bird strike may have happened over the Bronx park.

If that track is correctly depicting all aircraft, there was a helicopter flying upriver at 1,000 feet that looks as if was on a collision course with the ailing Airbus when it turned over Manhattan to get out of the way. 


edit - I missed the above posts about this.  Sorry for that.

Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: RatOmeter on January 15, 2009, 08:30:32 PM
Departure route out of LGA.  Looks like the possible bird strike may have happened over the Bronx park.

If that track is correctly depicting all aircraft, there was a helicopter flying upriver at 1,000 feet that looks as if was on a collision course with the ailing Airbus when it turned over Manhattan to get out of the way. 


edit - I missed the above posts about this.  Sorry for that.

Your post did provide some succinct insight, though. I the tractks recording by passur are anywhere close to correct, chronologically, I'd like to hear what the pilot of that helo has to say about what was seen.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: kea001 on January 15, 2009, 08:39:46 PM
I'm interested to hear someone on the news,
in this new era of political correctness,
on the cusp of a new democrat presidency,
come out and say,
with some authority
and with the knowledge that
they are saying what everyone is thinking
that,
indeed,

the culprits of this disaster were:

CANADA GEESE!!!
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: flyfll5@gmail.com on January 15, 2009, 09:16:01 PM
The Airbus does not indicate flaps by degrees. Flap settings are 1-2-3-4
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: glencar on January 15, 2009, 09:31:22 PM
Keith, if you're reading this, how far are you from Chelsea Peak? You're probably too far away from the city to have seen or heard this? My experience in the area only goes as far as EWR, so I'm not familiar. Also, isn't there a controller at N90 that frequents here? I can't remember. And which sector of N90 handles that area?

BL.



glancar and I believe someone else here are N90 controllers.
LGA departure would have been handling this flight.  Noone knows if they made the switch to departure, most likely not.  They took off Rwy 4, turned north, which is normal procedure from 4.  Sounds like they hit the birds on climbout, and started a left turn, maybe being vectored to TEB.  They were probably too high for HPN.

I actually took this flight Dec.22 on the way down to MYR. I got tired of taking that crappy discount airline that flies direct & selected US Air again. I worked the overnight last night (you can hear me from 1130PM to 230AM on 125.7) & I haven't heard anything from co-workers about this. It sounds like everyone involved did an awesome job. It's beautiful when everything works out.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: TelecomMom on January 15, 2009, 10:02:38 PM
 :evil:   :-D   :-D   OMG!  That made me laugh so hard, I almost peed myself.  Sorry, not disrespect meant to the event - but quite a snappy observation!  OK - I am new... sorry put this in the wrong place - meant for the post about being un PC and Canadian geese!
Title: Re: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: tedd4u on January 15, 2009, 10:06:01 PM
A+ - awesome job. Thank god nobody died. I look at it as a good omen for the year.

Title: Re: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: Saabeba on January 15, 2009, 10:45:22 PM
That's not a small plane with no engines.  Nice job!!
Title: Re: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: aviator_06 on January 15, 2009, 10:46:07 PM
Wow! These were some Top of the line Pilots! They lost both engines from the bird strike and he managed to bring the jet down safely. Wow! Talk about quick thinking and plus to put a heavy jet down in the water like that with out it flipping or doing some serious damage also says something about the pilots. Well Done!
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: ddphillips on January 15, 2009, 10:52:10 PM
Been a while since I've flown the A320 (5 years or so) but on a dual engine failure you lose both generators and hydraulics. The RAT (Ram Air Turbine) extends beneath the belly providing Hydraulic pressure, electrics are provided by the battery only. Not a good situation... Flight controls go to Direct Law (no computer control) - simular to Manual Reversion. The pilots REALLY had their hand full as this is the worst possible situation to be in.
Title: Re: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: gregp108 on January 15, 2009, 10:57:36 PM
If anyone wants to try to find it, I heard the last communications with the aircraft was through Teterboro airport, small airport in new jersey and requested landing there but didnt want to take a chance not making it and crashing in the city. Try Teterboro feed
Title: Re: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: rbrong on January 15, 2009, 11:03:02 PM
It seems like we have feeders all around LGA but not at LGA!  I listened through a bunch of stuff as close to the airport and departure frequencies as I could find and all I could get was a comment from Newark that there was an emergency at La Guardia.  After that I included a clip from JFK tower asking a pilot if all was okay since the controller had received a low altitude alert.  None of this is anything fancy but it's the best I could find.

I also snapped a shot of the flight log and ground track of Cactus 1549 from FlightAware.com.  Not a long flight!  Great piloting and speedy decision making saved lives today.
Title: Re: USAir Crash in NYC today
Post by: TelecomMom on January 15, 2009, 11:43:32 PM
Nice job!  Thanks. :mrgreen:
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: glencar on January 15, 2009, 11:55:07 PM
There's no way that flight was talking to NY Center. It wouldn't have been switched until it was around WHITE intersection & near 17,000 feet.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: IndyTower on January 16, 2009, 01:25:41 AM


    EDUCATION
B.S., Psychology – United States Air Force Academy, Colorado
M.S., Industrial Psychology – Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
M.A., Public Administration – University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado



Went to Purdue...explains why he's so smart.  ;)

In all seriousness though, can't say enough good things about this flight crew and how well this situation turned out.  Truly incredible.  Nice to see a fellow Purdue alum doing such an incredible thing.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: SkanknTodd on January 16, 2009, 01:29:57 AM
Notice that light blue square of wx radar return just southwest of the point where the flight turns towards the river?  I know large flocks of birds can show up on ATC radar... Think this might be the case? Or am I being silly?
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Fergalt on January 16, 2009, 04:20:18 AM
Holy sh*t, take a look at that Passur link, he narrowly avoids a head-on with N461SA coming up the river at 1000ft!
Title: US Airways em. landing anyone?
Post by: twick on January 16, 2009, 05:53:05 AM
Anyone has recordings of the yesterday's emergency landing of US Airways in NY?
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: NoMad on January 16, 2009, 06:32:21 AM
Been a while since I've flown the A320 (5 years or so) but on a dual engine failure you lose both generators and hydraulics. The RAT (Ram Air Turbine) extends beneath the belly providing Hydraulic pressure, electrics are provided by the battery only. Not a good situation... Flight controls go to Direct Law (no computer control) - simular to Manual Reversion. The pilots REALLY had their hand full as this is the worst possible situation to be in.
Couldn't they start the APU?
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Steelrman on January 16, 2009, 08:28:13 AM
I can only imagine what the witnesses must have been thinking when they saw the plane going down. My first thought would have been 9/11 all over again.  :-(

As a matter of fact, when I first heard from a co-worker about a "plane down" yesterday afternoon, that was my first thought before turning on the radio to get the real story.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 16, 2009, 10:31:59 AM
5) APU, LH ENG, and RH ENG FIRE PUSH - SELECT

Is that APU stop and extinguish?  This looks to be the first step to PUSH TO DISCH, right?

And with no hydraulic pressure from either engine, taking your flaps from 15 (takeoff) to 45 takes a bit, yes? So that assumes the APU is powered up? And last, that's a lot of flaps to have and keep a nose level landing without stalling.


Eh, you're close.  That checklist step secures the engines and APU from fuel, hydraulics, air, and electrics.

Also, on my airplane, and I believe most transport aircraft (except MD-80 series) the flaps are electric.  The APU wouldn't be running, as it wouldn't be needed.  And they had absolutely no time to start it up, as it wouldn't do much for them.

In our double engine failure checklist, it calls for the ADG to be deployed (which is should automatically if we lose all electrics).  Our ADG is a small generator that powers the essential flight computers and electrics, and 1 (out of 6) hydraulic pump.  We would then try to start the APU.  If the APU starts, it will pick up the full electrical load, then we'd use that (or windmill procedure) to restart the engines.  But all of that assumes that you've just had 2 engines flame out.  If you have an engine or engines that are severely damaged, you will never attempt a restart.

But in the time frame that this crew had, they would have no time to run any type of checklist outside of memory items.  Their focus would be to secure the aircraft and prepare aircraft and passengers for ditching.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: kevinotto on January 16, 2009, 10:50:15 AM
Hello all.  This guy really did do one helluvajob!  Has anyone gotten the name of the First Officer?  I haven't heard anyone on the news mention him/her.  I'm sure that he/she had something to do with the outcome of the crash as well.  Thanks!
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: keith on January 16, 2009, 11:10:24 AM
Whoever the northbound traffic was on the Hudson at 900ft, I give him/her credit for getting out of the way.

Aircraft traversing the corridor self-announce on 123.05.  There's little to no chance the A320 crew would've known this, or had time to find out about it. 

Secondly, while it's very common to see other small aircraft flying over the Hudson at 1000ft, it's very easy to remove the 'big jets' from your visual scan as you see them takeoff out of EWR/LGA/JFK, knowing that they're climbing rapidly, and will remain in the bravo airspace during the departure. 

It may have taken the pilot of the small aircraft/helicopter a few seconds to actually recognize that the A320 was coming head on, and descending.

Brad, I tried monitoring the Hudson freq after the incident to hear the chatter from the blenders, but couldn't hear anything.  I tried TEB tower but could only hear the airborne traffic, not the tower. The flew planes I did hear were not talking about the incident (which makes sense).
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: tinman4jesus on January 16, 2009, 01:41:32 PM
There should be a candlelight vigil for the geese.

'All we are saying, is give geese a chance' ♫


(http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:VuT5YqexxvDPxM:http://www.robertbateman.ca/paintings/MillPondCanadaGeesePE.jpg)



How about deleting such insensitive posts!
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: jsaye1 on January 16, 2009, 03:35:33 PM
there are feeds of the new york fire dept. during the incident at

http://kings.ny.scanamerica.us/index.php
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: kea001 on January 16, 2009, 03:53:41 PM

How about deleting such insensitive posts!

Sure. No problem. Done.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: maydayfire on January 16, 2009, 05:12:11 PM
no ATC recordings of the incident yet?
thanks
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: laylow on January 16, 2009, 05:13:33 PM
Doesn't seem to be.  There is no LGA feed here.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Ion the Sky on January 16, 2009, 10:45:47 PM
Its amazing in this day and age of video cameras and cell phones with video, no one got a clip of this landing, at least none I've seen on the networks.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: tmpd140 on January 17, 2009, 11:45:33 AM
Its amazing in this day and age of video cameras and cell phones with video, no one got a clip of this landing, at least none I've seen on the networks.

Just found this of the landing from a USCG camera on the Hudson...

http://www.break.com/index/raw-footage-hudson-river-plane-crash.html

I think a hats off has to go to the water ferrys that were first on the scene to hook up to the plane and evac the passengers.  Great job by all.....
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: delta092b on January 17, 2009, 11:59:40 AM
A slightly better video of the actual touchdown from a side angle can be found here:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2009/01/17/vo.surveillance.plane.cnn
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Eagle 1 on January 17, 2009, 05:28:22 PM
Wow, this video footage is amazing. Still surprised there's no recording from the flight to ATC though. I'm really interested into what happened on the radio after it went down.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: glencar on January 17, 2009, 06:33:39 PM
I haven't heard it myself(I was busy vectoring!) but I've been told that AWE1549 said, "We're landing in the Hudson!" & then it was radio silence for a bit. Both the pilot & the ATC were cool, calm & collected throughout the ordeal.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: athaker on January 18, 2009, 12:32:51 AM
CNN.com reports:

"Earlier in the day, the NTSB revealed the content of communications between the cockpit and controllers at LaGuardia in the brief period during which the incident unfolded.

'This is cactus 1549, hit birds, we lost thrust in both engines,' Sullenberger told controllers at approximately 3:27 p.m. Thursday. 'We're turning back towards LaGuardia.'

Controllers immediately began preparations to clear a runway for an emergency landing, but less than a minute later, Sullenberger reported that the aircraft wouldn't make it, Higgins said.

The last communication from the plane to controllers, Higgins said, was the pilot saying, 'We're gonna be in the Hudson.'"

Full article http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/17/hudson.plane.crash/index.html
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: athaker on January 18, 2009, 01:09:52 AM
Sorry for the back to back posts but a couple of questions for you pilots and aeronautic engineers:

1) About ditching procedure.  As far as I understand, you're supposed to remain above stall speed while in the air.  From the nice side view video, although not at all a perfect source, it looked like he was still moving pretty fast, enough for some more yardage in the air.  Also, I assume that an airbus hitting the Hudson stops just like a failed attempt at skipping a rock.  Instead of a nice smooth hydroplane it's gonna be 160 - 0 kts faster than Porsche C4S. My question is why not keep the plane above the water UNTIL stall speed, low enough so that when stall occurs, it settles into the water just below.

I'd speculate it's a tradeoff between the vertical impact of hitting the water after a stall and the horizontal impact of the water bringing the plane to the halt as more of a "landing" angle.  That, or to ditch in a way without breaking off the tail/other part of the fuselage.  Another option is that my logic is silly, wishful thinking, and that trying to hit the stall speed a few feet above the ground is too foolish or nearly impossible, so I should just sit down, eat my peanuts, and let Sully's boys do the piloting. Anybody know?

2) Are wing-mounted engines on any aircraft designed to detach if a certain force (like the Hudson at at nearly 200kts) is exerted?...Kind of like the release mechanism on Type 1 skiers' boots when they take a tumble....to avoid the entire wing or fuselage from being ripped off?

3) Not a question, but while I'm upset airbus hasn't released information about their secret "A-737" plans, I think our European friends over there in design and engineering deserve a handshake as well.


Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: PHL Approach on January 18, 2009, 03:40:51 AM
Here is A320 procedures for ENG DUAL FAILURE DITCHING. Now for a 737 Classic the QRH mentions "Maintain VREF and 200-300 fpm sink rate to flare". For a 75/76 the QRH states "Maintain airspeed at VREF 30 to touchdown". Unfortunately there is nothing about what speed to Approach for DITCHING in an Airbus. I can only think that it would be VREF just as the 737.

1. ATC/TRANSPONDER...............................................................Notify/As Required
[Notify ATC of the nature of the emergency and state intentions. If not in
contact with air traffic control, switch to code A7700 or transmit a distress
message on one of the following frequencies, (VHF) 121.5 MHz, or (HF if
installed) 2182 KHz or 8364 KHz.]
2. Cabin and Cockpit ......................................................................................Prepare
• notify cabin crew
• loose equipment secured
• survival equipment prepared
• belts and shoulder harness locked
3. GPWS SYS ... OFF
4. GPWS TERR................................................................................................... OFF
[Pressing OFF the SYS and TERR pb’s avoids nuisance warnings.]
5. CABIN SIGNS ...................................................................................................ON
6. EMER EXIT LT ..................................................................................................ON
7. If Commercial pb is installed:
a. COMMERCIAL pb .................................................................................. OFF
If Commercial pb is not installed:
a. GALY & CAB .......................................................................................... OFF
8. LDG ELEV..................................................................................................Select 0
9. BARO ... Set
When below 10000’:
10. CREW OXYGEN MASKS................................................................................ OFF
11. OXYGEN CREW SUPPLY.............................................................................. OFF
Note: Omit normal Descent-Approach and Landing Checklist.
APPROACH
12. L/G Lever...UP
13. SLATS and FLAPS........................................................................... Max Available
At 2000’ AGL:
14. CAB PRESS MODE SEL .................................................................. Check AUTO
[Outflow valve would remain open if MODE SEL were not in AUTO.]
15. BLEEDs (ENGs and APU)............................................................................... OFF
16. DITCHING pb ...ON
Note: If strong winds, ditch into the wind. In the absence of strong winds ditch
parallel to the swells. Touchdown with approximately 11° of pitch and
minimum vertical speed.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: emtwillie on January 18, 2009, 06:43:52 PM
Here is a better camera angla of the landing:

www.floppingaces.net/2009/01/17/video-flight-1549-landing
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Hollis on January 19, 2009, 10:20:40 AM
Touchdown should always be made above stall speed. Two reasons -  if stalled first, the airplane will pitch nose down and cause a 'brick wall' impact with violent deceleration. Worse yet is the the fact that one wing will drop before impact and that's all she wrote!
One bonus for a low wing airplane is the powerful 'ground effect' (as with an air cushion vehicle), which will actually have the effect of lowering the
wing 'stall' speed by use of the ground cushion under the wings.

(From an old aeronautical flight test engineer (me) that's been there, done that). 
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: delta092b on January 19, 2009, 11:53:51 AM
Here is A320 procedures for ENG DUAL FAILURE DITCHING. Now for a 737 Classic the QRH mentions "Maintain VREF and 200-300 fpm sink rate to flare". For a 75/76 the QRH states "Maintain airspeed at VREF 30 to touchdown". Unfortunately there is nothing about what speed to Approach for DITCHING in an Airbus. I can only think that it would be VREF just as the 737.

1. ATC/TRANSPONDER...............................................................Notify/As Required
[Notify ATC of the nature of the emergency and state intentions. If not in
contact with air traffic control, switch to code A7700 or transmit a distress
message on one of the following frequencies, (VHF) 121.5 MHz, or (HF if
installed) 2182 KHz or 8364 KHz.]
2. Cabin and Cockpit ......................................................................................Prepare
• notify cabin crew
• loose equipment secured
• survival equipment prepared
• belts and shoulder harness locked
3. GPWS SYS ... OFF
4. GPWS TERR................................................................................................... OFF
[Pressing OFF the SYS and TERR pb’s avoids nuisance warnings.]
5. CABIN SIGNS ...................................................................................................ON
6. EMER EXIT LT ..................................................................................................ON
7. If Commercial pb is installed:
a. COMMERCIAL pb .................................................................................. OFF
If Commercial pb is not installed:
a. GALY & CAB .......................................................................................... OFF
8. LDG ELEV..................................................................................................Select 0
9. BARO ... Set
When below 10000’:
10. CREW OXYGEN MASKS................................................................................ OFF
11. OXYGEN CREW SUPPLY.............................................................................. OFF
Note: Omit normal Descent-Approach and Landing Checklist.
APPROACH
12. L/G Lever...UP
13. SLATS and FLAPS........................................................................... Max Available
At 2000’ AGL:
14. CAB PRESS MODE SEL .................................................................. Check AUTO
[Outflow valve would remain open if MODE SEL were not in AUTO.]
15. BLEEDs (ENGs and APU)............................................................................... OFF
16. DITCHING pb ...ON
Note: If strong winds, ditch into the wind. In the absence of strong winds ditch
parallel to the swells. Touchdown with approximately 11° of pitch and
minimum vertical speed.

The NTSB said "....then the GPWS sounded" so this would indicate that either US Airways has a modified version of this checklist, there wasn't enough time to go through it or items 3 & 4 were skipped as they were not critical just annoying :)
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Jason on January 19, 2009, 12:48:10 PM
The NTSB said "....then the GPWS sounded" so this would indicate that either US Airways has a modified version of this checklist, there wasn't enough time to go through it or items 3 & 4 were skipped as they were not critical just annoying :)

You can silence GPWS annunciations via an annunciator push button on the panel in most installations.  Such is the case on the Citation fleet.  But as you pointed out, time was of the essence.  Annoying Ground Prox warnings are much less important at that point.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: athaker on January 19, 2009, 02:58:05 PM
Hollis -

Thanks for the explanations.  I didn't even think about the controllability of the aircraft.  Your description of the wing drop reminded me of another attempted water landing that was very tragic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nV7yE4hK2hI

And about the ditching procedure, you guys are probably right...reducing annoyances is most likely not on the "oh $#!* " checklist while plummeting towards a water-taxi free zone of the Hudson...

Touchdown should always be made above stall speed. Two reasons -  if stalled first, the airplane will pitch nose down and cause a 'brick wall' impact with violent deceleration. Worse yet is the the fact that one wing will drop before impact and that's all she wrote!

Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: mhawke on January 19, 2009, 07:32:47 PM
2) Are wing-mounted engines on any aircraft designed to detach if a certain force (like the Hudson at at nearly 200kts) is exerted?...Kind of like the release mechanism on Type 1 skiers' boots when they take a tumble....to avoid the entire wing or fuselage from being ripped off?


I'm not an aeronautical engineer (but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express)...but I am an engineer.

As one, I would make a basic assumption that the engine mounts are designed to break free at a stress level lower then that which would cause major damage to the wing.  The would prevent any exceptional stress to the engines either from turbulence or an accident from ripping the wing from the plane.

Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: delta092b on January 19, 2009, 07:56:28 PM
Report emerging today that the same aircraft N106US operating the same flight on 13th January also suffered a compressor stall in the right engine during the climb out of LGA. There was talk of returning but the pilot continue to CLT without any further issues.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: athaker on January 19, 2009, 10:26:22 PM
Report emerging today that the same aircraft N106US operating the same flight on 13th January also suffered a compressor stall in the right engine during the climb out of LGA. There was talk of returning but the pilot continue to CLT without any further issues.

I heard that on the news too.  I predict:

The media sensationalizing this, jumping on the opportunity to rip apart what is relatively a "feel good" story about an averted disaster. A flock of geese is too simple...having someone to blame is much sexier.  Just watch the "News at 10" previews from earlier tonight...
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: tyketto on January 19, 2009, 11:34:39 PM
Report emerging today that the same aircraft N106US operating the same flight on 13th January also suffered a compressor stall in the right engine during the climb out of LGA. There was talk of returning but the pilot continue to CLT without any further issues.

I heard that on the news too.  I predict:

The media sensationalizing this, jumping on the opportunity to rip apart what is relatively a "feel good" story about an averted disaster. A flock of geese is too simple...having someone to blame is much sexier.  Just watch the "News at 10" previews from earlier tonight...

It's FUD, pure and simple. I mentioned something about this on the FA forums.  I'll just paste what I said there:

I say this because now people are going to be more cautious to report any banging they hear from the engines let alone those knocks they hear that are normal operations on the Airbus. That it wasn't reported before is now going to cast the onus of doubt on the pilots before this incident on why they didn't say or do anything about the reports and continued on as they did. Because of that, less confidence in the plane, the airline flying the plane, and people less likely to fly on an A320 let alone any A320 variant until the issue calms down. Did a potentially negative story involving the same plane need to be reported after such a feat was done on it?

You could hear it now. those winding gears and knocks you hear while taxiing: "You hear that noise? There's something wrong! turn the plane around!!"

BL.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: PHL Approach on January 20, 2009, 12:00:53 AM
The NTSB said "....then the GPWS sounded" so this would indicate that either US Airways has a modified version of this checklist, there wasn't enough time to go through it or items 3 & 4 were skipped as they were not critical just annoying :)

Actually that is out of the US Airways QRH. But as Jason had said, they had such little time. Almost every workflow in the QRH has to do with most troubleshooting in the Flight Levels.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: atcman23 on January 20, 2009, 07:34:46 AM
2) Are wing-mounted engines on any aircraft designed to detach if a certain force (like the Hudson at at nearly 200kts) is exerted?...Kind of like the release mechanism on Type 1 skiers' boots when they take a tumble....to avoid the entire wing or fuselage from being ripped off?


I'm not an aeronautical engineer (but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express)...but I am an engineer.

As one, I would make a basic assumption that the engine mounts are designed to break free at a stress level lower then that which would cause major damage to the wing.  The would prevent any exceptional stress to the engines either from turbulence or an accident from ripping the wing from the plane.



Yes the engines on large aircraft are held on by shear bolts which break once a given force is applied to it.  They are purposely designed this way.  Think about it -- would you want to drag a boulder behind you when you're trying to run away from something that could hurt you?  Same scenario; by having the engines break off, you then have a better chance of the plane staying in one piece.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: kea001 on January 20, 2009, 08:52:14 PM
Backup System Helped Pilot Control Jet

"Crash investigations determined that a so-called ram air turbine -- which can be used to regain hydraulic pressure when both engines stop working -- also was deployed before the touchdown, board spokesman Peter Knudson said Monday. It isn't clear whether the crew deployed the turbine, or whether it deployed automatically because of the emergency. The device consists of a small propeller that drops out of the bottom of the craft, and then drives a hydraulic pump and also supplies backup electricity at certain speeds to help operate the plane's flight controls."

further on:

"According to one person familiar with the investigation, Capt. Sullenberger was able to keep the nose of the plane up while flying at a reduced speed partly because his aircraft's so-called fly-by-wire system used computers to prevent the jetliner from stalling, or becoming uncontrollable and falling out of the air. Preliminary data indicate that these computer-controlled safeguards remained fully operational until touchdown, this person said."


Wall Street Journal
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123241485664396363.html
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: darry2385 on January 20, 2009, 10:20:39 PM
What's with the "so-called"?  It iscalled a ram-air turbine, nobody is making it up. 
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: laylow on January 20, 2009, 11:08:34 PM
Quote
so-called fly-by-wire system
There it is again.  The news always likes to sow seeds of doubt, to make things sounds sinister and scary.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: phil-s on January 20, 2009, 11:56:03 PM
Not sinister at all  - the "so-called" is in there so you'll know that the writer doesn't expect you (the reader) to understand these horribly technical terms, like, ram, air, turbine, fly, and wire. Keep an eye out, though, for any mention of "so-called geese" in an article. That I'd like to see. 

To change the subject, kudos to all of you who posted real information here (as opposed to the crap on the networks). This was certainly the place to go for those of us who actually wanted to understand what had happened.

And to change it again, the goose problem is just going to get worse before it gets better. They're so happy living (and crapping) on golf courses that many no longer even leave for the winter.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: atcman23 on January 21, 2009, 07:36:30 AM


fly-by-wire system used computers to prevent the jetliner from stalling, or becoming uncontrollable and falling out of the air.


I wasn't aware that a fly-by-wire system would keep a plane from stalling.  Always thought that it just moved control surfaces via electrical inputs (using a computer) instead of hydraulic inputs, which explains why the Airbus is so complicated with all of the springs on board the airplane to provide the pilots with some form of force feedback.  Now if the plane had lost all electrical power, then I believe the A320 has a redundancy that allows for control to be maintained (such as batteries) but, sorry, I just don't think that a fly-by-wire system is going to keep a plane from stalling.  You need to do one of two things to prevent a stall: add power (which they did not have) or lower the nose (which is a bad option close to the ground).  I think the pilot pitched the plane for it's published best glide speed, not relied on a computer to "prevent" the plane from stalling.  If anyone would like to correct me if I am incorrect, please feel free to; but this was my understanding.

I think the media needs reporters specialized in the aviation industry to report for them and not rely on a run-of-the-mill journalist.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: kea001 on January 21, 2009, 08:50:49 AM

I think the media needs reporters specialized in the aviation industry to report for them and not rely on a run-of-the-mill journalist.

Looks to me like he's qualified.

"Andy Pasztor, senior special writer at the Los Angeles bureau of The Wall Street Journal.

Since coming to Los Angeles, Mr. Pasztor has written about white-collar crime, defense-related topics, the satellite industry and aviation safety. He has provided in-depth analyses of the commercial air disasters involving Trans World Airlines, Alaska Airlines, Egypt Air and the Concorde."

UCLA Anderson School of Management | Gerald Loeb Awards | Andy Pasztor
http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/x5058.xml (http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/x5058.xml)

You can reach him here if you have any further questions:
andy.pasztor@wsj.com


Also of interest:

Emergency directive issued over Airbus A320 engines
Thursday, 08 January 2009

"EASA's directive calls for airlines with around 1500 Airbuses to urgently check and repair high pressure compressor fans on CFM 56s on A318s, A319s, A320s and A321s.

EASA says since April last year six different engines used by three different operators had stalled. These were followed by the Air France incident.

``Stalls on both engines during flight can cause a dual IFSD (in flight shut down).''  The FAA warned such stalling problems ``could prevent continued safe flight or landing.'' "
http://www.businessday.co.nz/industries/4811789 (http://www.businessday.co.nz/industries/4811789)

Emergency Airworthiness Directive 2008-228
http://ad.easa.eu.int/blob/easa_ad_2008_0228E.pdf/EAD_2008-0228-E_1 (http://ad.easa.eu.int/blob/easa_ad_2008_0228E.pdf/EAD_2008-0228-E_1)

Airworthiness Directive AD 2009-01-01
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/0/b13c349078ebee5086257530004ec0a4/$FILE/2009-01-01.pdf (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/0/b13c349078ebee5086257530004ec0a4/$FILE/2009-01-01.pdf)

Left engine of US Airways jet still missing in NYC

Two days before the emergency landing, the same plane experienced a compressor stall while in flight. Passengers aboard the flight that left LaGuardia Airport on Jan. 13 reported hearing loud bangs from the right side of the plane. A short time later the situation appeared to return to normal and the flight continued on to Charlotte, N.C.

The compressor is essentially a fan that draws air into the engine and helps create thrust for the jet. A compressor stall is a situation of abnormal airflow resulting from a stall of the blades within the compressor. Compressor stalls can vary in severity from a momentary engine power drop to a complete loss of compression requiring a reduction in the fuel flow to the engine.

The stall will no doubt be looked at as the investigation moves forward, but pilots and aviation experts doubt the malfunction made the plane more vulnerable to the bird strikes that are believed to have imperiled the Airbus A320.
Retired Delta Air Lines pilot Joe Mazzone, who has flown planes that had compressor stalls, said he doesn't believe a compressor stall could have created or added to the total engine failure vis-a-vis a bird strike.

"If you have a big Canadian goose ingested in those engines, I would bet the farm that's what caused the engines to quit," Mazzone said. "The compressor stall would be a totally different issue unrelated to those birds."


http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ipKRkY9XnWmqqvBNAlBju1taRJCQD95RG14G0 (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ipKRkY9XnWmqqvBNAlBju1taRJCQD95RG14G0)

Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 21, 2009, 10:14:50 AM
fly-by-wire system used computers to prevent the jetliner from stalling, or becoming uncontrollable and falling out of the air.
I wasn't aware that a fly-by-wire system would keep a plane from stalling.  Always thought that it just moved control surfaces via electrical inputs (using a computer) instead of hydraulic inputs, which explains why the Airbus is so complicated with all of the springs on board the airplane to provide the pilots with some form of force feedback.  Now if the plane had lost all electrical power, then I believe the A320 has a redundancy that allows for control to be maintained (such as batteries) but, sorry, I just don't think that a fly-by-wire system is going to keep a plane from stalling.  You need to do one of two things to prevent a stall: add power (which they did not have) or lower the nose (which is a bad option close to the ground).  I think the pilot pitched the plane for it's published best glide speed, not relied on a computer to "prevent" the plane from stalling.  If anyone would like to correct me if I am incorrect, please feel free to; but this was my understanding.
I think the media needs reporters specialized in the aviation industry to report for them and not rely on a run-of-the-mill journalist.

Unforutnately I'm afraid to say that you are incorrect in this matter.  Allow me to explain:
This here is the difference in philosophy between airbus and Boeing FBW systems.  On a Boeing FBW (B-777), if the pilot tries to do something stupid (ie stall the aircraft, roll it too far, etc), the FBW system will provide feedback urging the pilot to correct himself, but it will still allow him to do it.  In other words, FBW will tell you that you are doing something stupid, but it'll still allow you to do it.
airbus FBW is jsut the opposite.  With all of the FBW computers in operation (airbus calls this "Normal Law"), it will absolutely prevent the pilot from doing anything outside of the normal flight envelope.  If the pilot holds the side stick controller completely to the left, the aircraft will roll to the left a predetermined amount of roll, then stop.  The pilot can continue holding the stick full left, but the aircraft simply will not do it.  Same thing applies with stall protection.  At high speed, if the pilot pulls full aft on the stick, the aircraft will pitch up at a normal rate not to exceed design tolerances.  At slow speed, full aft stick will pull the nose up to just above stall and the aircraft will not stall.  It will hold an attitude to maintain airspeed just above the critical AOA (which is most likely what occurred on the river). 
In simple words, in a Boeing, the pilot has final say of what happens.  In an airbus, the computers have the final say.

If you want to see a real life example of this, watch 2 videos.  Search for ITVV, it was a British company that made flight deck videos back before 9/11.  One is a few actual Cathay Pacific B-777 proving flights, but it also includes some demonstrations in the simulator of the flight envelope protection, including the demonstration of a full stall and recovery.  Then go find the ITVV video of an SAS A-320 simulator.  Here, the pilot demonstrates "Normal Law" and "Direct Law" flight envelope protection.

Hope this all helps.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 21, 2009, 10:27:58 AM
After some searching on the videos I mentioned in my previous post, I found these. 

Roll protection clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33rzqZpn0a4

Clip 1:  Cockpit and simulator overview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYyYVRqZahA

Clip 2:  Takeoff (engine fail) and RTO, Takeoff (engine fail at V1) single engine pattern and landing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNRJX6lVdls

Clip 3:  Autoland in Cat-III weather
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB-U_D9JwsE
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: atcman23 on January 21, 2009, 07:42:17 PM
Wow very interesting!  Thank you for sharing.  It's very interesting to see the differences in operations between Boeing and Airbus aircraft. 

Maybe it's a good thing aircraft of today don't run Windows...   :-P
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 21, 2009, 08:01:26 PM
Yeah, Fly-by-wire systems are a great benefit and add an extra layer of safety and protection to the aircraft. 

But sometimes they work against you.  Think back to the Air France crash of the A-320 that did the flyby at the airshow when the A-320 was first unveiled.  The pilots did the low pass, then added power to go around.  But the aircraft didn't agree with the pilot's attempt at a go around, so it just kept flying straight ahead and crashed into the trees.  Turns out that if the pilots would have pushed full forward on the control stick (counter intuitive), the plane would have thought "Oh no, this is bad, let's go around" and would have allowed the go around.

A funny side effect of fly by wire is on my airplane too.  Not all of the controls of my aircraft are fly by wire, but there are a few.  Included in that are the engines.  The thrust levers are just big switches that send signals back to the FADECs on the engines.  Our QRH says the following about a FADEC failure (complete failure of all control channels on an engine):

The engine will:
1) Respond to thrust lever movement with no overspeed and idle protection
2) Not respond to thrust lever movement and stay at last commanded power
3) Roll back to idle
4) Shut down

We always laugh at this QRH procedure, as it basically says "We have no idea what will happen to the engine, so hold on tight."  In any event, I think it always ends with the engine being shut down.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: atcman23 on January 22, 2009, 07:30:03 AM
That's true, the Air France A320 crash was something that could have been prevented.  Had that been a revenue flight, it would have been much much worse.

I'm taking it you're a FO on a CRJ-700 or CRJ-900? (not like there's a lot of difference between the two)
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: oreotsi on January 22, 2009, 01:32:39 PM
That's true, the Air France A320 crash was something that could have been prevented.  Had that been a revenue flight, it would have been much much worse.

I'm taking it you're a FO on a CRJ-700 or CRJ-900? (not like there's a lot of difference between the two)


They both have fancy bright lights compared to the older ones
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 22, 2009, 02:32:40 PM
They both have fancy bright lights compared to the older ones

Ha, ain't that the truth.  All I know is when a red light comes on, I'm supposed to push it and the fire will go out.

Oh, Dr. Oreotsi, I finally got my AT-SAT score back.  I'm on my way to working with you.  You staying put or moving south?
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: KSYR-pjr on January 22, 2009, 02:50:47 PM
Cessna157, just noticed your change in sig.  Are you done flying for a carrier?  If so, I am very sorry to see that.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 22, 2009, 03:04:06 PM
Yeah, my airline has about 300 pilots out on the street now.  I was in the last batch of them to go.

But I hear there's somebody in SYR that commutes to NYC quite often that is looking into buying a Citation.  I know where they could find an experienced Citation pilot!   :-D
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: glencar on January 22, 2009, 04:26:07 PM
Comair sucked anyway, no? Good luck getting on with someone else.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 22, 2009, 07:06:47 PM
Comair sucked anyway, no? Good luck getting on with someone else.

No, I wouldn't agree.  Some may.  A friend (controller) once told me "A job is what you make of it".  I never let any of the politics get to me.  I just came to work and flew my planes.  It was my lifelong dream to fly for Comair.  So I got to live my dream for 2 years.  But the economy has forced me to move on.

But we're starting to get a bit off topic.

Any guesses as to if/when the FDR and CVR get released to the public.  Not all accidents are released.  Hopefully they let these out.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: gstream on January 25, 2009, 03:27:46 AM
i have audios available
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: glencar on January 25, 2009, 08:43:08 PM
Comair sucked anyway, no? Good luck getting on with someone else.

No, I wouldn't agree.  Some may.  A friend (controller) once told me "A job is what you make of it".  I never let any of the politics get to me.  I just came to work and flew my planes.  It was my lifelong dream to fly for Comair.  So I got to live my dream for 2 years.  But the economy has forced me to move on.

But we're starting to get a bit off topic.

Any guesses as to if/when the FDR and CVR get released to the public.  Not all accidents are released.  Hopefully they let these out.
The NTSB will be releasing the tapes shortly.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: PHL Approach on January 26, 2009, 03:41:04 AM
An update on the a/c from TLS. This was pulled from the FDR.

FROM : AIRBUS FLIGHT SAFETY DEPARTMENT TOULOUSE

ACCIDENT INFORMATION TELEX - ACCIDENT INFORMATION TELEX

SUBJECT: US AIRWAYS Flight US1549 ACCIDENT IN NEW YORK

OUR REF: USA US1549 AIT N°2 DATED 23rd JANUARY 2009
Previous ref: USA US1549 AIT N°1 DATED 16 JANUARY 2009

SUBJECT: US AIRWAYS Flight US1549 ACCIDENT IN NEW YORK

This is an update to the AIT N°1 issued on 16th January 2009.

The information which follow has been approved for release by the US National Transport Safety Board (NTSB) and represent the highlights from the initial analysis of the available data: mainly Digital Flight Data Recorder, aircraft components, ATC script and radar.

The A320 aircraft was operating a scheduled flight US1549 from New York, La Guardia airport to Charlotte, Virginia on 15th January 2009, when the aircraft ditched on the Hudson river shortly after take-off at 15:30 local time.

The aircraft performed a normal flex take-off in slats/flaps configuration 2 from La Guardia airport with the co-pilot as Pilot Flying.

At time T0, soon after the aircraft was in clean configuration at an airspeed of about 210kts, both engines suffered a simultaneous and sudden loss of thrust at about 3000ft pressure altitude. The engines N1 decreased abruptly to 35% and 15% on engines 1 & 2 respectively. This sudden and simultaneous loss of engine thrust is consistent with the reported bird strike on both engines and also with the initial observations from the remaining engine 2. (Recovery of engine 1 being still in progress).

The captain took immediately control of the aircraft making smooth nose-down pitch inputs to maintain the airspeed at about 200kts.

At approximately T0+20 sec, the crew changed the aircraft heading towards the Hudson river.

There was no more response from the engine N°2. The engine N°1 continued to deliver a minimum thrust (N1 around 35%) for about 2 minutes and 20 seconds after T0.

At approximately T0+2min20sec, the crew attempted at about 500ft/200kts a quick relight on engine 1 without success.

The crew then selected slat/flap configuration 2 which was achieved.

From then on and until the ditching, the heading remained almost constant. The speed decreased from 200kts to 130kts.

Ditching occurred 3 minutes and 30 seconds after the thrust loss in the following conditions:
- Airspeed was about 130kts (at the Gross Weight, Valpha max is 125kts and Valpha prot is 132kts)
- Pitch attitude was 10 degrees up and bank attitude was at 0 degree.
- Flaps and slats were in configuration 2. Landing gear up

It is to be noted that at all times during the event and up until the ditching, the normal electrical supply (AC and DC buses) and all three hydraulic systems were fully operational and the flight control law remained in Normal law.

In line with ICAO Annex 13 International convention, the US NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) continues the investigation assisted by Accredited Representatives from the French BEA (Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses) as State of aircraft manufacturer. Airbus continues to support the NTSB investigation with advisors on-site and in the various investigation working groups.

Airbus has no specific recommendations at this stage. Should there be the need for recommendation as a result of the investigation, operators will be notified accordingly.

VICE PRESIDENT FLIGHT SAFETY
AIRBUS
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: KSYR-pjr on January 26, 2009, 07:49:26 PM
Interesting that some influential media here in the States are now questioning the official account of this accident.

Specifically they are wondering if a December 2008 airworthiness directive (AD) regarding inspection of these engines coupled with the fact that this very aircraft experienced a compressor stall two days earlier may be signals that the bird strike was not the primary cause of the engine failure.

We'll see if this goes anywhere.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: PHXCONXrunner on January 30, 2009, 03:38:32 AM
Interesting that some influential media here in the States are now questioning the official account of this accident.

Specifically they are wondering if a December 2008 airworthiness directive (AD) regarding inspection of these engines coupled with the fact that this very aircraft experienced a compressor stall two days earlier may be signals that the bird strike was not the primary cause of the engine failure.

We'll see if this goes anywhere.

To steal from someone else:

A compressor stall is an aerodynamic phenomenon.  Birds hitting your plane is physical damage.  The media will try to portray the engines as "unsafe if a bird hits it", but it's true of any engine.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: atcman23 on January 30, 2009, 07:18:24 AM
I like an article that I read that said that bird ingestion might cause a compressor stall.

How about this:

Bird ingestion might cause engine failure.
Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: Hollis on January 30, 2009, 11:27:10 AM
And if you don't believe it, just take a look:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-8_Gnbp2JA

Title: Re: Plane headed to CLT from LGA down in Hudson River
Post by: cessna157 on January 30, 2009, 11:46:43 AM
While indeed an interesting video, the description is wrong (title is correct).  A bird ingestion, is most cases, will not release a fan blade.  The damage occurs further down in the engine to the compressor blades and burner cans (fan blades will be bent too though).

I have a video from the FAA all about turbine engine modes of failure.  It is a great video, with lots of examples of just these problems.  The entire video is over 20 mins long.  But I cannot upload it as the file is 84Mb.

Try searching for "Engine Malfunctions: Recognition and Response" and you might find it out there.