Comments on the Ditching of U.S. Air Flight 1549

On January 16, 2009, U.S. Air Flight 1549 ditched in the Hudson River after taking off from LaGuardia Airport. The captain, as expected, handled it in a professional manner.

For the non-pilot readers, here are a few thoughts on the well-handled emergency, as seen from someone with over 60 years of aviation experience, starting in the Navy and then as an international airline captain and federal air safety inspector.

• The Airbus twin-engine A320 struck birds at some point during the climb out. Since the aircraft reached an altitude of about 3,200 before both engines failed due to the bird-ingestion, it can be assumed, with the knowledge now available, that the bird-strike did not occur immediately after liftoff.
   
• When both engines failed due to the bird strike, the pilots followed normal procedure that would be expected of any trained and experienced crew. The pilots lowered the nose of the aircraft to maintain airspeed.  
   
• Simultaneously, as would come naturally for anyone, the pilots headed the aircraft to a touchdown location where there weren't any obstructions. And the only touchdown zone within their gliding range that did not have obstructions was the Hudson River. And that is where the aircraft touched the surface.
   
• Landing on water is not that much different than landing on land, except that the gear is retracted. This writer made hundreds of water landings while a flight instructor in the Navy Catalina flying boats.
  
• The pilots lowered the flaps to lower the landing speed and thereby reduce the damage to the aircraft which would hasten the water inflow into the cabin
  
• Upon contact with the Hudson River, one engine ripped loose from the aircraft, as could be expected.
   
• At the altitude of 3,200 with both engines failed, it was doubtful that the aircraft could have glided to either Teterboro Airport in New Jersey or return to LaGuardia. Possibly a less experienced pilot might have tried that. The results would probably have been catastrophic, if the aircraft's gliding range fell short of the airport destination.
   
• News media personnel described the pilots' handling of the emergency as heroes. Not to in any way take away credit from the flight deck and cabin crew, almost any trained and experienced pilot would have followed the same procedure. Even a student pilot, suddenly losing the only engine, would have lowered the nose to maintain airspeed and then headed the aircraft to where there were no obstructions. What would have been more accurate would be to focus on the unusual nature of the emergency and its outcome, while praising the pilots and cabin crew for performing in a very professional manner.
  
• To the credit of the captain, he admitted that he did what almost any trained and experienced pilot would have done.
  
• Luck did play a role in that emergency. IF the bird strike occurred immediately after liftoff, and both engines had immediately failed, the aircraft would probably not have been able to reach the Hudson River. Instead, it would have crashed into high-density apartment buildings under the takeoff flight path. In that case, it is probable that everyone on board would have been killed and many people on the ground.
  
• It was somewhat comical—or pathetic—to hear aviation-illiterate media people, and passengers, describe the routine actions of the crew as being heroic. However, in the American culture where professional ball players are called heroes, or cringing passengers in a hijacked aircraft heroes, then anyone who was breathing could probably qualify as Heroes. It is also possible that there, in the light of so much going wrong due to the misconduct of so many people in government and in certain financial institutions that the hero label diverts public attention away from the ugly nature of so many people and groups in the United States.

www.transoceanairlines.com