Airliner crashes into Hudson River after LGA departure

On Jan 15, 4:55*pm, Guy Elden Jr wrote:
I'm absolutely astonished that plane didn't flip when it hit the
water. They got real lucky today, as it's absolutely freezing up here
right now.


I wouldn't expect the plane to flip, unless the pilot tried to ditch
with the gear down. Yeah, it was cold yesterday (I'm in southern CT)
I don't know if anybody ended up in the water, but just thinking about
it makes me cringe.

Witness also said gear was down. If true, was bad decision.

Big John

************************************************** ************
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:54:53 -0700, Shirl
wrote:

Guy Elden Jr writes:
I'm absolutely astonished that plane didn't flip when it hit the
water.

Witness said they held the nose up and that it looked like a normal
landing only on water instead of a runway. Amazing job.

Tech Support wrote:

Witness also said gear was down. If true, was bad decision.

How many airliners have you successfully ditched? So who are you to
second-guess this astonishingly perfect outcome?

Big John

Way too big.

Again. Talk without correct data.

In my thousands of jet hours only saw mechanical engine failures
(turbine wheel and blades, compressor blades, generator/starter
failures, loss of oil pressure, etc,) Rare but all happened.

Had a few bird strikes, up to duck size, in turbine and on air frame
with not enough damage to prevent further flight and routine landing.

My last flight, on active duty, was in a T-39 going into the Springs
with a full load of passengers.

Lost oil pressure on starboard engine over Omaha and shut down. Flew
on into the Springs and made single engine landing. Just another day
in the office.

Big John

************************************************** ***************
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 23:12:23 +0100, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Kingfish writes:

Holy smokes! CNN is reporting an airliner went down in the Hudson
after departing LaGuardia. I heard something about birdstrikes, but
can't imagine a double engine failure due to that(?) They sure picked
a cold day to go swimming... Hope everybody is ok...

Bird strikes are a leading cause of engine failure. Jet engines don't often
fail all on their own.

Tech Support wrote in message
...
Witness also said gear was down. If true, was bad decision.

Big John

************************************************** ************

I wonder if the gear was still down from take off, and they didn't have time
or power to lift it.

On Jan 16, 11:20*am, Tech Support wrote:
Witness also said gear was down. If true, was bad decision.


I know what usually happens if a GA plane ditches with the gear down,
and only assume the same would happen to a big transport. After
hearing more about the pilot's background and experience I seriously
doubt he would make that kind of mistake. Witnesses are notoriously
unreliable, especially the casual observer, non-aviation type. At any
rate, the captain made the right decision when put in a tight spot.
The jet could have made it back to LGA on one engine easily enough,
losing both is a nightmare scenario.

"Kingfish" wrote in message
...
On Jan 16, 11:20 am, Tech Support wrote:
Witness also said gear was down. If true, was bad decision.


I know what usually happens if a GA plane ditches with the gear down,
and only assume the same would happen to a big transport. After
hearing more about the pilot's background and experience I seriously
doubt he would make that kind of mistake. Witnesses are notoriously
unreliable, especially the casual observer, non-aviation type. At any
rate, the captain made the right decision when put in a tight spot.
The jet could have made it back to LGA on one engine easily enough,
losing both is a nightmare scenario.


That why you need to get as high as you can as fast as you can especially in
a populated area, altitiude is insurance.

Kingfish wrote:
On Jan 16, 11:20 am, Tech Support wrote:
Witness also said gear was down. If true, was bad decision.


I know what usually happens if a GA plane ditches with the gear down,
and only assume the same would happen to a big transport.

I'm not sure. The "flat plate area" of the tires is pretty small,
relative to the total kinetic energy of a twin-engine airliner. Any
effect the mains have will apply will pale in comparison to the engines
hitting a half-second later. The nosewheel will hit *after* the mains
are significantly in the water; again, I don't think they'll contribute
much more.

*If* the plane had the gear down, the simple fact is, it worked and no
one was seriously hurt. The pilot's batting a thousand as far as I'm
concerned....

Ron Wanttaja

"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote in message
...

"Kingfish" wrote in message
...
On Jan 16, 11:20 am, Tech Support wrote:
Witness also said gear was down. If true, was bad decision.


I know what usually happens if a GA plane ditches with the gear down,
and only assume the same would happen to a big transport. After
hearing more about the pilot's background and experience I seriously
doubt he would make that kind of mistake. Witnesses are notoriously
unreliable, especially the casual observer, non-aviation type. At any
rate, the captain made the right decision when put in a tight spot.
The jet could have made it back to LGA on one engine easily enough,
losing both is a nightmare scenario.


That why you need to get as high as you can as fast as you can especially
in a populated area, altitiude is insurance.


Unless the following was photoshopped, gear was up.
To this layperson, looks like perfect nose-up pitch

http://abcnews.go.com/US/popup?id=66...t=false&page=2

One of our KC-135's sucked up a seagull- they said it smelled like burnt
fish inside the plane, or so the story goes.

Anthony sure writes like an expert considering that he has zero flying
hours, doesn't he?