Hudson River Opportunity

His name was Arland D. Williams, Jr. Here's a Wiki write-up about
him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arland_D._Williams_Jr. It mentions
that the Time article was written before Arland's identity was known.

-John


On Jan 18, 12:05 am, brtlmj wrote:

Another hero, "the man in the water":http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...925257,00.html

B.

NTSB: Pilot landed in Hudson to avoid catastrophe

Saturday, January 17, 2009 8:30 PM EST
The Associated Press
By LARRY NEUMEISTER and DAVID B. CARUSO Associated Press Writers

NEW YORK (AP) — The pilot of a crippled US Airways jetliner made a
split-second decision to put down in the Hudson River because trying
to return to the airport after birds knocked out both engines could
have led to a "catastrophic" crash in a populated neighborhood, he
told investigators Saturday.


Capt. Chesley B. "Sully" Sullenberger said that in the few minutes he
had to decide where to set down the powerless plane Thursday
afternoon, he felt it was "too low, too slow" and near too many
buildings to go anywhere else, according to the National
Transportation Safety Board account of his testimony.


The pilot and his first officer provided their first account to NTSB
investigators Saturday of what unfolded inside the cockpit of US
Airways Flight 1549 after it slammed into a flock of birds and lost
both engines.
Co-pilot Jeff Skiles, who was flying the plane at takeoff, saw the
birds coming in perfect formation, and made note of it. Sullenberger
looked up, and in an instant his windscreen was filled with big, dark-
brown birds.


"His instinct was to duck," said NTSB board member Kitty Higgins,
recounting their interview. Then there was a thump, the smell of
burning birds, and silence as both aircraft engines cut out.


The account illustrated how quickly things deteriorated after the bump
at 3,000 feet, and the pilots' swift realization that returning to
LaGuardia or getting to another airport was impossible.


With both engines out, Higgins said, flight attendants described
complete silence in the cabin, "like being in a library." A smoky haze
and the odor of burning metal or electronics filled the plane.


The blow had come out of nowhere. The NTSB said radar data confirmed
that the aircraft intersected a group of "primary targets," almost
certainly birds, as the jet climbed over the Bronx. Those targets had
not been on the radar screen of the air traffic controller who
approved the departure, Higgins said.


After the bird impact, Sullenberger told investigators he immediately
took over flying from his co-poilot and made a series of command
decisions.
Returning to LaGuardia, he quickly realized, was out. So was nearby
Teterboro Airport, where he had never flown before, and which would
require him to take the jet over densely populated northern New
Jersey.


"We can't do it," he told air traffic controllers. "We're gonna be in
the Hudson."


The co-pilot kept trying to restart the engines, while checking off
emergency landing procedures on a three-page list that the crew
normally begins at 35,000 feet.


Sullenberger guided the gliding jet over the George Washington Bridge
and looked for a place to land.


Pilots are trained to set down near a ship if they have to ditch, so
they can be rescued before sinking, and Sullenberger picked a stretch
of water near Manhattan's commuter ferry terminals. Rescuers were able
to arrive within minutes.


It all happened so fast, the crew never threw the aircraft's "ditch
switch," which seals off vents and holes in the fuselage to make it
more seaworthy.
As the details of the river landing emerged Saturday, investigators
worked to pull the airliner from the river. After they struggled most
of the day with logistics, a crane began trying to raise the submerged
jet late Saturday evening.


With its load of water, the craft was estimated to weigh 1 million
pounds. The process was expected to last into the night. The jet was
entirely submerged next to a sea wall in lower Manhattan and blocks of
ice blanketed the river surface.


The NTSB said sonar teams may have located the sunken left engine of
the plane. Preliminary radar reports identified an object directly
below the crash site.


Crews need to remove the cockpit voice and flight-data recorders and
find that engine. Divers originally thought both engines were lost,
but realized Saturday that one was still attached. The water had been
so dark and murky that they couldn't see it.


The investigation played out as authorities released the first video
showing the spectacular crash landing. Security cameras on a Manhattan
pier captured the Airbus A320 as it descended in a controlled glide,
then threw up a spray as it slid across the river on its belly.


The video also illustrated the swift current that pulled the plane
down the river as passengers walked out onto the wings and ferry boats
moved in for the rescue.


Authorities also released a frantic 911 call that captured the drama
of the flight. A man from the Bronx called at 3:29 p.m. Thursday,
three minutes after the plane took off.


"Oh my God! It was a big plane. I heard a big boom just now. We looked
up, and the plane came straight over us, and it was turning. Oh my
God!" the caller told 911.


At almost the same moment, the pilot told air-traffic controllers that
he would probably "end up in the Hudson."


Sullenberger was seen entering a conference room of a lower Manhattan
hotel, surrounded by federal investigators, before his interview
Saturday. The silver-haired pilot was wearing a white shirt and slacks
and seemed composed.


When a reporter approached him for comment, one of the officials
responded: "No chance."


NBC said "Today" show host Matt Lauer would interview Sullenberger
from Washington on Monday, a day before President-elect Barack Obama
is inaugurated.


His wife, Lorrie Sullenberger said "the enormity of the situation" had
only begun to sink in Friday night as she watched the news.


"It was actually the first time that I cried since the whole incident
started," she said on "The Early Show" on CBS. She also said the
family was making plans to attend the inauguration.


She suggested the happy ending was good for the country.


"I think everybody needed some good news, frankly," she said.


Experts say the threat that birds have long posed to aircraft has been
exacerbated by two new factors over the past 20 years: Airline engines
have been designed to run quieter, meaning that birds can't hear them
coming, and many birds living near airports have given up migrating
because they find the area hospitable year-round.


Canada geese, one of the most dangerous birds for aircraft,
historically migrate not because of cold but a lack of food. Winter
weather kills the grass they eat and sources of fresh water freeze
over.


But in developed areas, there is often both food and grass year round,
found in parks and golf courses.


And there isn't much that be done in the engineering of jet engines to
armor them against a strike without hurting their ability to generate
thrust.
The most vulnerable part of the engine is the fan, which can be bent
or smashed by an ingested bird. Pieces of busted blade then rip
through the rest of the engine like shrapnel.


Engines have been fortified so that they can stay intact in the event
of such a strike, but they usually cannot be restarted once they are
damaged, said Archie Dickey, an associate professor of aviation
environmental science at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University's campus
in Prescott, Ariz.


He said hits hard enough to cause a total failure are rare, only
happening two or three times a year worldwide.


"That's extremely rare," Dickey said. "The chance of it hitting both
engines, I'd guess it is less than 1 percent."


Most bird strikes happen within five miles of an airport, lower than
1,000 feet, as planes are taking off or landing. Aircraft hit
thousands of birds every year, but they usually bounce off harmlessly.


The US Airways flight hit the birds at 3,000 feet, the NTSB says. That
caused a total engine failure, and the plane hit the river 3 1/2
minutes later.


"Brace! Brace! Head down!" the flight attendants shouted to the
passengers.


Then, they were in the water. Two flight attendants likened it to a
hard landing — nothing more. There was one impact, no bounce, then a
gradual deceleration.


"Neither one of them realized that they were in the water," Higgins
said.


The plane came to a stop. The captain gave a one-word command,
"Evacuate."

jcarlyle wrote:

If you go he http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/arc...comes_from.php
there is an uncut video from a surveillance camera. It shows the last
few seconds of 1549's water landing, the exit of the passengers, and
the arrival of three ferries. Plane lands at about 2 minutes in, a lot
of passengers out within a minute, the first ferry arrives within 4
minutes.

-John
That is some peice of video. The camera must have been remotely
controlled by either push buttons or key strokes, too bad it wasent
a joystick, it would have been smoother panning. Great coverage.
...lew...

The investigation played out as authorities released the first video
showing the spectacular crash landing. Security cameras on a Manhattan
pier captured the Airbus A320 as it descended in a controlled glide,
then threw up a spray as it slid across the river on its belly.

The video also illustrated the swift current that pulled the plane
down the river as passengers walked out onto the wings and ferry boats
moved in for the rescue.

I think this is the video they refer to:
http://www.truveo.com/Newly-released...n/id/901984028
Nice flare...

-Paul

That accident was attributed to Pilot error as I remember.

Tried to take off with snow or frost or ice on wings.

Big John

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



On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 05:40:05 -0800 (PST), jcarlyle
wrote:

His name was Arland D. Williams, Jr. Here's a Wiki write-up about
him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arland_D._Williams_Jr. It mentions
that the Time article was written before Arland's identity was known.

-John


On Jan 18, 12:05 am, brtlmj wrote:

Another hero, "the man in the water":http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...925257,00.html

B.

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 19:15:04 +0000, Nyal Williams wrote:

At moments 3:57 and 4:17 a bizjet buzzes the site; who knows about that?

At 17:44 17 January 2009, jcarlyle wrote:
If you go he
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/01/
this_video_apparently_comes_from.php
there is an uncut video from a surveillance camera. It shows the last
few seconds of 1549's water landing, the exit of the passengers, and the
arrival of three ferries. Plane lands at about 2 minutes in, a lot of
passengers out within a minute, the first ferry arrives within 4
minutes.

It shows a lot more of a flow downriver than I'd expected. No other
footage I've seen has given any real idea of the rate of drift.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On Jan 18, 1:16*pm, Tech Support wrote:
That accident was attributed to Pilot error as I remember.
Tried to take off with snow or frost or ice on wings.

Icing in the engines disabled some sensors, and the pilots thought
they were developing much higher power than they really did. I recall
reading that the accident was avoidable - had they recognized what was
wrong and pushed the throttles forward...

B.

brtlmj wrote:
On Jan 18, 1:16 pm, Tech Support wrote:
That accident was attributed to Pilot error as I remember.
Tried to take off with snow or frost or ice on wings.

Icing in the engines disabled some sensors, and the pilots thought
they were developing much higher power than they really did. I recall
reading that the accident was avoidable - had they recognized what was
wrong and pushed the throttles forward...

Shouldn't they have fire-walled the throttles regardless? I remember
reading about a Shorts driver, caught in a micro-burst, who did just
that - mandating an expensive engine hot section teardown. At the
"inquest" he was asked why he run his engines up to 120% of their rated
power. His answer was "I couldn't get any more".

Getting back to the Air Florida crash, the NTSB, when listening to the
cockpit voice recorder, immediately knew that the engines were not
producing enough power simply by the sound.

Tony V.

On Jan 17, 11:33*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Jan 17, 8:27*pm, howdy wrote: On Jan 16, 8:10*pm, Tech Support wrote:
[snip]
Everyone I know is amazed that it stayed afloat
as long as it did. *Had the rear doors been opened, it would have been
different.

[snip]

Notice some news reports are describing the rear door being partially
opened (by a passenger) e.g. seehttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090118/ap_on_re_us/plane_splashdown

Darryl

Also note, AP is reporting the crew say they did not have time to
activate the ditch switch. e.g. see http://wcbstv.com/local/black.box.crash..2.911309.html

That sucker floated quite well if water was coming in the rear door
and the ditch switch was not activated.

Darryl

What amazes me (and there is lots to be amazed about in all this) is
that there were no boats or bridges in the river to get in the way,
but there were quite a few very large boats (ferrys) that had fresh
crews, powered up and ready to go off for the afternoon commuter
rush. Maybe it is amazing that the river was wide enought at that
point, around Chicago you'd have a heck of a time finding a place to
land, except maybe Lake Michigan.

- John