Aircraft Water-Landings (Pilots Chime In)

[Sunroof]

Okay, I have lots of hours logged between a Piper Tri-Pace and a Cessna 152 over the decades. So I have some ideas about controlling a small aircraft, but I keep wondering what it would be like to have "landed" an airplane in a river, like we just witnessed yesterday.

The Hudson River was calm, no obstacles (buoys, vessels, structures, etc) in the river or flight path coming in, daylight hours, great visibility and no structural damage assumed before touchdown besides the internals in the engine. It was along and clear approach.

Whats textbook here? They say ditching is not a part of the flight instructions, so just how did this guy do it without the engines biting so hard when in contact with water that the noise did not go in?

Can I assume he had a nose up attitude to allow the tail and rear underbelly to hit first and still maintain some nose up attitude til he was slow enough to lower the wing in? With the huge intake diameter of those two engines, you would think that these would just gulp in water and stop it dead as contact with the water was made. Was he under stall speed and just slammed the underbelly down? What works?

I heard the Airbus comes equipped with a "ditch button" that when activated all vents to the outside are shut down and sealed thereby allowing for more temporary buoyancy of the craft. Thats amazing in itself.

I will assume its still floating because the fuel in the wing tanks is providing some critical buoyancy here.

Pilots, what do you say?

Bob

[peppy]

I am no pilot, but did get some pilot lessons years ago (had a medical and soloed).

I thought you got as low as possible stalled the craft and dropped it. By no means do I think this is easy.

[flatbutt]

If I may add to the question...how did he maneuver this thing with no power? If both engines are down how do you "muscle" the hydraulics on such a beast?

[Dantilla]

I've always been told that you do NOT want to stall, but touchdown as slowly as possible before the stall.

Once stalled, there is very little control- The pilot basically becomes another passenger. What is necessary in cases like this is to remain in control as long as possible, even after initially touching the water.

[Heel n Toe]

Originally Posted by Sunroof

The Hudson River was calm, no obstacles (buoys, vessels, structures, etc) in the river or flight path coming in,

Not entirely true on "no obstacles" ...on one of the cable news shows, a reporter said he only cleared the George Washington Bridge by 200-300 feet. The turnaround flight path took them right over it... if he hadn't had enough altitude before the bird strike, he might have had to try to go under it. Either that, or head North up the Hudson rather than South for the ditch.

Graphic at the one-minute point in this vid:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/28689463#28689311

One of the passengers heard the copilot telling Sullenberger after they got on one of the rescue boats, "You know, Sully... nobody has ever done a successful ditch."

[m21sniper]

I'm no pilot, but i watched quite a few videos on you tube last night of people NOT landing successfully in the water. At 170mph(or whatever the landing speed is for an airbus) the water is as hard as concrete.

To me, that pilot is a STUD.

[rick-l]

Originally Posted by flatbutt

If I may add to the question...how did he maneuver this thing with no power? If both engines are down how do you "muscle" the hydraulics on such a beast?

I am not a pilot and know squat about the A320.

I am not sure there was 0 power out of both engines.

I think the A320 also has a Ram Air Turbine that pressurizes one hydraulic system down to a certain airspeed.

[304065]

Double bird strike? NFW. A single bird strike is a one in a million event. Odds of a double are infinitesimally small.

I can't wait to hear the report from the pilots and the computers. Guess the NTSB can't blame any dead guys this time.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Originally Posted by rick-l

I am not a pilot and know squat about the A320.

I am not sure there was 0 power out of both engines.

I think the A320 also has a Ram Air Turbine that pressurizes one hydraulic system down to a certain airspeed.

Most jets have some sort of a ram-air generator that deploys into the airstream, electronic pump backup, pressure accumulator, etc. Basically redundancy saved his ass, but I have no doubt that this was 99.9% pilot skill. The man is a hero, pure and simple.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by john_cramer

Double bird strike? NFW. A single bird strike is a one in a million event. Odds of a double are infinitesimally small.

I can't wait to hear the report from the pilots and the computers. Guess the NTSB can't blame any dead guys this time.

They said the pilot hit a flock of birds.

[cstreit]

If you're in the water, in ain't a landing!

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Gear up and flaps/slats extended to give as slow as possible Vs. Then maintain a nose-high attitude until water contact just above the stall speed, try to maintain directional control with the rudder. That's what I was taught anyway.

[Tim Hancock]

I was taught to remove a shoe and open the door slightly and wedge the shoe there so that when the plane starts sinking, you can get the door open without having water pressure holding it closed. I shiit you not, that is what my flight instructor told me.

[HardDrive]

[svandamme]

So where was Dustin Hoffman?

[stomachmonkey]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

I'm no pilot, but i watched quite a few videos on you tube last night of people NOT landing successfully in the water. At 170mph(or whatever the landing speed is for an airbus) the water is as hard as concrete.

To me, that pilot is a STUD.

Was the right guy at the stick.

Reminds me of the Gimley Glider incident.

They set it up as a scenario in flight training simulators and every pilot that has had to try it has crashed.

Coincidently the pilot in that situation was also a glider pilot.

[speeder]

Whatever the procedure, he executed that landing absolutely flawlessly. If this was some bizarre Olympic competition, he would have got a 10.0. What a great time to have luck and skill come together. Still can't believe no one drowned in 32deg. water, there had to be people who could not swim at all on that plane. Freaking miracle.

[willtel]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

They said the pilot hit a flock of birds.

According to john_cramer birds don't travel together so you must be mistaken.

[BlueSideUp]

The A320 has hydraulic controls and electronic flight displays. With a total loss of electrical power the RAT (Ram Air Turbine) deploys automatically giving power to the captain's displays only. The First Officer wouldn't have any instruments on his side. The RAT also supplies limited hydraulic power for the flight controls but I'm not sure it would have the power to extend flaps and slats.

The minimum speed is 140 knots in order for the RAT to supply sufficient power for the flight controls. The airplane floated for such a long time because of the light fuel load and the Airbus ditch switch. The ditch switch closes all valves below the water line to maximize floating time. Oh and USAirways doesn't allow pets in the cargo area so no pets were killed.

The Captain and First Officer did an awesome job, they deserve a lot more respect than their employer has given them over the past few years.

For ditching the slowest speed possible is the best way to go in but you have to maintain control. If you touch down too nose high the tail will touch first and slam the nose down breaking the aircraft up. The captain did a great job, pilots are taught that the airplane will most likely break up in a ditching.

The engines are designed to break away in an accident like this.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by Sunroof

I will assume its still floating because the fuel in the wing tanks is providing some critical buoyancy here.

Bob

That would make it sink, not float. What one would want are empty fuel tanks.