Video: Hero pilot’s family talks about the non-crash
posted at 5:45 pm on January 16, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I wish I could give you the man himself but he’s under a gag order while the NTSB investigates. Expect him on every talk show in America within a week or so. In the meantime, this — and his new fan page at Facebook — will have to do.
How’d he pull it off? Skill…
Eye-witnesses said the captain pulled the nose of the plane up just as it hit the water, helping to keep the fuselage intact.
Experts said the pilot did ‘absolutely everything right’ with a ‘textbook ditching’.
‘If you know you are facing a ditching, the crash-landing of an aircraft on water, it is crucial that you land the plane absolutely level,’ said David Learmount, operations and safety officer of Flight Global.
‘You must not try to keep the plane airborne and if you land it too slowly you will drop out of the sky,’ he added.
Mr Learmount said that the pilot had to land the plane perfectly straight – otherwise it would have broken up on impact.
…and, via one of our commenters, technology:
The device, called a “ditching switch,” effectively seals the plane by closing valves and ventilation ports, a spokesman for the airline said…
With the valves and ports shut, “a float line” is created, Airbus spokeswoman Mary Anne Greczyn said in an e-mail…
“They’re not amphibious,” Mann said. “But the general rule of thumb is, when they’re full of fuel, which is lighter than water, they will float, as long as their structural integrity is intact.”
He’s already gotten a call from Bush, and the key to New York City is waiting for him.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Can I ask for him the next time I want to fly?
Hate planes, hate taking off, hate turbulance, hate landing… but I might feel better if he were the Capt.
You Rock!
upinak on January 16, 2009 at 5:53 PM
Bush should make it his final act as President to give the pilot the Medal of Freedom.
Rocks on January 16, 2009 at 5:53 PM
+1
upinak on January 16, 2009 at 5:54 PM
Not to split hairs here but how is a ditching different from a crash? US Airways and the pilot should be commended for the way their procedures made this a story without fatalities but, at the end of the day, the airline is down one airbus when they started the day.
highhopes on January 16, 2009 at 5:57 PM
Non-crash?
This was definitely a non-planned contact with terrain.
That’s the usual defintion of crash. Handling it with great skill does not change the fact.
drjohn on January 16, 2009 at 6:04 PM
Well, a crash with zero loss of life is technically still a crash. But what a wonderful story this is. I still like Vic’s version of how to make a plane float: 2 scoops of ice cream in a glass, add some root beer and a plane.
Ta Daa!
wise_man on January 16, 2009 at 6:04 PM
It’s cool that this hero lives in Danville, I grew up in the East Bay not far from Danville. Of course he’s also a former Airforce pilot and use to fly F-4 Phantoms, one of my all time favorite fighters!
Liberty or Death on January 16, 2009 at 6:05 PM
I believe “ditching” is a specific aviation term that refers to an intentional water landing.
The reason that it’s not considered a crash is because it was a controlled and intentional landing (likely because it was the only flat, open area large enough for him to safely land the plane).
“Ditching” by definition does not included runway overruns into water, accidental controlled flight into water, or cases where the crew is unable to control the aircraft’s descent.
You’re right that it doesn’t make a difference in the number of flyable planes that US has but the difference between a ‘ditch’ and a ‘crash’ in reality is the difference between a plane full of survivors and a wreckage full of dead and severely injured people.
JadeNYU on January 16, 2009 at 6:06 PM
Kind of a buzzkill, are we?
A plane crash to me is probably something that happened on, oh, say 9/11/01.
But I think we’re splitting hairs on something that I couldn’t do on the very very best day of my life!!
Well done, amazing pilot, well done.
mjk on January 16, 2009 at 6:07 PM
There are so many things under the surface of the story about the pilot. Courage. Didn’t panic. Skill. Sound decision making (3 minutes from bird strikes to water ditch). Leadership. Walking the plane twice to make sure everyone got off. Hell of a man and a pilot.
Hog Wild on January 16, 2009 at 6:08 PM
Nerves of steel.
Johan Klaus on January 16, 2009 at 6:11 PM
+2 and maybe sneak in a pardon for Ramos and Campean.
Sanjoboy on January 16, 2009 at 6:12 PM
+1
baldilocks on January 16, 2009 at 6:12 PM
It could be considered not a crash because, technically speaking, it was a controlled landing under sub-optimal conditions. Though the plane was experiencing a mechanical failure, the pilot(s) never lost the ability to command the aircraft, albeit within a severely limited flight envelope (that is, the aircraft was obviously no longer mechanically capable of doing everything it normally could).
I suspect, however, that AP is alluding more to the lack of lives lost.
Blacklake on January 16, 2009 at 6:12 PM
Thanks! Good differentiation of the terms.
highhopes on January 16, 2009 at 6:13 PM
But it was planned. It was an ad-hoc plan, and it was far from the pilot’s first choice. But granted that the plane was running out of energy, he consciously chose to ditch in the safest location available, and was able to control the plane to achieve the desired effect. Obviously, it was an accident, and it’s not unreasonable to call it a crash. But it’s quite different from most crashes, in which the pilot loses completely the ability to control the plane in flight due to mechanical failure or other forms of damage. To sum it up, the pilot adapted effectively to a deteriorating energy situation, and as such aircraft never departed from controlled flight. He flew it carefully into the water.
Blacklake on January 16, 2009 at 6:18 PM
Was the non-crash of the airline with the landing gear stuck sideways a crash? I wonder if that plane was put back in service. Must not be a possibility with this one. Just imagine the carfax report if they tried to sell it after they recovered it.
Slight water damage** NEW UPHOLSTERY!!! **While this airbus is never going to see the sky again, maybe someone would want to buy it and turn it into a diner or something that would stay at the side of the river as a testament to what happened.
wise_man on January 16, 2009 at 6:19 PM
Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy with the outcome and as you and JadeNYU point out that there’s a difference between a crash and a “controlled landing.” Thanks for the explanation.
highhopes on January 16, 2009 at 6:20 PM
This is what’s always been referred to during the flight attendants’ safety talk as a “water landing” which by my definition has always been a crash. The plane and occupants were going down and the plane was going to be lost, no matter what, after the incident with the geese. It was only through this great pilot’s skill, training and experience that prevented loss of life in the aircraft or on the ground. I love it when a(n) (Emergency) plan comes together.
heddly_lamar on January 16, 2009 at 6:20 PM
Oh Good Lord!
Just when I thought you’d overdosed in Obama victory cocaine you show up once again.
highhopes on January 16, 2009 at 6:21 PM
take a long walk off a short pier, dork.
wise_man on January 16, 2009 at 6:22 PM
One thought that came to me when I first heard this story was how many of those passengers were asking themselves “what did she say about what I should do in the unlikely event of a water landing?”
highhopes on January 16, 2009 at 6:23 PM
Whatever, traitor.
highhopes on January 16, 2009 at 6:24 PM
As The Who said in 1982’s It’s Hard (and also Pete Townsend’s Popular – is it okay to steal from yourself?)
Any kid can fly, but few can land.
juanito on January 16, 2009 at 6:28 PM
The art of the airplane, that says a lot.
Good on him!
TheSitRep on January 16, 2009 at 6:30 PM
Good Lord, you can’t even come into a page about a plane landing in the river without being a a*hole, “high”hopes.
wise_man on January 16, 2009 at 6:31 PM
It was a controlled flight into terrain.
If he’d landed on a strip without power it would have been a “crash landing.”
Sub-optimal conditions?
Is that what they’re calling the Hudson river these days?
Please. It was really well done and Sully’s judgment above all was superb, which is what most matters.
But this was a crash. The engines were sheared off at impact. The plane is in the water.
drjohn on January 16, 2009 at 6:32 PM
Please, stop.
Cindy Munford on January 16, 2009 at 6:37 PM
Comment of the Day™
steveegg on January 16, 2009 at 6:42 PM
Again, while I think it fits the common definition of crash, it doesn’t fit the FAA’s technical definition of a crash.
I watched a show about a plane that had wiring trouble that set off a fire in the bathroom. The pilot brought the plane down and there was plenty of time for everyone to safely evacuate the plane. However, many people died because they were sitting in their seats in shock and they simply didn’t get up and leave the plane.
They had experts look at that disaster (and a few others) to try to determine why some people performed better under stress than others.
Their main finding was that, if you take just 1-2 minutes to read over the emergency procedures and decide, “This is what I will do if something happens” you’re more likely to ‘remember’ what to do even when you’re in shock.
Ever since then, I’ve always taken a moment to read the emergency cards on my own and count the chairs between me and the emergency exit.
JadeNYU on January 16, 2009 at 6:46 PM
Every inch of the skies is safer, thanks to Captain Sully!
What a dramatic way to become America’s newest hero…
At Least, Mine!
localmalcontent on January 16, 2009 at 6:46 PM
Sully cuts into Messiah’s days of glory, nolens. I love it!
Entelechy on January 16, 2009 at 6:59 PM
The pandemic use of the word Hero is tiresome. I realize in these feminized times where men are boys and boys are girls, there is a dearth of anything resembling a hero, and this consequently nominates any man who changes his own tire a hero, but we must be honest with facts. A hero is someone who, of his own volition, risks his own life to save the lives of others.
keep the change on January 16, 2009 at 7:21 PM
It was neither a prototypical crash nor a prototypical landing. So while I don’t altogether disagree with you, I won’t altogether disagree with the pilot if at some point he says, “As bad as this was, it was better than crashing.”
Kralizec on January 16, 2009 at 7:24 PM
Great “Carfax” dig.
BallisticBob on January 16, 2009 at 7:55 PM
Of course we had him first. Born and raised Texan.
conservnut on January 16, 2009 at 8:11 PM
That’s a pretty narrow definition of hero. I have a very personal connection with this incident as my husband went through a similar experience last year when an oxygen bottle exploded on his aircraft. He did everything required, along with his crew, to bring it safely to the ground. He doesn’t think of himself as a hero, but everyone on board does and I don’t see how you can deny them that feeling and that need to elevate him to super status. Who cares if everyone else thinks he’s a hero? Let them. Helps them cope, and believe me you need something like that after you’ve been through what is essentially a near-death experience.
I can also tell you that Sully will be feeling very high from the adrenalin for a few days and so glad he didn’t stuff up and cause anyone to be hurt, but in a week or two he will come down from it, and it will be bloody hard for him and his family, especially with the media feeding frenzy surrounding him at the moment. I hope his airline is keeping a good eye on him and the rest of the crew. Sometimes the enormity of it doesn’t sink in for a fair while, after all the hero-worship dies down, and then it can hit you like a train wreck.
Ozwitch on January 16, 2009 at 8:31 PM
No. He did an awesome piece of work but it was his job. The Medal of Freedom is about doing more than your job.
Members of the military perform all kinds of genuinely brave acts regularly but only a handful get the CMOH which is the military equivalent of the MOF.
Perspective please.
Ares on January 16, 2009 at 9:21 PM
Ares,
He did more than his job. It was perfection. Perfection is not part of the job. Perfection should be honored. Perfection inspires other people to not just do their job but to strive for perfection. That is exactly what Medals were designed for.
Rocks on January 16, 2009 at 9:55 PM
Indeed narrow KTC. We see heroic things everyday from police, firemen, etc. What makes these things heroic is not just that they were done but because the person prepared for such a situation and performed flawlessly. Read this pilot’s resume, it’s no accident he was the one to perform such a flawless maneuver. Heroes are prepared, most especially to save lives, and that is exactly what this pilot was and has done. He is a hero in every sense of the word. People put their lives in his hands and he didn’t fail them, when everything says he could have.
Rocks on January 16, 2009 at 10:08 PM
Criteria here:
http://www.medaloffreedom.com/
With respect, I think the medal has a place and it is not here.
Once you blur the lines of distinction with awards you end up, as the Brits have, debasing them – I give you Sir Paul McCartney as an example.
That said, didn’t Tony Blair get this medal?
Ares on January 16, 2009 at 10:54 PM
Like most real heroes, Sully will probably say that he was just earning his keep.
While a low-altitude flameout over Lower Manhattan definitely pegs the pucker-factor gauge, airline pilots face tough real-time judgement calls every day. The fact that so few of them wind up on the news is a testament to their extraordinary level of professionalism.
And, like most media stories fixated on a single person, the heroic actions of the rest of the team are likely to go unheralded. Here’s a shout-out to the window-exit passengers who had the presence of mind to review the instructions for removing the overwing exit hatches, and the cabin crew who got everyone out with no loss of life or permanent injury.
skydaddy on January 16, 2009 at 10:57 PM
ahem
Q.E.D.
skydaddy on January 16, 2009 at 10:59 PM
Ares,
Have you looked at the people who have received the Medal of Freedom? Do you know how many athletes and entertainers have won it? If Julia Child and Rita Moreno deserved it this man certainly does.
Rocks on January 16, 2009 at 11:05 PM
He followed orders, granted, and provided an alternate target for outrage from opponents to the WOT.
Say what?
He was a self-important poodle.
Ares on January 16, 2009 at 11:09 PM
Skydaddy,
I agree with you. There are heroic things done everyday, by heroes. Many others even on that flight. You can’t honor all with the highest award because it lowers the impact of the award. Which is exactly why you need to find situations and individuals to honor, both for that person and the persons they represent. This captain is just such an individual, in just such a situation.
Rocks on January 16, 2009 at 11:11 PM
I am a massive fan of Julia Child so I won’t comment on that.
Would he deserve it if he’d tanked it and they’d all drowned? Honest question.
Ares on January 16, 2009 at 11:11 PM
It says nothing about “Doing more than your job.”
I believe that this man “made a significant public or private accomplishment.” He’s qualified.
And it is in no way “feminizing” to honor someone who has a dangerous job for doing it better than most other men could in a time such as this. Were all of the pilots who could pull this kind of maneuver off in the past just a bunch of pikers? Were they slackers who just didn’t know how to do their job? Or were they good men who “did their job.”
This gentleman went to great lengths to make sure that he was prepared for a situation like this. And when the situation arose, he was up to the task.
29Victor on January 16, 2009 at 11:13 PM
I do believe that I shall quote Cracked Magazine on this one:
“Every once in a while, the Creator looks down from on high, extend his finger to an newborn infant, and intones: That one shall have balls of F***ing granite”.
Apparently, the pilot got the nod from the Big Man on this one
Presidential medal? Let’s give the man a good, rock-solid conservative capitalist result: Apparently the pilot has a consulting business on the side. He teach people how to apply the safety procedures of the airline to the business world.
Think he knows his stuff?
Mal Carne on January 16, 2009 at 11:18 PM
I like her too Ares.
Honest answer, no. They don’t give medals for trying, no matter how hard.
Rocks on January 16, 2009 at 11:22 PM
“Bush should make it his final act as President to give the pilot the Medal of Freedom.”
I’ll 178,997,654,366 that
DSchoen on January 16, 2009 at 11:51 PM
Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing.
Even if you have to swim for it.
That was some seriously nifty flying.
-Dave
Dave R. on January 17, 2009 at 12:05 AM
It’s the only definition that makes sense. If somebody gets himself out of tight squeeze, we don’t call him a hero. He saved his own behind and that is good enough. Everybody else on that plane was redundant. Pilots themselves have this as a saying: Save yourself, and the passengers will be okay.
A hero is, by logical definition, someone who does something dangerous for the benefit of others which they don’t have to do. That option to engage danger when safety was the easier route, is the very principle behind the notion of the hero. If you expand that definition to include everyone who has ever performed better than expected in a trying situation, then you can call almost anyone a hero at some point and then the word, and the concept it expresses, loses its meaning.
Let’s not cheapen things. Liberals do that for us. They cheapen our culture. They cheapen our language. And now, by printing trillions for bailouts, they are even cheapening our currency. Things lose meaning. Awarding a MOH in this situation would be to put this very phenomenon into minted form.
keep the change on January 17, 2009 at 2:53 AM
It was a great effort by the whole crew to get folks out once the splashdown was successful. My question is if there was a warning or avoidance system in place on the ground and was it working?
I hope the survivors remembered to thank a higher power for the outcome. If anything they all could have died from exposure to the cold water.
johnnyU on January 17, 2009 at 4:59 AM
I think he’ll get his capitalist reward: he’ll be able to make big bucks on the lecture circuit now. (Deservedly so, of course).
According to media reports, “everybody” on board was praying. I expect there were many “thank-you” prayers as everyone got off the plane safely.
Good work by everyone, from captain and crew to passengers and river rescue workers.
AZCoyote on January 17, 2009 at 7:15 AM
man he could have gone from hero to goat very quickly. I’m glad it went ok, because we would be hearing all kinds of stories about him being a drunk and formerly divorced and the airline industry is broken.
Great job sir, you are a hero.
tomas on January 17, 2009 at 9:09 AM
Just saw the video of that landing on the Hudson. As a veteran airport bum(my husband flies a glider) I have witnessed many landings, the good, the bad, and the ugly! Capt. Sully’s landing was sheer poetry. It was beautiful. That took some major skill. He is a real hero, but more importantly he is a real man! God bless the good Captain and all the passengers that made it through that “bad day at the office”. It was a true miracle.
BetseyRoss on January 17, 2009 at 1:56 PM
well what do you know.
wise_man on January 18, 2009 at 12:11 AM
Comment pages: