I'll take this episode over the movie any day. I know Sully gets most of the credit in the media, but First Officer Skiles (sorry if I misspelled his last name) should get credit too. Both of those pilots are why everyone survived under impossible circumstances.
@@Dante-jx6tmSkiles is the spelling, they have it written next to his name when he is first interviewed right at the beginning. All the crew did a stellar job that day. Flight Attendants and the pilots. The passengers helped each other and the ferry crews and rescue crews were right on point. Great work all around. Oh and the air traffic controller. Can’t forget him,
@ShadowCatGold2006 let's give him credit, but I won't take 2 seconds to spellcheck his name lol Such a weird sentence even though you spelled it correctly.
I remember seeing the news reports when it happened and thinking "Wow, what an awesome save" but was utterly shocked when I watched the movie and realized Sully was from my little hometown in Texas. Small world!
So glad to see Mr. Skiles getting the interview here. I understand that Mr. Sullenberger was in control of the plane as it was ditched, but I've always felt that Mr. Skiles hasn't gotten enough credit for his part in saving all of these people's lives. To be fair, I don't think that circumstance is the FAULT of Sully, as I remember it he was more than willing to share credit with Skiles, but the media certainly focused much more on him. Pleased to see ATC Patrick Harten here, too!
Captain knew he had far too much fuel, far too little altitude. 50 50 chances of safe return wernt good enough. Human life is worth far more than all the riches of the world. Water is enemy of fire and heat. So he went for it. Excellent choice.
I was watching television here in Europe when this situation was shown. I remained almost glued to the screen until everyone was recovered. I love the Airbus over Boeing and was so delighted to see how well it was landed and no lives lost. The crew were excellent and I cried as everyone was brought safely to the shore.
Yes, this has occurred to me. If they had spotted a vessel or two that already massive workload could have been greatly complicated: trying to tweak the glide trajectory while keeping the right pitch and the wings level. There are other what ifs: they had to clear the GW Bridge... I don't know how high they flew over it (... ah, 900 ft according to Wikip) but that could've been a disaster too. As a resident of London UK this also makes me think quite a bit: there is simply no way you can land in the twisty Thames, which is stuffed full of bridges, much narrower, and sometimes with vessels. Also London is so heavily built up for miles around: good luck with finding a patch of level field or parkland! And we have birds too... although fortunately not 10 pound Canada geese (unless they've taken a major wrong turning).
I always wondered what the captains of those vessels thought seeing that plane come overhead smoking at such a low altitude. I know I would have been shocked and horrified.
I know it's not the greatest thing to bring up here but the movie did focus a lot on what time of yr the incident happened. It was the middle of winter when it happened. Temperature wasn't much higher than freezing outside of the water. That might've contributed to a relatively empty Hudson
I was NYC 🚒👨🏻🚒🧑🚒 🔥 we had no way to reach them.. thank god for the fire and police civilians boats. Sully is one cool calm guy under pressure..” I would go down a hallway filled with fire with him…. I can’t believe it was 09? Feels like 5 years ago
Mentour Pilot (YT channel) did a real-time simulator recording of this event from start to finish. It helps to understand exactly how little time they had to react.
@@Powerranger-le4up THAT man was a true badass...a one-eyed PILOT?! That's just amazing. I'd love to know how he practiced to make THAT certification work! His whole crew was amazing, but TACA 110's captain was just top-tier.
See that's what happens when people don't pay attention to the safety briefing, when he was talking about not knowing how to brace, even though the attendant was saying heads down. People don't listen or think they know what to do,, then a situation like this happens and you won't know what to do. It's not up to the flight crew, it's not even up to the flight attendants it's up to you as a passenger to pay attention. This could have been a lot worse.
@@randydelaney7053 I was stunned that, facing water outside, there appeared to not be many life vests used. I scuba but am not a strong swimmer. My reliance on a BC to float at the surface would have me whipping that puppy out from beneath my seat in a heartbeat.
The Adrenaline and Terror Running Through Passengers Mind and Bodies as They are Told to Brace For Impact For a Hudson River Plane Landing....Must be Pretty Surreal Feeling
It's fascinating how something as insignificant as an organic bird can either get completely and totally obliterated by an aircraft engine like nothing happened, or bring the metal bird down.
@@douglaszare1215 EXACTLY!!! The ACTUAL CASUALTIES of the Miracle of Hudson are FOUR Canada Geese!!! 😜😝🤣🤪😂 Sad that these geese cannot communicate to the air traffic control to manage their air space!!!
@@good2golden803 No, I just don’t think Hollywood actors, celebrities, or other prominent people should exploit their fame to foist half-baked political opinions on others. Their opinions on matters outside their competence are about as profound as those you’ll find at the corner barber shop
I always knew this was an amazing story. But now at this point I've watched enough mayday: air disaster to know a plane trying to land on the water doesn't usually end so well
what was not mentioned here was that after the crash landing, Sully immediately went to the passengers' area to tell them to evacuate. It was actually Sully who was the last one to leave the plane.
This episode demonstrates clearly the expertise, professionalism and skill of the flight crew. They have earned even more of my respect. As for bird strikes, as they state in the video, they will continue to happen. They will also damage engines until such improbable time someone makes a miraculous scientific and engineering discovery that aircraft engines are something akin to those blade-less fans so many of us have in our homes that would allow birds to pass through without damaging any crucial component. How that would be possible and if it were ever to be possible is beyond me and as I wrote earlier, it would probably have to be a miraculous and spectacular scientific and engineering breakthrough. In short, not likely a reality anytime soon. The avian radar clearly looks like the most realistic and effective method currently at our disposal.
I saw in another documentary that some tour helicopter overheard the traffic control conversation and confirmed what Captain Sully said, and I can just imagine the disbelief. "We're gonna be in the Hudson." "...I'm sorry, say again?" "He said he's gonna be in the HUDSON!"
It was not a miracle, just a crew that did their job, what they were trained for. It would be a "miracle" if they survived ditching mid Atlantic in heavy waves, in darkness
I live by LGA and birds are something else. I was in manhattan that day to meet up with a friend. we were around the spot they landed and half an hour later we heard about it. Had we changed our schedule, or was late for something we would have seen it.
Hudson river is so wide and free from obstacle, so capt sully doesn't have too much worries. it's very different if compared to Garuda Indonesia flight 421 who ditching on solo river
An Air Canada 767 performed a similar dual engine failure back in the 80s. Only difference was the water, to land on water and keep the aircraft in one piece is both pilot skill and a lot of luck.
Sully saved many more lives than 155 plus crew. I'm guessing some of the people who were saved had children who might not have been born with a different pilot.
When the passenger says we were told to Brace but how do you do that? Well if you listen to the flight instructions at the beginning and read the card it tells you. Everyone should know these basic things! 😮
They did not press the ditch switch because they did not get to the end of the ditch checklist. Pressing that switch would have sealed openings in the fusalage increasing the duration the plane could stay afloat.
So what was the outcome of having such a detailed QRH at low level flight, as happened in this case? If overly detailed QRH have caused aircraft disasters in the past as well, then this is something that needs to be addressed. Sully switching on the back-up generator early and fast tracking the QRH proceedure is probably the major decision that contributed to a successful outcome.
Surely, aircraft manufacturers could develop some sort of rudimentary hydro-skis similar to those seen on amphibious aircraft that could be deployed to help increase the chances of a successful water landing. I'm sure I'll get many comments dismissing it immediately and explaining it's impossible, but I'm not talking about making all aircraft amphibious. I'm just suggesting some basic skis that could be folded up in the wings and body which could be extended in the case of emergencie to absorb some of the impact.
its a little more than that as the engines usually hang low and infront of the wings, so on landing if you dont do it right they can rip the plane apart as they become the first object to hit. without the engines the body of the plane would probably be good enough as its a nice flat smooth surface. For how to deal with bird strikes hitting the engine core, maybe they could use sort of a intake cone on the engine, it would redirect the birds to the outer fan blade area and reduce what could be sucked into the core.
@jjjacer Yeah, I realize the engines hanging below the wings are the problem. I'll refrain from calling you Captain Obvious. I'm talking about something that could be extended to below that level. All it would need to do is keep the engines out of the water until the aircraft has slowed enough to prevent the engines dragging and causing catastrophic damage. I do like your idea for the cones on the engines. However, I'm concerned it may reduce air intake, making the engine less efficient. Bird strikes aren't the only reason pilots have had to ditch in water.
@@brett22bt true, sometimes i do state the obvious but that comes from working IT and finding people with no common sense. technically you wouldnt need multiple ski's, could probably have one big one just infront of the engines on the body, would have to be forward enough past COG to prevent the plane from face planting on water landing. For loosing efficiency with an intake cone, maybe have it ajustable that it reduces in diameter once the plane is above 10,000 feet where birds are less of an issue, although yeah turbofans would be a bit harder to do this on due to size, especially since they just get bigger and bigger, not like the turbojets of old where a russian mig can close off its intake and just get air from the top so that it dont suck in dirt and mud from unpaved runways
@@brett22bt A lot of added weight for "skis" deployment that don`t cause drag .You`d be better off to find a way to de-attach the engines off the plane from 300 ft before crash landing to increase lift, scrub speed and have a flatter surface to meet the ground or water.
Am I the only one who feels sorry for the birds? I'm glad all the passengers survived, but the birds were just flying along minding their own business. Plus all the birds that are being euthanized just because they MIGHT cause a problem some day. What a shame.
I do feel sorry for the birds 😢 Between planes, trains, vehicles, skyscrapers, habitat loss… bird populations have decreased significantly in last few decades. Wish we could find a better way to coexist without causing such harm
The actual documented report is the very best, not this reenactment; it doesn't come close. The movie was OK as a movie, but not about the real event. Why can't the original report that was shown first be viewed now? It can't be found.
Why do people care who does or doesn't get credit for the outcome of the flight?. No one watching this video is in any position to do anything about it anyway.
I am not a technical person ,far from it ,but isn’t there a way for devices to be installed somewhere in the cockpit so pilots could actually see whether an engine is on fire or not or fell out …. Just saying
On the contrary actually. Its simple physics. Imagine you skipping a rock on a pond. You always take the perfectly flat and smooth ones, because they skip better off the surface, right? Now imagine the plane. Its gliding/flying through the air with a certain speed. Ideally, it would only have a smooth bottom surface to touch the water, without engines or anything protruding from it. It would glide smoother over the water surface than if it had bumps and engines and gears cutting the water surface. But it does have engines. So what happens upon water contact? The planes tail hits the warter first, and the plane glides smoothly over the surface. It decelerates. Then the bulk of the plane comes down and the engines touch the water surface. But since they are not a smooth surface of the fuselage, but more like 2 bumps protruding, they break through the surface and present an enormeous water resistance. Inertia comes to play: the engines severely decelerate the plane, but the actual fuselage wants to go faster still, because it has not decelerated as much as the engines yet: the whole plane begins to rotate around the axis of the lowest forward motion: the axis where the engines are fixed onto the wings. This brings the nose down and the plane slams onto the water. The same happens if you deploy the gear, BUT now the gear hits the water first, as it is by design lower than the tail would be. So the rotation of the plane begins at a lower point (earlier) already, allowing the plane to build up more energy in the rotation. The plane would faceplant into the river almost with the same speed it hit the water at first contact, and the forces working through the fuselage would be much greater than if the engines hit after the tail. Its the same principle if you are sliding down a snowy hill on your feet and someone grabs a hold of your legs suddenly and fixes them in place. You faceplant much harder as if you were already on your hands and knees or your belly
@@JimKlus-jc4dw Sully liked the film except for the negative portrayal of the NTSB, which was entirely made up, likely by Clint Eastwood. When I saw it, that was the only glaring problem I noticed; the NTSB has never had that reputation from what I've observed. I guess every film needs a villain of sorts, and Eastwood decided it should be them. He's a weird, paranoid duck.
@@abbycross90210I feel bad for the NTSB. That movie made people believe in false story. I think there’s never a docudrama film that is completely true.
i have been hesitant to watch this episode a lot and decided to give it a shot now, reason why is not because it's not a good exciting episode but because it's kind of painful for me knowing that the people in the cabin survived, and yes that's great. but any animal/pet in the cargo holder under the plane didn't, because it would have been too late and they'd drown right away being under the belly of the plane. to me that's not a happy story all together. like yes, he landed it safely but for humans. not the animals and yes some survived but some other beings didn't. while i don't know if there were any pets on the plane i can't be sure there weren't. this is why water landings always sadden me still. the poor animals could have had the same chance of survival if they weren't in the fuking cargo area and in the cabin where they belong just like the other passengers flying. and honestly, they deserve that seat/spot more than some "people" on the plane in the cabin. i think every animal should be safe traveling and have the same chances we do and come and go comfortably and safely. especially with their families. i would want my dog/cat or bunny or whatever with me and make sure they're good, most animals are like babies forever and are precious and special. i think we've come a long way but still need to grow in a lot of other ways. how many souls on board should be a question of how many humans and non human souls are on board.. rescuers should also rescue animals in there and do equal search and rescues for both. plain and simple. so, this episode is still heartbreaking in some way. i hope there were no animals on the plane at all. i really, really do. and it'd be great and i'd appreciate it if someone knows that there weren't other souls besides people and confirms it to me. birds flying in that engine is sad too. both human beings and animals deserve to live.
Quick google search tells me there were no animals on board this flight. edi. you could simple check it from wikipedia page on US Airways Flight 1549 - Aftermath
@@desmondou thats totally impractical tho. Some flocks can be several hundrets of individuals strong. Sometimes thousands of individual birds. To carry enough bird repellants would add tons of weight to the plane, making it totally umsafe or flat out unable to fly
I'll take this episode over the movie any day. I know Sully gets most of the credit in the media, but First Officer Skiles (sorry if I misspelled his last name) should get credit too. Both of those pilots are why everyone survived under impossible circumstances.
You didn’t misspell his name that much it was Skyales
@@Dante-jx6tmSkiles is the spelling, they have it written next to his name when he is first interviewed right at the beginning. All the crew did a stellar job that day. Flight Attendants and the pilots. The passengers helped each other and the ferry crews and rescue crews were right on point. Great work all around. Oh and the air traffic controller. Can’t forget him,
@ShadowCatGold2006 let's give him credit, but I won't take 2 seconds to spellcheck his name lol
Such a weird sentence even though you spelled it correctly.
BRO INSTEAD OF CAPTAIN . THE FIRST OFFICER HELPED THE PASANGERS TO GET OUT
OFC the co pilot gets credit too. But Sully got majority of it as he should have, HE is the one who had his hands and control of the plane.
I remember this day. This still brings tears to my eyes. God bless you Capt. Sully
I remember seeing the news reports when it happened and thinking "Wow, what an awesome save" but was utterly shocked when I watched the movie and realized Sully was from my little hometown in Texas. Small world!
Whoah, nice surprise!
So glad to see Mr. Skiles getting the interview here. I understand that Mr. Sullenberger was in control of the plane as it was ditched, but I've always felt that Mr. Skiles hasn't gotten enough credit for his part in saving all of these people's lives. To be fair, I don't think that circumstance is the FAULT of Sully, as I remember it he was more than willing to share credit with Skiles, but the media certainly focused much more on him. Pleased to see ATC Patrick Harten here, too!
Great Team Work.
Definely one of my favorite episodes of the whole show!
Same here ❤
Mine too.
One of the greatest saves of all time. Truly heroic.
Heh, it's pretty interesting since.... the plane was in good enough shape that parts got salvaged and re-used on other planes.
And the A320’s flight envelope kept it from stalling.
Captain knew he had far too much fuel, far too little altitude. 50 50 chances of safe return wernt good enough. Human life is worth far more than all the riches of the world. Water is enemy of fire and heat. So he went for it. Excellent choice.
The ultimate feel good story.
I feel sad for the birds !!
this video kept me on the edge of my seat, great job, koodos to the crew
Koodos
I was watching television here in Europe when this situation was shown. I remained almost glued to the screen until everyone was recovered. I love the Airbus over Boeing and was so delighted to see how well it was landed and no lives lost.
The crew were excellent and I cried as everyone was brought safely to the shore.
After all these years, I still find it incredible that they didn't hit any vessel on a busy waterway like the Hudson River.
Yes, this has occurred to me. If they had spotted a vessel or two that already massive workload could have been greatly complicated: trying to tweak the glide trajectory while keeping the right pitch and the wings level. There are other what ifs: they had to clear the GW Bridge... I don't know how high they flew over it (... ah, 900 ft according to Wikip) but that could've been a disaster too. As a resident of London UK this also makes me think quite a bit: there is simply no way you can land in the twisty Thames, which is stuffed full of bridges, much narrower, and sometimes with vessels. Also London is so heavily built up for miles around: good luck with finding a patch of level field or parkland! And we have birds too... although fortunately not 10 pound Canada geese (unless they've taken a major wrong turning).
I always wondered what the captains of those vessels thought seeing that plane come overhead smoking at such a low altitude. I know I would have been shocked and horrified.
I know it's not the greatest thing to bring up here but the movie did focus a lot on what time of yr the incident happened.
It was the middle of winter when it happened. Temperature wasn't much higher than freezing outside of the water.
That might've contributed to a relatively empty Hudson
I was NYC 🚒👨🏻🚒🧑🚒 🔥 we had no way to reach them.. thank god for the fire and police civilians boats. Sully is one cool calm guy under pressure..” I would go down a hallway filled with fire with him…. I can’t believe it was 09? Feels like 5 years ago
This is the first clean sheet save that I know, hats off to the crew 🎉
"The problem can get worse - because there are many birds out there" 😂
Mentour Pilot (YT channel) did a real-time simulator recording of this event from start to finish. It helps to understand exactly how little time they had to react.
So many similarities to “the miracle in Gottröra” SAS flight SK751. The fuselage broke into three parts but all passengers and crew survived.
TACA Flight 110’s captain, Carlos Dardano, is the original Sully. He was also blind in one eye.
And TACA Flight 110
@@Powerranger-le4up Original "Sully" was captain Migadis. Olympic Airways flight 411, ATH - JFK.
@@Powerranger-le4up THAT man was a true badass...a one-eyed PILOT?! That's just amazing. I'd love to know how he practiced to make THAT certification work! His whole crew was amazing, but TACA 110's captain was just top-tier.
@@Akis__ Yes. This!
I think both pilots should have gotten a medal!!!!! THEY SAVED EVERYONE!!!!!
Actually, they did receive the Master’s Medal from the Guild of Air Pilots and Air Navigators.
See that's what happens when people don't pay attention to the safety briefing, when he was talking about not knowing how to brace, even though the attendant was saying heads down. People don't listen or think they know what to do,, then a situation like this happens and you won't know what to do. It's not up to the flight crew, it's not even up to the flight attendants it's up to you as a passenger to pay attention. This could have been a lot worse.
@@randydelaney7053 that's exactly what went through my mind as well! It's so important to listen to those instructions.
@@randydelaney7053 I was stunned that, facing water outside, there appeared to not be many life vests used. I scuba but am not a strong swimmer. My reliance on a BC to float at the surface would have me whipping that puppy out from beneath my seat in a heartbeat.
They are obviously not as clever as you Dickie.
“Whether it was right or not???? “ All lives were saved. That was the right. There were no other options
The Adrenaline and Terror Running Through Passengers Mind and Bodies as They are Told to Brace For Impact For a Hudson River Plane Landing....Must be Pretty Surreal Feeling
Bot
the caption is hero.. he save all the passanger ❤❤
It's fascinating how something as insignificant as an organic bird can either get completely and totally obliterated by an aircraft engine like nothing happened, or bring the metal bird down.
It was multiple birds, though.
@@douglaszare1215 EXACTLY!!!
The ACTUAL CASUALTIES of the Miracle of Hudson are FOUR Canada Geese!!!
😜😝🤣🤪😂
Sad that these geese cannot communicate to the air traffic control to manage their air space!!!
And really heavy birds at that. Geese, i believe
Geese are HUGE though.
we had news of this in the UK infact it was news worldwide what a story and thank God for Capt Sully and his Co pilot God bless you both XXXXXX
I watch this on a daily as my favorite show to watch ❤❤❤
Sully’s voice would make me feel safe, I can’t really explain it he just sounds like he’ll handle the situation whatever it may be 😆
Definitely one of my fav episode
sully was a miracle worker here
"MY AIRCRAFT". GOAT.
Clay Presley later took flying lessons himself to help him get over some of the fears.
This episode is way better than the movie Sully
I agree since the NTSB was actually on Sully’s side the entire time.
Yeah. I was really disappointed with the movie.
Yeah, forced drama needs to go, it even twisted the whole thing a bit...
Yeah I agree I was mad at the movie of flight 1549 emergency landing on the hudson river😒🤬
Sully was a good movie for drama, if factually a little short.
rarely does a captain break into Hollywood after a plane crash... like j Peterman said kudos on a job, done 😊
Sullenberger should stick to flying and not inflict his biased political opinions on us. Nobody gives a crap what he thinks about Trump
@@djpalindrome Are you upset because his opinions about Trump differ from yours?
@@good2golden803
No, I just don’t think Hollywood actors, celebrities, or other prominent people should exploit their fame to foist half-baked political opinions on others. Their opinions on matters outside their competence are about as profound as those you’ll find at the corner barber shop
@@djpalindromethe whole point of anyone having political opinions is to 'foist them on others'. That's how it works dude
i was born the same day this happened jan 15 2009
Pov parents: OMG WHY IS MY KID BORN AND A PLANE JUST HIT THE HUDSON
I always knew this was an amazing story. But now at this point I've watched enough mayday: air disaster to know a plane trying to land on the water doesn't usually end so well
what was not mentioned here was that after the crash landing, Sully immediately went to the passengers' area to tell them to evacuate. It was actually Sully who was the last one to leave the plane.
They clearly mentioned it
This episode demonstrates clearly the expertise, professionalism and skill of the flight crew. They have earned even more of my respect. As for bird strikes, as they state in the video, they will continue to happen. They will also damage engines until such improbable time someone makes a miraculous scientific and engineering discovery that aircraft engines are something akin to those blade-less fans so many of us have in our homes that would allow birds to pass through without damaging any crucial component. How that would be possible and if it were ever to be possible is beyond me and as I wrote earlier, it would probably have to be a miraculous and spectacular scientific and engineering breakthrough. In short, not likely a reality anytime soon. The avian radar clearly looks like the most realistic and effective method currently at our disposal.
I was at work right next to the East River and we kept hearing about this but I don't think any of us really believed it was happening!
To make it more complete yet, documentary should tell that aircraft sits in a museum in NC
I saw in another documentary that some tour helicopter overheard the traffic control conversation and confirmed what Captain Sully said, and I can just imagine the disbelief.
"We're gonna be in the Hudson."
"...I'm sorry, say again?"
"He said he's gonna be in the HUDSON!"
And the people on shore went out and saved them after Captain Sullenberger landed so perfectly on the Hudson.
It's a miracle no one lost their lives. Several pets did perish inside the cargo hold.
not sure what flight you're talking about. there were no animals on this flight
No animal in cargo nor bulk hold at all according to Wikipedia
Eh I'm not too concerned about the pets. The geese also perished
It was not a miracle, just a crew that did their job, what they were trained for. It would be a "miracle" if they survived ditching mid Atlantic in heavy waves, in darkness
I love the Norm Macdonald film, "Sully Sullenberger: Airport Pilot".
I live by LGA and birds are something else. I was in manhattan that day to meet up with a friend. we were around the spot they landed and half an hour later we heard about it. Had we changed our schedule, or was late for something we would have seen it.
Hudson river is so wide and free from obstacle, so capt sully doesn't have too much worries. it's very different if compared to Garuda Indonesia flight 421 who ditching on solo river
What’s interesting is that, “Sully” is Tom Hanks second movie featuring an aircraft ditching following, “Cast Away”.
That can't be the real story, the captain looked nothing like Tom Hanks...😅
@@johnwymer1215 I see people no longer understand sarcasm and humor……
😂😂😂
@@sunnyfon9065🤦🏼♀️
Tom was the best choice in my opinion.
I remember that day I work in lower manhattan
Lesson-Don't be panicked in any given situation, have confidence on you and manage the situation with care.
An Air Canada 767 performed a similar dual engine failure back in the 80s. Only difference was the water, to land on water and keep the aircraft in one piece is both pilot skill and a lot of luck.
Also Captain Carlos Dardanos in 1988 on TACA flight 110
Wouldn’t a way to keep bird away would be to have frequency emitters on planes that send out sound that would scare birds away.
@@jonathanradut2595 that’s what I was thinking…
It looks like those birds Goose were cooked ! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Sully saved many more lives than 155 plus crew. I'm guessing some of the people who were saved had children who might not have been born with a different pilot.
When the passenger says we were told to Brace but how do you do that? Well if you listen to the flight instructions at the beginning and read the card it tells you. Everyone should know these basic things! 😮
AMAZING 😮
we dont talk about this enough
I remember when this happened I was younger then the plan crashed landed in the Hudson River.
Those poor birds.
I'd say
Eat more Geese
Not my dog
Not my cat
- james blunt
You will be the one
You will be the one
to eat ❤
What it doesn't answer is why an airtight plane leaks like a sieve as soon as it touches the water.
They did not press the ditch switch because they did not get to the end of the ditch checklist. Pressing that switch would have sealed openings in the fusalage increasing the duration the plane could stay afloat.
When you slide across waves at 150mph it tends to rip apart metal parts. It was very clearly stated in this video.
Seeing Bob Benzon without a moustache just feels...wrong.
Birds can bend those blades and causes them to sent blades into the engines it’s very common
So what was the outcome of having such a detailed QRH at low level flight, as happened in this case? If overly detailed QRH have caused aircraft disasters in the past as well, then this is something that needs to be addressed. Sully switching on the back-up generator early and fast tracking the QRH proceedure is probably the major decision that contributed to a successful outcome.
Does anyone believe there was fowl play going on here ? 😂😂😂😂😂
Wym?
No, no one believes that.
@@Smokie2107it's play on words. 'Fowl' refers to birds, and is a homophone of 'foul' which is common to see as a part of the phrase 'foul play'
Surely, aircraft manufacturers could develop some sort of rudimentary hydro-skis similar to those seen on amphibious aircraft that could be deployed to help increase the chances of a successful water landing. I'm sure I'll get many comments dismissing it immediately and explaining it's impossible, but I'm not talking about making all aircraft amphibious. I'm just suggesting some basic skis that could be folded up in the wings and body which could be extended in the case of emergencie to absorb some of the impact.
its a little more than that as the engines usually hang low and infront of the wings, so on landing if you dont do it right they can rip the plane apart as they become the first object to hit.
without the engines the body of the plane would probably be good enough as its a nice flat smooth surface.
For how to deal with bird strikes hitting the engine core, maybe they could use sort of a intake cone on the engine, it would redirect the birds to the outer fan blade area and reduce what could be sucked into the core.
@jjjacer Yeah, I realize the engines hanging below the wings are the problem. I'll refrain from calling you Captain Obvious. I'm talking about something that could be extended to below that level. All it would need to do is keep the engines out of the water until the aircraft has slowed enough to prevent the engines dragging and causing catastrophic damage.
I do like your idea for the cones on the engines. However, I'm concerned it may reduce air intake, making the engine less efficient. Bird strikes aren't the only reason pilots have had to ditch in water.
@@brett22bt true, sometimes i do state the obvious but that comes from working IT and finding people with no common sense. technically you wouldnt need multiple ski's, could probably have one big one just infront of the engines on the body, would have to be forward enough past COG to prevent the plane from face planting on water landing.
For loosing efficiency with an intake cone, maybe have it ajustable that it reduces in diameter once the plane is above 10,000 feet where birds are less of an issue, although yeah turbofans would be a bit harder to do this on due to size, especially since they just get bigger and bigger, not like the turbojets of old where a russian mig can close off its intake and just get air from the top so that it dont suck in dirt and mud from unpaved runways
@@brett22bt A lot of added weight for "skis" deployment that don`t cause drag .You`d be better off to find a way to de-attach the engines off the plane from 300 ft before crash landing to increase lift, scrub speed and have a flatter surface to meet the ground or water.
@@tedzehnder961 Yeah, I did mention extra weight involved. But yeah, that could work.
Why not try to redesign the engines so that birds can't hurt them? They could put a screen of some type in front?
They talked about why screens won't work.
Am I the only one who feels sorry for the birds? I'm glad all the passengers survived, but the birds were just flying along minding their own business. Plus all the birds that are being euthanized just because they MIGHT cause a problem some day. What a shame.
Nope i am sad
Well...peoples lives are more important than birds lives ....sorry.
I do feel sorry for the birds 😢
Between planes, trains, vehicles, skyscrapers, habitat loss… bird populations have decreased significantly in last few decades. Wish we could find a better way to coexist without causing such harm
From Mayday Air Disaster episode to Tom Hanks movie Sully
Damn you, Birb!!!!
Out of a couple pellets when up
Only 1 pigeon came down
The actual documented report is the very best, not this reenactment; it doesn't come close. The movie was OK as a movie, but not about the real event. Why can't the original report that was shown first be viewed now? It can't be found.
Went up
Goose ❤
WE GOT THE HUDSON!
Why do people care who does or doesn't get credit for the outcome of the flight?. No one watching this video is in any position to do anything about it anyway.
Canada Goose 25lbs
Mallard Duck 10 to 13lbs
My money is on the Mallard 😂
Especially if she's protecting her eggs 6 months ago
And his young ones
October 12 2024
Mallard Duck over
Canada Goose
I am Canadian
I miss the OG intro 🥲
Thank you Jesus
No
you ever skimmed a stone on the shore.....they had
I am not a technical person ,far from it ,but isn’t there a way for devices to be installed somewhere in the cockpit so pilots could actually see whether an engine is on fire or not or fell out …. Just saying
You mean like a camera?
Unfortunately, the birds did not make it…
Poor birds 😢
Never forget this accident
Ps
And isn't there a way of taking into consideration their flocking,?
Can you make a video on VASP 375
Great landing. BUT IF he released landing gear, would that not helped more?
On the contrary actually. Its simple physics. Imagine you skipping a rock on a pond. You always take the perfectly flat and smooth ones, because they skip better off the surface, right?
Now imagine the plane. Its gliding/flying through the air with a certain speed. Ideally, it would only have a smooth bottom surface to touch the water, without engines or anything protruding from it. It would glide smoother over the water surface than if it had bumps and engines and gears cutting the water surface. But it does have engines. So what happens upon water contact? The planes tail hits the warter first, and the plane glides smoothly over the surface. It decelerates. Then the bulk of the plane comes down and the engines touch the water surface. But since they are not a smooth surface of the fuselage, but more like 2 bumps protruding, they break through the surface and present an enormeous water resistance. Inertia comes to play: the engines severely decelerate the plane, but the actual fuselage wants to go faster still, because it has not decelerated as much as the engines yet: the whole plane begins to rotate around the axis of the lowest forward motion: the axis where the engines are fixed onto the wings. This brings the nose down and the plane slams onto the water.
The same happens if you deploy the gear, BUT now the gear hits the water first, as it is by design lower than the tail would be. So the rotation of the plane begins at a lower point (earlier) already, allowing the plane to build up more energy in the rotation. The plane would faceplant into the river almost with the same speed it hit the water at first contact, and the forces working through the fuselage would be much greater than if the engines hit after the tail.
Its the same principle if you are sliding down a snowy hill on your feet and someone grabs a hold of your legs suddenly and fixes them in place. You faceplant much harder as if you were already on your hands and knees or your belly
For everyone who didn't catch the MAJOR MOTION PICTURE.about this.
I've seen it, it was bad, about 97% of the movie was fictionalize the rest 3% was based on facts. Even Captain Sully gave it a thumbs down.
@@JimKlus-jc4dw Sully liked the film except for the negative portrayal of the NTSB, which was entirely made up, likely by Clint Eastwood. When I saw it, that was the only glaring problem I noticed; the NTSB has never had that reputation from what I've observed. I guess every film needs a villain of sorts, and Eastwood decided it should be them. He's a weird, paranoid duck.
@@abbycross90210I feel bad for the NTSB. That movie made people believe in false story.
I think there’s never a docudrama film that is completely true.
So it is more dangerous to fly during birds' migration season.
Rip brid
way tooooo hyped.
i have been hesitant to watch this episode a lot and decided to give it a shot now, reason why is not because it's not a good exciting episode but because it's kind of painful for me knowing that the people in the cabin survived, and yes that's great. but any animal/pet in the cargo holder under the plane didn't, because it would have been too late and they'd drown right away being under the belly of the plane. to me that's not a happy story all together. like yes, he landed it safely but for humans. not the animals and yes some survived but some other beings didn't. while i don't know if there were any pets on the plane i can't be sure there weren't. this is why water landings always sadden me still. the poor animals could have had the same chance of survival if they weren't in the fuking cargo area and in the cabin where they belong just like the other passengers flying. and honestly, they deserve that seat/spot more than some "people" on the plane in the cabin. i think every animal should be safe traveling and have the same chances we do and come and go comfortably and safely. especially with their families. i would want my dog/cat or bunny or whatever with me and make sure they're good, most animals are like babies forever and are precious and special. i think we've come a long way but still need to grow in a lot of other ways. how many souls on board should be a question of how many humans and non human souls are on board.. rescuers should also rescue animals in there and do equal search and rescues for both. plain and simple. so, this episode is still heartbreaking in some way. i hope there were no animals on the plane at all. i really, really do. and it'd be great and i'd appreciate it if someone knows that there weren't other souls besides people and confirms it to me. birds flying in that engine is sad too. both human beings and animals deserve to live.
Quick google search tells me there were no animals on board this flight.
edi. you could simple check it from wikipedia page on US Airways Flight 1549 - Aftermath
5:55
QRH = a pilots bible
I'm terribly sorry, but the geese were there before the planes!
Am I right in thinking that they're only there for a certain season?
U.S Airways joined the chat🗿
(Singing) Blame Canada, Blame Canada... Damn floppy headed Canadian Geese...
He he no more cats and dogs
Eat more Geese ❤
Gary from Winnipeg Canada
Anyone here who had been in this plane?
This was the Swiss cheese model in a positive way.
I sure hope Sully never had to pay for anything again in New York
Untitled Goose Flight Simulator
Crow's is a whole other taste
Be right back
I use pellets not a
Beebee gun
I'm not an animal
Oops missed
The planes should have a system to hit the birds like a anti missile system fitted on the engines or wings
@@desmondou thats totally impractical tho. Some flocks can be several hundrets of individuals strong. Sometimes thousands of individual birds. To carry enough bird repellants would add tons of weight to the plane, making it totally umsafe or flat out unable to fly
When you save a plane and become will ferrals step dad
That one atc💀