11 ms·

Oh, FFS. Yeah, we know, you can fly and land with a single engine, that's what ETOPS is more or less, noone questioned that. And yes, a two engine turboprop mig

by chx 9y ago

Oh, FFS. Yeah, we know, you can fly and land with a single engine, that's what ETOPS is more or less, noone questioned that. And yes, a two engine turboprop might have more problems with a single engine, but no idea how relevant that is. But please. She had a situation at her hands where 140 people are injured, perhaps dying and she talks to the tower with a stony calm. Even the famous "Houston Center voice" of the Tower Controller was shaken a bit when he asked back. That's what made everyone astonished.

peterwwillis 9y ago
That's just embellishment. 140 people were not injured or dying, she was told what the situation was. A Navy fighter pilot with over two decades of commercial flying is not going to get rattled by one engine out on a jetliner. It's not like the landing gear was broken.
- PKop 9y ago
  > A Navy fighter pilot with over two decades of commercial flying is not going to get rattled by one engine out on a jetliner. Spot on. Some seem to be going out of their way to embellish the stakes as if it's necessary to credit the pilot with being highly skilled. She already is, no question! She doesn't need the exaggeration, it seems patronizing..the situation is what it is, no more no less.
- ynniv 9y ago
  This is horseshit. She had an engine explode and shrapnel ripped apart the fuselage, it’s not remotely a “one engine out simulation”. Was the wing damaged? How badly was the fuselage damaged? Was the plane actually on fire as the indicators showed? She was accounting for a large number of unknowns that the armchair crowd here is not even considering. She was also told that someone was ejected from the plane. Do these not have an impact on the pilot’s mental state? She retired from flying fighter jets only to be shot down by her own poorly maintained engine while carrying 150 other people? This is looking at a good outcome and deciding that it looked easy. Yeah, the pilot matters.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - Brockenstein 9y ago
    Aye. I'm not going to say she did the impossible, threaded the eye of the needle or anything like that. But there was plenty of opportunity or circumstance for things to horribly wrong. But she's got a ton of experience and in the moment of truth she didn't choke and everyone who could be saved was saved. That ought to be enough for anyone.
maxerickson 9y ago
In the recording of the tower communications, she specifically mentions the person that was sitting next to the broken window, it doesn't sound at all like she believes that most of the passengers are (seriously) injured.
- coatmatter 9y ago
  I think she might have also never entered the cabin, so therefore got the information secondhand. This probably helps with calmness and focus. "Crew Resource Management"?
huffmsa 9y ago
The status of 140 people in the back has zero bearing on the situation in the cockpit. The situation is that one engine has gone offline and there has been a sudden depressurization event. The airline industry realized long ago that people suck under pressure so they write checklists and explicit sets of procedures for dealing with basically everything. Your job as the pilot is to execute that checklist, as best you can and not be a cowboy. Even getting the plane ready for takeoff is a checklist you must complete and file before every takeoff.
- coldcode 9y ago
  Even the Miracle on the Hudson was a pilot completely aware of what could and should be done even though the exact scenario had never been practiced. Experienced pilots have been through enormous training sessions these days and even tossing them something no one has ever faced is still based on them understanding the limitations and potentials of a plane in distress. It doesn't always come out perfectly (planes do still crash based on pilot error) but I'd trust a well trained experience airline pilot without question in life or death in an airplane.
  - huffmsa 9y ago
    Yeah that definitely wasn't the first time Capt Sullenberg had experienced a double engine failure on takeoff. First time in the middle of Manhattan, sure, but that doesn't change much, just means there's no big cornfield to set the plane down in.
    - twtw 9y ago
      Source? Double engine failures are incredibly rare, and I've not been able to find anything that indicates Sullenberberger was involved in any prior to 1549. In simulation, probably.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
  - 9y ago

by chx 9y ago

peterwwillis 9y ago

That's just embellishment. 140 people were not injured or dying, she was told what the situation was. A Navy fighter pilot with over two decades of commercial flying is not going to get rattled by one engine out on a jetliner. It's not like the landing gear was broken.

PKop 9y ago
> A Navy fighter pilot with over two decades of commercial flying is not going to get rattled by one engine out on a jetliner. Spot on. Some seem to be going out of their way to embellish the stakes as if it's necessary to credit the pilot with being highly skilled. She already is, no question! She doesn't need the exaggeration, it seems patronizing..the situation is what it is, no more no less.
ynniv 9y ago
This is horseshit. She had an engine explode and shrapnel ripped apart the fuselage, it’s not remotely a “one engine out simulation”. Was the wing damaged? How badly was the fuselage damaged? Was the plane actually on fire as the indicators showed? She was accounting for a large number of unknowns that the armchair crowd here is not even considering. She was also told that someone was ejected from the plane. Do these not have an impact on the pilot’s mental state? She retired from flying fighter jets only to be shot down by her own poorly maintained engine while carrying 150 other people? This is looking at a good outcome and deciding that it looked easy. Yeah, the pilot matters.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- Brockenstein 9y ago
  Aye. I'm not going to say she did the impossible, threaded the eye of the needle or anything like that. But there was plenty of opportunity or circumstance for things to horribly wrong. But she's got a ton of experience and in the moment of truth she didn't choke and everyone who could be saved was saved. That ought to be enough for anyone.

maxerickson 9y ago

In the recording of the tower communications, she specifically mentions the person that was sitting next to the broken window, it doesn't sound at all like she believes that most of the passengers are (seriously) injured.

coatmatter 9y ago
I think she might have also never entered the cabin, so therefore got the information secondhand. This probably helps with calmness and focus. "Crew Resource Management"?

huffmsa 9y ago

The status of 140 people in the back has zero bearing on the situation in the cockpit. The situation is that one engine has gone offline and there has been a sudden depressurization event. The airline industry realized long ago that people suck under pressure so they write checklists and explicit sets of procedures for dealing with basically everything. Your job as the pilot is to execute that checklist, as best you can and not be a cowboy. Even getting the plane ready for takeoff is a checklist you must complete and file before every takeoff.

coldcode 9y ago
Even the Miracle on the Hudson was a pilot completely aware of what could and should be done even though the exact scenario had never been practiced. Experienced pilots have been through enormous training sessions these days and even tossing them something no one has ever faced is still based on them understanding the limitations and potentials of a plane in distress. It doesn't always come out perfectly (planes do still crash based on pilot error) but I'd trust a well trained experience airline pilot without question in life or death in an airplane.
- huffmsa 9y ago
  Yeah that definitely wasn't the first time Capt Sullenberg had experienced a double engine failure on takeoff. First time in the middle of Manhattan, sure, but that doesn't change much, just means there's no big cornfield to set the plane down in.
  - twtw 9y ago
    Source? Double engine failures are incredibly rare, and I've not been able to find anything that indicates Sullenberberger was involved in any prior to 1549. In simulation, probably.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
- 9y ago