Comments:US Airways jet makes emergency landing in river by New York City

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

  • Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
  • Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
  • You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

First successful ditching?Edit

Is this the first ever non-fatal ditching of a civil aircraft?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Morrid1 (talkcontribs)

No but it is rare see: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123205611103787217.html?mod=googlenews_wsj --SVTCobra 22:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
It says "There have been few, *if any*, successful attempts during the jet age"....so doesn't really answer the question! Morrid1 (talk) 22:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
There has only been one other - the Tupolev 124 ditching in Neva River. There was also a small turboprop airliner in waaaay back in 1956; Pan Am Flight 943. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 18:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Cheers to the pilot and crew. well done, guys. - Imind (talk) 03:11, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

A DC3 ditched in Botany Bay, just after takeoff from Sydney Airport on 24 April 1994. Aircraft was above MTOW and suffered engine failure after takeoff. All 25 on board evacuated. 3 injuries related to incomplete use of crew seatbelts. Investigation report online here [1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.237.6.188 (talkcontribs)

Another interesting example I came accross was Japan Airlines Flight 2. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 10:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Did the plane eventually sink?Edit

Just curious...—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.245.9.90 (talkcontribs)

I saw (on the TV news) that it was gradually getting deeper in the water - it seemed almost sunk about 2 hours after the landing. --InfantGorilla (talk)
They dragged it to the shore. It is still floating. --Ysangkok (talk) 23:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
There is a great image that shows people standing on the edge of the wing, about six inches under the water. They are trying to retrieve the plane. However, the engines are now buried in silt which obscures them; USCG is using sonar to locate them and the shredded-up geese. Deathgleaner (talk) 23:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Birds had been knocked out bullshit giant steel bird.Edit

That's a "suicide bombing". Now all American that be a victim of that "jihad" know the effect to be a soldier of George H. "Bullshit" country.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kazmierczak (talkcontribs)

Didn't take your meds today? --99.247.16.231 03:56, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

"All aboard survived the landing."Edit

Nice to know that can happen. Evidently the pilot(s)/crew were WELL qualified at their profession. 76.117.247.55 11:32, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Such amazing job from the pilot, some good news in what is a dark and dismal year with the credit crunch and high street shops closing down. A sense of hope.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 94.168.209.226 (talkcontribs)

We cannot say "the pilot was well qualified" without first knowing what procedure he was going to perform AND the air traffic contol records of N90. AND we need to know if something was wrong with the aircraft or not.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.96.254.192 (talkcontribs)

True, but it's still an impressive feat. Fephisto (talk) 18:18, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
we need to know if something was wrong with the aircraft or not
A passenger told the press that an engine was on fire. Details should come out in the NTSB investigation. --InfantGorilla (talk) 09:41, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Whilst it may have been spewing flame - damaged jet engines often do - I would be surprised if the engine itself was actually on fire. It is possible though if, say, a fuel line had ruptured. We will indeed have to wait for the NTSB to piece it all together (in fact, pulling the engines - which seperated from the airframe - out the Hudson would be a good start). Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 10:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I didn't know that. Thanks. --InfantGorilla (talk) 10:56, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, Canadian goose char-grilled with jet fuel then soaked in water for several days is not tasty. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

As far as I knowEdit

This version of the story came from someone I know, who got it from CNN:

A plane takes off from an airport in New York. Three minutes later it encounters a flock of geese. Several geese get shredded up in the engines. First, one engine stalls and then the other. The pilot had lots of experience. He was able to maneuver the plane to safety by pulling the plane up as it went down, which resulted in the plane going up and down in this continuous cycle. Eventually, the plane and all 155 passengers, including 150 passengers, 3 flight attendants, and the pilot & copilot splash down near the edge of the Hudson river next to many boats. They all survived, aside from a few broken bones and other injuries. The boats that can do it raced to the help.

Deathgleaner (talk) 23:11, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

good infoEdit

This a great news with lots of details—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.68.18.221 (talkcontribs)