A320, AKA Canadair [modified]

Lost User

An A380 A320 made a sucessfull landing on the Hudson River yesterday after a bird strike. In fact so sucessfull was the landing that all the passengers and crew were able to stand on the wings of the still floating plane waiting to be picked up. Aparently the captain walked up and down the plane twice checking everyone was out before making himself a coffee and his way out on to the wings. http://www.newser.com/story/48052/plane-down-in-hudson-river-all-are-safe.html[^] The interesting thing is how it landed, OK, as the French would say, watered, intact. I dont think there has ever been a case of such a large plane doing this before. Perhaps the A380A320 is built like a Canadair!

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

modified on Friday, January 16, 2009 2:17 AM

blackjack2150 · modified on Friday, January 16, 2009 2:17 AM

The plane in question is an Airbus A320. The A380 is the biggest commercial in the world, recently launched, which AFAIK is only operated by a few Asian companies.

Lost User

OK, I will modify it. Thanks. Anyway, arent you surprised the plane survived intact?

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

blackjack2150

That too, but I'm actually more surprised that the thing floats. I wonder if they're designed to do that...

Sahir Shah · modified on Friday, January 16, 2009 2:17 AM

Awesome pilot. That's what I call balls of steel[^]

modified on Friday, January 16, 2009 3:13 AM

Lost User

It is extraordinary. Water, as anyone will know who has water skiied, is damn hard above 30 mph. At 100 knots its like concrete. I guess he had his wheels down, and that got rid of some of the speed. Ground efect would then take over reducing his stall speed by some, and with a real slow final touch down on a smooth river its just enough. Remarkable stuff though, and I would like to see what the underside of the plane looks like.

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

John Carson

fat_boy wrote:

It is extraordinary. Water, as anyone will know who has water skiied, is damn hard above 30 mph. At 100 knots its like concrete. I guess he had his wheels down, and that got rid of some of the speed.

You guess wrong. http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newjersey/ny-bc-nj--planeinriver-nj0115jan15,0,4278371.story[^] http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090115.wcrash_landing16/BNStory/International[^]

John Carson

Dalek Dave · modified on Friday, January 16, 2009 2:17 AM

What is amazing is that most aircraft when landing on water,(except those designed for it of course), tend to crash and burn because the engine nacelles catch the surface and rip through everything. The level of skill shown by the piolts is superb, and must be applauded. There was an Ethiopian Crash at sea (see here[^]) that failed to make it. (btw, if you are a smoker, Ethiopian Airways are the only carrier that allow you to smoke on board!)

------------------------------------ "The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion" Arthur C Clarke

Lost User

Are you stalking me now picking up on any error I make? What are you, some kind of anal sad internet creep?

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

Lost User

Dalek Dave wrote:

engine nacelles

Quite. They are below the wings, so you would expect them to catch and drag aggressively causing such a deceleration the nose of the plane would be slammed into the water. I would love to see some tape of this plane actually 'landing'(watering).

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

John Carson

fat_boy wrote:

Are you stalking me now picking up on any error I make?

That would be a fulltime job and very unrewarding. Your posts are full of errors and you do not appear to be very teachable. That is why I generally avoid any serious effort to engage with you.

fat_boy wrote:

What are you, some kind of anal sad internet creep?

It is ironic but not surprising that you continually whine about my refusal to debate your claims and then you whine when I do. Also ironic is the fact that you regularly complain that I insult you. I guess that a troll is a troll is a troll.

John Carson

Lost User

John Carson wrote:

That would be a fulltime job and very unrewarding.

And yet here you are doing it.

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

Maximilien

The flight was originally a short one, the fuel reservoirs were not completly full, and air is pumped in to "fill the gap". I think planes are designed to be able to float for some time but in PERFECT conditions, and the conditions were perfect yesterday, no wind, no waves, plane "landed" at low speed and in total control.

This signature was proudly tested on animals.

Oakman

blackjack2150 wrote:

I wonder if they're designed to do that

Yes. The A320 has something called a ditch-switch. When thrown, all of the intakes on the plane are closed tightly. As long as no-one opens the back door of the plane, which is tail-heavy like many planes, it floats higher and longer than ones without the switch.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

Oakman

Dalek Dave wrote:

tend to crash and burn because the engine nacelles catch the surface and rip through everything.

If the landing gear are down, they'll catch the surface and be ripped away, along with a goodly portion of the undercarriage. Luckily this pilot is A.) A safety inspector who often works with the NTSB investigating crashes, and B.) a certified glider pilot. Now he can claim, along with shuttle pilots, to be a certified b.f. glider pilot.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

Zhat

Having done a bit of waterskiing, and barefoot skiing as well, yes water is hard, but even a 'faceplant' at 40+mph just stings mostly. And, having worked in Aviation, on a number of different aircraft, for over 22 years, it's not THAT extraordinary. The pilot is not only very experienced, he's an experienced aviation safety officer as well as a licensed glider pilot. And though the Airbus wasn't designed to "glide" he knew enough to keep his speed, bring the plane in at a very shallow angle and let it skip on the water surface until it stopped. He had a bit of luck, yes, and I doubt it's something anyone could repeat over and over, but he knew enough to get everyone back home to thier families. That is remarkable. Had he got up to a higher altitude, and then lost his engines...well, that's not a pretty thought.

Tim Craig

Zhat wrote:

Had he got up to a higher altitude, and then lost his engines...well, that's not a pretty thought.

Actually, he would probably have had more options. Higher altitude plus higher air speed would give him a much extended glide range and he could have made a much more planned descent. Possibly even made an airport and landed with the wheels on a real runway.

"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke