6 Responses to “Be my hero, Schettino!”

1. Dave Brough says:

   February 6, 2012 at 7:20 am

   “What’s the difference between the two captains? Character. Sullenberger didn’t abandon his crew and passengers; in the face of danger he rose to the occasion. Once he landed in the Hudson, he didn’t flee like Schettino because his duty was to his passengers and crew.”
   Think again. There’s no difference between Sullenberger and Schettino.
   Because Schettino wasn’t paying attention, he ran aground. Because Sullenberger wasn’t paying attention and ran into a river. Rather than help his passengers abandon ship Schettino took to the lifeboats; rather than help his passengers, Sullenberger was too chicken to even step outside the aircraft. The simple fact is, Sullenberger abandoned his highest duty, that of caring enough for his crew and passengers by looking where he was going. That’s why he ended up going where he was looking. Another thing. Schettino did the best thing possible after his ship was holed: head for land. Sullenberger coulda and shoulda done the same. His landing spot was the one he departed from: La Guardia.
   Find another hero. Sullenberger ain’t your boy.
2. gamblito says:

   February 6, 2012 at 7:45 am

   those italians think they can solve everything with lies.
3. Jeff Bowe says:

   February 7, 2012 at 7:12 am

   Dave Brough…are you kidding me? Do you know anything about physics? How about just gravity, a simpler topic? When a commercial airliner loses power, or any airplane not designed to be a glider, it cannot stay in the air. While an airplane’s wings do provide lift, lift is generated by the forced passing of air over and below the wings. Without the engines producing thrust to push the plane through the air at a speed (actually velocity) to produce adequate lift, that plane was at best in a controlled glide to the ground. Sullenberger could calculate that in his head, and could back it up with his instruments that his elevation to distance ratio was not impossible. Look up terms like glide rate and understand that Sullenberger’s plane could not make it back to LaGuardia. Ask any airline captain and they will tell you that what Sullenberger did was both incredibly complicated and took a level of composure way out on the continuum. Do some basic research before you take pot shots at someone with a much greater understanding of the physics of air flight.
4. Dave Brough says:

   February 8, 2012 at 1:07 pm

   Jeff Bowe…no, I’m not kidding you, and I do know a little about physics, and as a commercial pilot with several thousand hours logged over 3 decades, I also know a little about flyin’. I would also point out that I have also studied – with a passion — this incident – and how Sullenberger caused it and how he handled it.
   Let’s start with your lesson on glide ratios and how “not all aircraft are designed to be gliders” and how Sullenberger could not have returned to LGA. Contrary to your assertion, ALL aircraft are “designed to be gliders”. In fact, with glide ratios approaching 20:1, commercial airliners – like the A320 Sullenberger thoughtlessly destroyed – make for very efficient gliders. To put this in context, after the strike, momentum carried Sullenberger to 3,200 feet (it could have been higher, but after seizing control from First Officer, Jeff Skiles — who was actually doing the flying — Sully ignored that at that time and place, altitude was his best, in fact, only friend, and that he could translate positive airspeed into more altitude. Instead, he stupidly pushed the nose down in a vain attempt to attain the 300 knots required for a re-light). Converting glide ratio and altitude, Sully now had the capability of traveling something like 64,000 feet – about 12 miles. The strike occurred 4.5 miles from LGA and thereafter, the aircraft glided for another 12 miles before splashing. In other words, even adding a fudge factor, Sully had, stored safely away beneath him, twice the ‘fuel’ needed to make it back to LGA. The confirmation came when Airbus — the maker of that aircraft – sim’d the scenario and EVERY pilot within a 30-second window was able to return safely to LGA. So much for that.
   As for “any airline captain will tell (me) that what Sullenberger did was both incredibly complicated and took a level of composure way out of the continuum”, ANY airline captain will tell you that Rule # 1 of flying is “See and Avoid”. And it’s hardly incredibly complicated: just use your standard-issue MK-1 eyeballs and noodle! For thems not in the know, conditions at the time were CAVU (Ceiling And Visibility Unlimited), and because they were headed northwest, no excuse of “The sun was in my eyes”. Meaning this: had Dum and Dummer actually been looking, that flock of birds could have been seen several miles off. Let’s do the math. Their (then) 240 mph airspeed moved them a mile every 15 seconds. Multiplying that by the 3 miles one can (easily) spot a 100-yard wide target in a flapping V-formation, would have given them 45 seconds advance notice – a long time in aviation – and plenty of time to see and then make the slight – and to those in the cabin – unnoticeable nudge it would have taken to have avoided their fated feathered encounter. But the transcript shows that Sully only saw them 1 second before impact – about the length of a football field. How so? Because, the transcript also reveals that for a whole half minute prior to the strike, both pilots were gawking the “beautiful view of the river” (Sully). That led to a series of errors that the only descriptor I can conjure up is ‘comedy’. Except that for those aboard, it was anything-but.
   As for Sully being “composed”, you might want to rethink that one, too. Here’s a few reasons. After blastering through the birds, Sully wasted his first 10 seconds waking up and trying to decipher what had actually happened. His first effort? Starting the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) – except that in loss of power, the APU starts automatically. He then seized control of the aircraft, forgetting that because the flying is the easy part, in emergencies that was always left to the less experienced guy (in fact, that was Skiles first-ever day flying this type of aircraft). The trouble-shooting, the hard part, is left to the guy with the ‘experience’ (i.e. Sullenberger). Next, in a scenario that completely removed Skiles from doing anything useful, Sully ordered to him dig out the book-of-words and look up a procedure mandated to 30,000 feet and above.

   When it came time to talk, Sully forgot that in aviation, technology is still in the dark ages, meaning you can’t talk over someone else, hence him ‘stepping’ on the controller. He didn’t have the presence of mind to declare a “May day” or even use the emergency frequency. He used the wrong call sign (“Cactus 1439” – not 1549). He told ATC he was “heading back toward La Guardia”, but oops, kept going straight ahead. He forgot that when you land, you turn INTO the wind. He forgot to advise the cabin it was a ‘water’ landing (hence not one person exiting wearing a life vest). When Skiles asked he said he’d hit the ditch switch, but in fact, hadn’t. He forgot that when you land, you use flaps. Even when Skiles reminded him, he said ‘Naw’. Hence impacting the water at such force that the entire back end of the aircraft was ruptured – hence also, the immediate flooding. Once down, he didn’t even have the presence of mind to use his cell to call 911 and advise what the heck was going on. But he did call his wife.
   One last thing. Sully and I have something in common: we’ve both splashed in the Hudson. The difference was that I was smart enough to do it in an aircraft designed for more than one water landing.
5. Sara says:

   February 8, 2012 at 9:14 pm

   Dave Brough, I lost interest reading your retort. Stop being such a wang. It’s much easier for a flock of birds to make a sudden movement than a giant passenger airplane. Also, if Sully had taken the time to allow the other pilot to take the reigns as is “always left to the less experienced guy,” you would be complaining about how he didn’t use his leadership instincts to do the work himself instead of complaining that it took him a whole 10 seconds to react. P.S. Last I read, this was an OPINION PIECE.
6. Dave Brough says:

   February 10, 2012 at 10:16 am

   Sara…I’m sorry you “lost interest reading my retort”. You might have learned something new. Reminds me of “Don’t confuse me with facts: I’ve made up my mind”. You’ve got lots of company.
   As for it being “easier for a flocks of birds to make a sudden movement”, I’m still shaking my head. A flock of starlings, perhaps, but geese with 6′ wingspreads and lumbering along at 30 mph? Hardly. Especially when the other guy was moving along at a football-field-a -second.
   As for Sully’s ‘leadership instincts’, what leadership instincts…?!They were non-existent. A leader leads. This incident started because this ‘leader’ was not only gawking the river, he distracted his Junior – the one doing the flying – by mentioning it – hence neither watching; hence cooking their goose. A leader stays ahead of the curve. Sully was always two or three steps behind. This was a case of a man so consumed with pucker factor that he forgot everything he was supposed to know. Go back and read my ‘retort’ and you’ll agree. I hope.