USAirways flight goes down in the hudson river

[RedGT3]

Originally Posted by e46e92love

Its why you need to stick to the 777, something the airbuses, not even the 340 can compete with: engines that can shred through more than 100lbs of bird meat with no worries mates

If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going

Cheers,
e46e92

Here's your Boeing. No thanks, I will stick with my Airbus
What airplane you fly? and please don't say 737

[e46e92love]

Originally Posted by fll335

Here's your Boeing. No thanks, I will stick with my Airbus
What airplane you fly? and please don't say 737

Great another Airbus lover........its kinda of like a Mustang lover telling me how Ford is the bomb and BMW sucks

BTW, if you are going to counter argue, something I welcome, you might want to bring some facts with it, don't just post a video, thats too easy

Cheers,
e46e92

[RedGT3]

Originally Posted by e46e92love

Great another Airbus lover........its kinda of like a Mustang lover telling me how Ford is the bomb and BMW sucks

BTW, if you are going to counter argue, something I welcome, you might want to bring some facts with it, don't just post a video, thats too easy

Cheers,
e46e92

I'm not another Airbus lover I fly the dam thing . Also flew the 737 and in terms of systems and pax comfort the bus is light years ahead of the Boeings.
BTW. BMW do suck can't wait to trade my POS 335 for a Z06.

[bmstyle71]

airbus > boeing. Saying the a320 was better as a tree trimmer? Umm that's why it's called a TEST flight. Can you say fly-by wire? Was it frontier that was going to get 737's but Boeing didn't agree on the price so airbus invited them over to Europe and put them up in sick hotels and all this stuff and gave them a better deal and they ended up going the bus way. So instead of Boeing making a couple of hundred million dollars (at least) they came out with nothing. Yeah that's smart.

[Greeney]

Anyone want to split time / get me sim time in the B6 A320/E190 sims? LMAO.

[RedGT3]

Originally Posted by Greeney

Anyone want to split time / get me sim time in the B6 A320/E190 sims? LMAO.

Before 911 no problem, now is going to be really hard unless you're a girl and really hot

[bmstyle71]

And let's not forget which passenger jet set the record for the longest and farthest glide after a dual engine flame out. Wasn't airbus' fault, RR didn't send the mechanics the required parts for the new engine and they ended up using a separator bar for the older engine that rubbed the fuel line till it burst.

[777ER]

I was working at LGA and about 10 mins before the end of my shift, I got word that one of the A320 crashed into the hudson river, all of us went from the hangar to the bar in the terminal to watch the news...thought it was one of our planes but got lucky.

Plane crash landed into the water after hitting a flock of geese, disabled both engines and they requested to return to LGA but ATC told them to go to TEB...they rejected that and told them they can't make it and had to land on the water and ditch. Amazing the pilot set it down easy on the water and didn't spin out the plane or let the nose go underwater during water landing.

Captain has 29 years of flying experience, aircraft was built in 1999.

To see what the aircraft did after takeoff, go to:
http://www4.passur.com/lga.html
and enter 15:26 and press play, you will see a plane depart to the north from LGA and make a turn to the left over to the hudson river...note the altitude as it turns and descends.

Kudos to the crew for getting it down safetly.

[Greeney]

Originally Posted by fll335

Before 911 no problem, now is going to be really hard unless you're a girl and really hot

Damn . I should be working for B6 this summer though, im attempting to get an internship in the flight department.

[RedGT3]

Originally Posted by 777ER

I was working at LGA and about 10 mins before the end of my shift, I got word that one of the A320 crashed into the hudson river, all of us went from the hangar to the bar in the terminal to watch the news...thought it was one of our planes but got lucky.

Plane crash landed into the water after hitting a flock of geese, disabled both engines and they requested to return to LGA but ATC told them to go to TEB...they rejected that and told them they can't make it and had to land on the water and ditch. Amazing the pilot set it down easy on the water and didn't spin out the plane or let the nose go underwater during water landing.

Captain has 29 years of flying experience, aircraft was built in 1999.

To see what the aircraft did after takeoff, go to:
http://www4.passur.com/lga.html
and enter 15:26 and press play, you will see a plane depart to the north from LGA and make a turn to the left over to the hudson river...note the altitude as it turns and descends.

Kudos to the crew for getting it down safetly.

No argument the crew did an excellent job. I still don’t know why they were thinking about going back to LGA when EWR is only a few miles from TEB

[bmstyle71]

Originally Posted by fll335

No argument the crew did an excellent job. I still don’t know why they were thinking about going back to LGA when EWR is only a few miles from TEB

Maybe they're unfamiliar and in the heat of the moment first thing that pops into your head is where you took of from. So natural reaction is shit lets go back. Or they had they're navs and comms set to LGA and given their low altitude they didn't have time to figure out the rwys at EWR and change freq and yada yada.

[Blake]

Originally Posted by bmstyle71

Maybe they're unfamiliar and in the heat of the moment first thing that pops into your head is where you took of from. So natural reaction is shit lets go back. Or they had they're navs and comms set to LGA and given their low altitude they didn't have time to figure out the rwys at EWR and change freq and yada yada.

i don't think unfamiliarity has anything to do with it. the captain is an accomplished pilot. i just think that with all the quick decision making that occurs in an emergency, he deemed a water landing was the safest idea for not only those on the aircraft, but those on the ground.

[Blake]

oh and all this boeing vs. airbus BS, stfu. both companies make quality products that rarely malfunction or they wouldn't be airworthy. to me, it's comparing apples to apples. for me, i prefer boeing because it's american-made and i'm more familiar with the planes. outside of that, whatever.

[bmstyle71]

Originally Posted by Blake

i don't think unfamiliarity has anything to do with it. the captain is an accomplished pilot. i just think that with all the quick decision making that occurs in an emergency, he deemed a water landing was the safest idea for not only those on the aircraft, but those on the ground.

Well yeah but his decision was based on the aircraft's altitude (time). That's what I'm saying, In that much little time, he's thinking about checklist this and all the things running through his mind until he said you know what, fuck it, we don't have time or room for any of this shit....river it is.

[bmstyle71]

Originally Posted by Blake

oh and all this boeing vs. airbus BS, stfu. both companies make quality products that rarely malfunction or they wouldn't be airworthy. to me, it's comparing apples to apples. for me, i prefer boeing because it's american-made and i'm more familiar with the planes. outside of that, whatever.

True....airbus>boeing...hahaha lol

[777ER]

Originally Posted by e46e92love

I am fully aware of the the fact that airplane manufacturers don't make their own engines, but its the specs that they ask the manufacturer to achieve is where the importance lies. Remember, Airbus are the idiots whose software logic has led to two crashes of their test aircraft. Remember when Airbus found out that their A320 was better at trimming trees then flying?

Boeing's logic never, ever, ever had the ability over rule the pilot. Airbus decided that a computer knows best; only took Airbus one airplane and two dead test pilots to release they screwed the pooch on that one

Yes they were trying to do a test where the FBW systems won't let the aircraft stall even with the sidestick pulled full up. 2 or 3 of the crew test flying that aircraft was killed.
From what I gathered, they were like 'locked' into that mode and was unable to recover.

The only manufacturer as dumb as Airbus is the old McDonald Douglas. First, they lose a DC-10 because they thought it was wise to have all hydraulic lines converge through the top of the fuselage running right under engine number 2, thus when engine number 2 had a catastrophic fan blade failure that ripped through the skin of the engine and into the fuselage on United Flight 232 all of her hydraulic power went dead, forcing the crew to do something that has never been duplicated: use differential power on engines 1 & 3 to steer the plan, only crashing at the very end but saving most on board. Brilliant idea: lets converge ALL HYDRAULIC lines under engine #2. Morons.

while I agree with you, what happened to the fan containment ring? it was supposed to contain the fan blades should it seperate from the hub.

Of course, McDonald Douglas wasn't done there. No, as we found out on AA Flight 191, when she lost engine #1 and it fell the f*ck off (that in itself is retarded), it tore out part of the wing, rather than have a slot locking mechanism (as boeing has) to lock the flaps in place, MD in their infinite wisdom didn't, so the engine fell, hydraulic pressure plumeted and the flaps went to a full 30 degree extension, causing the left wing to stall, thus leading to one of America's worst airplane crashes/disasters.

So, like i said, if it ain't boeing, I ain't going.....

Cheers,
e46e92

the problem was when the engine/plyon tore off that wing, it leaked out hyd fluid and that allowed the slats to retract. When the slats retracted, the stall speed became higher on that wing and loss of lift occured as a result.
The fix was to stop using forklifts to install the whole engine/plyon assembly to save time. The acutal problem happened about 10 flights ago when AA mechanics removed the engine (it was approved by the FAA for this prodecure but McD told AA it's not recommended and you're on your own with that one) they installed the new engine/plyon and installed the front mounting bolt and left to lunch.
During lunch time, the seals in the forklift actuator leaked very slowly and the engine with only the front bolt installed, pulled on the wing (weight) and pushed up the aft mount into the area where the mount on the wing (for the engine) buckled.
Mechanics came back to work and did not notice the problem, they just readjusted the forklift to make the aft mount bolt holes line up and installed the bolt where the damage has been done already and gone unnoticed.

AA had to go to criminal court over their maintenance pratices on DC-10's and the chief mechanic who leaded the engine change operation on that DC-10 was due to show up to court (between AA and McD) to testify the prodecure that was used to install the engine. Just days before, he killed himself by closing the garage door and run his car and passed out due to carbon monoxide poisoning.

A internal report was made by AA (forgot the name) and that was put on desk of the CEO of AA at that time and it had shocking answers and results in it. He ordered it destoryed.
Some time later a copy of the report appeared and he was blackmailed.

Shortly after, AA settled without question.

The sad fact is that AA had the DC-10 fully insured and they made a profit off this crash...
AA got a check for full replacement of the DC-10.

Investigators ran the #'s countless times in a queens warehouse where the files of that DC-10 was stored (insurance papers, maintenance records, etc) and could not believe it.

[777ER]

Originally Posted by fll335

No argument the crew did an excellent job. I still don’t know why they were thinking about going back to LGA when EWR is only a few miles from TEB

It depends the situation you have at hand at that time. The most important part was the atlitude they had to work down from.

It's either risk casuilites on the ground and the aircraft or settle for the river which was the best choice at that time considering the size of the aircraft and the location they're aiming to ditch at. It did a long glide down to over the hudson and settled down softly tail first to drag the plane down and not cartwheel over the water.

[777ER]

Originally Posted by Blake

the engines aren't made by airbus. they're actually made by a company called international aero engines. international aero engines are actually a joint venture of a few major engine manufacturers including pratt & whitney and rolls-royce, who both make engines for the 777. this isn't a blemish to anyone's record really, it's something that, in reality, is prone to happen. almost 100% of the time, a bird in a jet engine is going to result in engine failure. this USAir flight just happened to be that even rarer statistic of getting a bird in both engines resulting in failure. shit happens, it's good that everyone is remarkably unscathed. all that said, boeing FTW!

IAE never made engines for the 777. They are found on 717's, MD-90's, A320's (jetblue ordered the A320's with IAE V2500)

IAE is a joint project which RR and P&W both work together. Basically the fan and compressor section is provided by RR and the turbine section is provided by P&W.

Same goes for CFM which is a joint project between GE and Snecma.

As for the 777 engines:

You have 2 options, GE or RR.

P&W failed on the 777 engine which ended up Boeing to pick GE and RR for the powerplant options.

As the reason P&W failed, the PW4000 had the worst fuel burn and the least thrust output.
Only one or two airlines ordered the 777 with P&W's

As for GE, they're the most efficient and least fuel burn, least robust.

RR is between GE and P&W but is more robust.

That is to say if you get a compressor stall in a GE, you may break a few compressor blades.

As for RR, maybe or maybe not...depends on your luck.

As for P&W, they're built like tanks, compressor stall the blades will take the abuse with no problems.


When the 777-300ER (longer verison of the 777-200) was in the stages of being built, due to the power requirements (almost 100,000 lbs of thrust per engine needed to substain a failed engine at takeoff), it was very costly and RR wouldn't take the risk (they did build one close to 100k thrust but couldn't achieve it with reliability), as for GE, they can afford to but want exclusive rights to that type of the aircraft before they would even build one.

The GE90-115B was born.
and it could do 115k thrust unrated on the test stand...more than enough for the power requirements for the 777 with room to spare/improve over the future.

After meetings, reviews, etc, at the board meeting, GE won the exclusive rights to the 777-300ER and in part, they funded the R&D of the 777-300ER.

P&W was locked out due to the history of the PW4000 and they had no chance in hell.

[777ER]

Originally Posted by fll335

Here's your Boeing. No thanks, I will stick with my Airbus
What airplane you fly? and please don't say 737

That's a 767

It was EgyptAir and it was hijacked.

[777ER]

Originally Posted by bmstyle71

airbus > boeing. Saying the a320 was better as a tree trimmer? Umm that's why it's called a TEST flight. Can you say fly-by wire? Was it frontier that was going to get 737's but Boeing didn't agree on the price so airbus invited them over to Europe and put them up in sick hotels and all this stuff and gave them a better deal and they ended up going the bus way. So instead of Boeing making a couple of hundred million dollars (at least) they came out with nothing. Yeah that's smart.

Either that did indeed happen with Frontier, jetblue was in the same boat.

Boeing didn't believe jetblue would mature and become a airline like they are today.
Since then, they now deal with upstart airlines.

[Blake]

Originally Posted by 777ER

IAE never made engines for the 777. They are found on 717's, MD-90's, A320's (jetblue ordered the A320's with IAE V2500)

i never said they did. i know what planes use IAE engines, i was saying P&W and RR both made engines for the 777, but you are much more knowledgeable than me about engines. you are a A&P mech for 777, right?

[777ER]

Originally Posted by bmstyle71

And let's not forget which passenger jet set the record for the longest and farthest glide after a dual engine flame out. Wasn't airbus' fault, RR didn't send the mechanics the required parts for the new engine and they ended up using a separator bar for the older engine that rubbed the fuel line till it burst.

Air Transat A330.

It wasn't RR's fault. They had a SB out for updating the fuel line to clear the hyd lines.

It was Air Transat maintenance supervisor's fault. He wanted the aircraft done and back in service after a scheduled engine change and the company was short on planes and needed it bad.

The mechanic refused to sign it off and backed out after the engine change was complete. The supervisor signed if off.

RR and Airbus provided assistance with the investigation and they had the paperwork stating it's a know problem and there's a SB to fix it.

During the investigation, the supervisor was suspended without pay.
A while later, he was fired. Not sure if they yanked his "Transport de Canada-o" license to work on aircrafts.