Jim in Anchorage Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 As per other news accounts, water temperature is 40. It's been 20 degrees here for only a day. If this was in Alaska in February, then maybe water temps would approach 20. Otherwise, nowhere close. Then they would land on ice.
KD in CA Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 As per other news accounts, water temperature is 40. It's been 20 degrees here for only a day. If this was in Alaska in February, then maybe water temps would approach 20. Otherwise, nowhere close. Yeah, my thought was that whoever wrote the story probably got a D in high school physics.
GG Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 Then they would land on ice. Depends on the salt & muck content of the "water" but I'm not going to get into that discussion.
Wacka Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 Depends on the salt & muck content of the "water" but I'm not going to get into that discussion. Now that everyone is off the plane, someone on another site said if it would have been years ago when the Hudson was a lot more polluted, the plane could have made a wheels down landing and taxied to a dock.
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 Depends on the salt & muck content of the "water" but I'm not going to get into that discussion. 20 degrees? Come on. the river would have to be pure glycol. Is it that polluted? And from the looks of that current,that was no high tide
bills_fan Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 20 degrees? Come on. the river would have to be pure glycol. Is it that polluted? And from the looks of that current,that was no high tide Not high tide. That pilot deserves a ticker-tape parade. He takes off, loses power in both engines due to birds, gains control over this commercial jet with little or no power over the largest city in the country, then proceeds to make a water landing, bringing it in with no break-up and save everyone's life. WOW! We got ourselves a hero.
erynthered Posted January 15, 2009 Author Posted January 15, 2009 I heard reports on the radio that said because of the salt water, pollution and a light load of fuel probably helped in keeping the plane afloat. If true an amazing job by the pilot by saving all those people. Just. WOW!!
GG Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 20 degrees? Come on. the river would have to be pure glycol. Is it that polluted? And from the looks of that current,that was no high tide According to the Google, seawater can freeze at 28F, saline lakes freeze at -4F. Take your pick what lower Hudson is with all the shipping activity. AFAIK, NY Harbor has frozen only a few times in the last century.
stuckincincy Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 Not high tide. That pilot deserves a ticker-tape parade. He takes off, loses power in both engines due to birds, gains control over this commercial jet with little or no power over the largest city in the country, then proceeds to make a water landing, bringing it in with no break-up and save everyone's life. WOW! We got ourselves a hero. Are "birds" substantiated as the cause of engine power loss - or rumor? 2 motors...simultaneously...
bills_fan Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 Are "birds" substantiated as the cause of engine power loss - or rumor? 2 motors...simultaneously... I think rumor...right now the rumor is it was a flock of geese.
gmac17 Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 i watched the plane float by about 45 minutes ago right at the water. nothing different than what you saw on tv, but there were dozens of seat cushions floating by the piers in NY. I heard reports on the radio that said because of the salt water, pollution and a light load of fuel probably helped in keeping the plane afloat. If true an amazing job by the pilot by saving all those people. Just. WOW!! pollution?? It's not THAT polluted to change the buoyancy.
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 Reports now say maybe everyone got off. Musta been a helluva flight.
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 Not high tide. That pilot deserves a ticker-tape parade. He takes off, loses power in both engines due to birds, gains control over this commercial jet with little or no power over the largest city in the country, then proceeds to make a water landing, bringing it in with no break-up and save everyone's life. WOW! We got ourselves a hero. My remark had to do with water,salt or otherwise,being liquid at 20 degrees. Agree 100% about the pilot. Cant imagine a worse dead stick situation then over the concrete canyons with a 200,000 pound plane that quits flying at 120 MPH.
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 On a lighter note, I just saw Patterson praising the "NY fairy's" for the rescues. that must be some city.
bills_fan Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 It was a "double bird strike," per this report... The pilot reported a "double bird strike" less than a minute after taking off, said Doug Church, a spokesman for the National Air Traffic Controllers Union. The controller sent the aircraft back toward LaGuardia, but the pilot saw an airport below him and asked what it was, Church said. It was Teterboro Airport in New Jersey, and the pilot asked to land there, Church said. The instruction to land at Teterboro was the last communication with the plane before it went down in the river, Church said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/plane_in_river
kegtapr Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 On a lighter note, I just saw Patterson praising the "NY fairy's" for the rescues. that must be some city. Then he proposed a rescue tax.
KD in CA Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 Are "birds" substantiated as the cause of engine power loss - or rumor? 2 motors...simultaneously... Birds are a very real and frequent cause of engine damage/failure. It must have been a big flock to get sucked into both engines; that part is obviously very unusual.
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 Then he proposed a rescue tax. Retroactive,of course.
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 Birds are a very real and frequent cause of engine damage/failure. It must have been a big flock to get sucked into both engines; that part is obviously very unusual. I remember in 95 a AWACS plane here in Anchorage went down at take off and that was a confirmed bird strike. I think the AWACS is built on the 707. Not so good in that one I saw smoke all day.
WVUFootball29 Posted January 15, 2009 Posted January 15, 2009 I remember in 95 a AWACS plane here in Anchorage went down at take off and that was a confirmed bird strike. I think the AWACS is built on the 707. Not so good in that one I saw smoke all day. yeah awacs is a 707. Don't remember hearing about that crash I remember just after high school I worked for US Airways in Jamestown. We had 19 seater Beechcraft turboprops for our puddle jumpers, one night one hit a goose during a landing. Put a hole in the wing about the size of a football and took out an engine. Landed the plane with no incident, but I had to wait for the mechanics from DuBois PA to arrive before I could go home for the night...was a loooong night
Recommended Posts