Yes, "Power of Myth" is cool. I was flabbergasted that public tv put that on years ago. And then it really caught on, which also surprised me. I guess people were ready to understand that "myth" is just what you call someone's religion you don't believe in, and "religion" is what you call the myth you believe in. Of course got the book, and then all of the other Campbell books. Mircea Eliade and Jung are also cool.
Airplane Lands Safely In Hudson River
- Thread starter homeless mind
- Start date
yes, the pilot was only doing his job, but it was something he had only ever done in theory.
surgeons get to practice on corpses, but pilots don't get a practical exam where they can crash land on water.
that being said, if this water landing had happened on the Atlantic or Pacific ocean, people would've died. the plane would've probably sunk before everyone got out. it was lucky to land on the Hudson, where New Yorkers were willing to make rafts, find rafts and boats to get people out of that plane.
good job all around.
surgeons get to practice on corpses, but pilots don't get a practical exam where they can crash land on water.
that being said, if this water landing had happened on the Atlantic or Pacific ocean, people would've died. the plane would've probably sunk before everyone got out. it was lucky to land on the Hudson, where New Yorkers were willing to make rafts, find rafts and boats to get people out of that plane.
good job all around.
Black Swan
Abord the Yorikke!
so, brass balls and
serendipity
serendipity
if ever there was a fortuitous accident, this is it.
cirerita
Founding member
Believe it or not, I agree with the boss on this one. There's nothing heroic about what the pilot did. He just did his job and was lucky/skilled enough to save 150 people. But as Digney said, he probably was trying to save his own ass.
You know, he had to try to safely land on water. He couldn't count on God, could he? So he had to do it, and he did it. What's heroic about that? He performed extremely well, but was that heroic?
Now, just for the sake of argument, let's say that commercial airliner was equipped with that cool thing you see pilots use in fighter planes (in a movie, I mean). When the fighter is about to crash, they push a button and off they go with the parachute. I wonder if this hero we're talking about would have pushed the "magical" button if he had had the chance to do so. You know: "Sorry, mothers, but there's nothing I can do anyway. Goodbye and good luck. I'm off to the skies." Or would he have tried to land on water despite everything, knowing he could save his ass by pushing that button? Yeah, nobody knows the answer to that, but that would have been heroic to me.
You know, he had to try to safely land on water. He couldn't count on God, could he? So he had to do it, and he did it. What's heroic about that? He performed extremely well, but was that heroic?
Now, just for the sake of argument, let's say that commercial airliner was equipped with that cool thing you see pilots use in fighter planes (in a movie, I mean). When the fighter is about to crash, they push a button and off they go with the parachute. I wonder if this hero we're talking about would have pushed the "magical" button if he had had the chance to do so. You know: "Sorry, mothers, but there's nothing I can do anyway. Goodbye and good luck. I'm off to the skies." Or would he have tried to land on water despite everything, knowing he could save his ass by pushing that button? Yeah, nobody knows the answer to that, but that would have been heroic to me.
bospress.net
www.bospress.net
Yeah, we have as a people have a bad habit of calling people heroes a lot more than was warranted. A hero is someone who puts himself in harms way, knowing that it may kill him (or her), but does it anyway to save someone else. Getting killed by accident does not make you a hero. This can be taken to the absurd: A few years ago, two Capital police were killed by a gunman in the US Capitol. They were both surprised and one was giving a tourist info when he was shot, point blank, in the back of the head. People called him a hero. What? He had one of the safest police jobs out there. He never saw it coming and did nothing heroic. Is giving directions heroic? If he died of a massive aneurysm while giving directions would that have been "heroic"?
Dying is not heroic. Dying while trying to save someone else is not heroic, unless the hero knows that they are in real danger.
mjp mentioned the people on the flight that crashed in PA on 9/11. I can appreciate what they did, but I do not know if I would call that heroic. Maybe I'm an ass for saying it, but they tried to take control of the plane from the terrorists because they knew that they would surely die if they did not. They were trying to save themselves. In the struggle, the terrorist pilot crashed the plane into the ground. It is borderline, but in the end they knew that it was the only chance for them to live and they took a chance. Now, if the terrorists said that they could all parachute out and that they were then going to fly the plane into the White House and they still resisted, then that would have been heroic.
The pilot is a good pilot, not a hero. Cirerita is right. Is he had an eject button and he really thought that they were all gonna die, the Hudson pilot probably would have pushed the button.
Bill
p.s. mjp mentioned the
Dying is not heroic. Dying while trying to save someone else is not heroic, unless the hero knows that they are in real danger.
mjp mentioned the people on the flight that crashed in PA on 9/11. I can appreciate what they did, but I do not know if I would call that heroic. Maybe I'm an ass for saying it, but they tried to take control of the plane from the terrorists because they knew that they would surely die if they did not. They were trying to save themselves. In the struggle, the terrorist pilot crashed the plane into the ground. It is borderline, but in the end they knew that it was the only chance for them to live and they took a chance. Now, if the terrorists said that they could all parachute out and that they were then going to fly the plane into the White House and they still resisted, then that would have been heroic.
The pilot is a good pilot, not a hero. Cirerita is right. Is he had an eject button and he really thought that they were all gonna die, the Hudson pilot probably would have pushed the button.
Bill
p.s. mjp mentioned the
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
The pilot kept his cool in a very dangerous situation. Most people choke under pressure, he did not. So he is above average.
The ejection seat I sat in on a B-52 would not operate properly at speeds under 220 knots. In training it was pretty much a fact of life that a B-52 and most jets cannot be ditched with any success. Is that where the saying Last Ditch Effort comes from?
He could have been lucky but he was certainly cool under fire.
The ejection seat I sat in on a B-52 would not operate properly at speeds under 220 knots. In training it was pretty much a fact of life that a B-52 and most jets cannot be ditched with any success. Is that where the saying Last Ditch Effort comes from?
He could have been lucky but he was certainly cool under fire.
cirerita
Founding member
Sure, and as I said before, he performed extremely well. Is that heroic?
The ejection seat comparison was completely fictional, of course, but I think it brings up an interesting related topic: how do we react when there's a choice? The pilot had no choice but trying to land on water as safely as possible, and that he did. If that airliner had functional ejection seats, would he have reacted the way he did?
The ejection seat comparison was completely fictional, of course, but I think it brings up an interesting related topic: how do we react when there's a choice? The pilot had no choice but trying to land on water as safely as possible, and that he did. If that airliner had functional ejection seats, would he have reacted the way he did?
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
I think you have pointed out exactly why there are no ejection seats for a select few on airplanes. Human nature is to safe your ass.
After he ejected safely from the burning 747 the pilot was quoted, "It's a shame so many had to die. I did all I could to try and extinguish the flames, but it was no use. There was no hope for them. I thank God I'm alive."
After he ejected safely from the burning 747 the pilot was quoted, "It's a shame so many had to die. I did all I could to try and extinguish the flames, but it was no use. There was no hope for them. I thank God I'm alive."
y tu, Abel? Porque?
And to think, you used to be one of my heroes. ;)
I've been working on a few slogans, while the kids watch SpongeBob, as I have a few hours to kill before I go to a football party.
This is just a meager attempt to continue to endear myself to every single member of this forum.
Here goes:
"One Forum. One Brain."
"You're Right - As Long As We Agree."
Maybe they're better for the 1984 discussion. Orwell's kids' book.
I'll try and scribe one more slogan before finishing this thought...
Etymologically speaking, hero has a few meanings, that have changed/evolved with time. Much like language.
1. Originally meaning a demigod - when gods fucked mortals, had kids.
2. Someone who, in a position of danger or weakness, displayed courage.
3. A person who is idealized for courage, outstanding achievements.
There are more, sure, but those made sense to me relative to the pilot and his actions.
So, we know the pilot most likely wasn't a demigod (but may be now to the 150 passengers, and probably the crew, too).
We know he was in a position of danger and weakness (engines on fire).
Now, did he display courage? One could argue it was self-preservation, and I wouldn't have a problem with that. But IMO, he certainly displayed courage. When put in an in-extremis situation, one rises to the occasion or chokes. The pilot rose (or landed safely, to be more accurate).
And perhaps the event was not a "miracle" (noun: a surprising or welcome event; an extraordinary event or accomplishment); but rather, "miraculous" (adjective: highly extraordinary and improbable, bringing very welcome consequences).
Should he be idealized for an outstanding achievement? Vote on that one yourself, I cast a ballot in the "Yes" column. No hanging chads.
As promised, here's my last slogan:
"Great Minds Think Disalike."
Back to SpongeBob. Patrick's in trouble, it seems...and I'm ready to blow the froth off of a cold one.
Pax,
homeless mind
Digney in Burnaby
donkeys live a long time
I know that my "save his own ass" line was a toss off line. Flippancy is one of my ways of dealing with the world.
To me it still comes back to that "right stuff" pilot philosophy that Tom Wolfe chronicled in his book, and then was made into a movie. As I remember having the "right stuff" is using all your skill and knowledge to bring an airplane/jet/whathaveyou back after it's gone into some catastrophic failure.
Is that heroic? I really don't much care. If the city of New York wants to give him a ticker tape parade I won't be there, or watch it on t.v.
The whole event reminded me of the "Gimli Glider", a 1983 incident where a 767 ran out of fuel (stupidity concerning the conversion to metric) and the pilot finally ran out of options and had to land at what he thought was an abandoned military airport. There is a dramatization of it complete with interviews of the real people involved on youtube. First of five parts linked here so you have to commit some time to watch it. I don't remember the word hero being used for the pilot even though he had to do one amazingly difficult manouevre with the jet to slow it down to land.
Pilot Bob Pearson was interviewed after this most recent incident. I didn't catch what he said. Here's an interview/story from last year on the 25th anniversary of the Gimli event. I see the headline starts with "hero". Hooray!
Reading the article I see the pilot was demoted and co-pilot was suspended after until the full story was discovered. No doubt the pilot in New York has spent more time with the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) than he wants to going over everything from his first piss of the day onward. (Flippancy, again.)
mjp
Founding member
If that were true I'd be in here all by myself.
Lolita Twist
Rose-hustler
I've always loved conspiracy theories.
We were sitting at the dining room table yesterday chatting about this odd, remarkable, local story (I used to fish in the Hudson as a kid :p) over coffee & cigarettes (I really shouldn't be giving cigarettes to a cancer patient, but I feel like a bad person either way, so fuck it), and they're calling the pilot a hero. He flew in so smoothly. Like a bird.
When I started this thread, I was amazed, and uninformed as to the happening. Sounds like a '50s movie, "The Happening." But I could be mistaken. On that movie name, date, if it existed, and other points of discussion herein.
Thanks Dig, you are a cool voice in the wilderness. Cheers, not that you need it or request. Just appreciated. PS, too. Your information was sound, and more valid than anything I scribed. Research and knowledge turn me on. All the other posts here, too, thanks. Cool beans. Cool thread.
(Speaking of knowledge, did you know the movie Psycho was the first movie ever to show a toilet flushing?)
However, IMO, at the end of the day, the pilot on that ship is the one I want behind the tiller any time I fly. Auto-nav or not. Debate that, if you must...
Babe Ruth, Jackie Robinson, Abraham Lincoln, Billy-Boy Shakespeare, Billy Idol, Charles Bukowski, et al, they are all heroes in the mindscapes of many. For varied reasons. No shit, right? Weil, not that they are; not that they aren't. It's really up to each individual to decide what constitutes heroism in one's mind. And miracles. I have a friend who when he takes a shit is a miracle. No shit.
As my daughter will redundantly say to me (mimicking me: for real, for real, for real...).
Since I didn't sharpen my pencil point properly, there was allusion, confusion. Good confusion. Good allusion. Good debate. That's all.
Many of the heroes in my life go unseen. Probably not alone here. So it just makes sense.
Pax,
homeless mind
Side Note:::::::::LG: fix your sig, as a rock fan, it's driving my bonkers: ...my sound machine.) Love the song, long time...lol.
Thanks Dig, you are a cool voice in the wilderness. Cheers, not that you need it or request. Just appreciated. PS, too. Your information was sound, and more valid than anything I scribed. Research and knowledge turn me on. All the other posts here, too, thanks. Cool beans. Cool thread.
(Speaking of knowledge, did you know the movie Psycho was the first movie ever to show a toilet flushing?)
However, IMO, at the end of the day, the pilot on that ship is the one I want behind the tiller any time I fly. Auto-nav or not. Debate that, if you must...
Babe Ruth, Jackie Robinson, Abraham Lincoln, Billy-Boy Shakespeare, Billy Idol, Charles Bukowski, et al, they are all heroes in the mindscapes of many. For varied reasons. No shit, right? Weil, not that they are; not that they aren't. It's really up to each individual to decide what constitutes heroism in one's mind. And miracles. I have a friend who when he takes a shit is a miracle. No shit.
As my daughter will redundantly say to me (mimicking me: for real, for real, for real...).
Since I didn't sharpen my pencil point properly, there was allusion, confusion. Good confusion. Good allusion. Good debate. That's all.
Many of the heroes in my life go unseen. Probably not alone here. So it just makes sense.
Pax,
homeless mind
Side Note:::::::::LG: fix your sig, as a rock fan, it's driving my bonkers: ...my sound machine.) Love the song, long time...lol.
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
That's why we try to avoid drunk posting.
Are you trying to cut posting down by 50%? :eek: :D
What about drunk reading?
What about drunk reading?
mjp
Founding member
Now you can land the plane yourself.
Black Swan
Abord the Yorikke!
I am not too surprise to see this one. Wonder if they'll make one for 9/11, unless it already exists...
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
So, do I get to be on a talk show now?
mjp
Founding member
No one died in the Hudson river (that day), so that's not really a fair comparison.
Yes. Have your people call Oprah's people. Extra points if you jump up onto Oprah's guest couch and pump your fist in the air when you describe the landing.
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
Okay boss!
One of my sisters said I looked like Tom Cruise, in the eighties.
One of my sisters said I looked like Tom Cruise, in the eighties.
mjp
Founding member
A really interesting 10 page (!) article in the latest Vanity Fair about the Hudson River landing. It's called, "Anatomy of a miracle."
It was the pilot's decision to glide to a Hudson River landing, but only because he knew he didn't have enough altitude to make to back to La Guardia, or to neighboring Teterboro. Aside from probably running straight into what is basically a cliff at the end of La Guardia, or landing in a New Jersey neighborhood, the Hudson River was his only option.
The article stresses many times that Sullenberger is a very good pilot, but he was flying a plane that made the landing much easier than it may have been in an old Boeing:
"...it doesn't really matter what Sullenberger thought, because fly-by-wire in the Airbus cannot be overpowered, and it can be switched off only by pulling circuit breakers, which no fool would have done. Sullenberger's A320 went all the way to the water under fly-by-wire control. That means it handled the constant adjustments and repetitive chores of flight by itself, and responded to Sullenberger's larger inputs according to a regime that is known as Normal Law..."
"Suffice it to say that if Sullenberger had done nothing after the loss of thrust the airplane would have smoothly slowed until reaching a certain angle with the airflow, at which point it would have lowered its nose to keep the wings from stalling, and would have done this even if for some reason Sullenberger had resisted. Of course, Sullenberger did no such thing."
"...the best gliding speed - a value which the airplane calculated all by itself and presented to him as a green dot on the speed scale of his primary flight display. During the pitch changes to achieve that speed, a yellow "trend" arrow appeared on the scale, pointing up or down from the current speed with predictions of speed 10 seconds into the future - an enormous aid to settling onto the green dot with a minimum of oscillation."
The article goes into the history of the Airbus planes, and it's pretty informative. It's the longest piece I've seen on the landing. And it makes it crystal clear that any decent pilot could have made the same landing - in that plane.
So yeah, good (if obvious) decision to go for the river, but otherwise, not heroic by any stretch. He was just doing his pilot job. Which the article also mentions is becoming less about flying a plane that sitting there watching it fly itself. I came away from the article with the impression that it would be exponentially more difficult - an incalculably more dangerous - to drive a Los Angeles city bus than pilot an Airbus.
But whichever side of the fence you're on about that river landing, this is a must-read article.
It was the pilot's decision to glide to a Hudson River landing, but only because he knew he didn't have enough altitude to make to back to La Guardia, or to neighboring Teterboro. Aside from probably running straight into what is basically a cliff at the end of La Guardia, or landing in a New Jersey neighborhood, the Hudson River was his only option.
The article stresses many times that Sullenberger is a very good pilot, but he was flying a plane that made the landing much easier than it may have been in an old Boeing:
"...it doesn't really matter what Sullenberger thought, because fly-by-wire in the Airbus cannot be overpowered, and it can be switched off only by pulling circuit breakers, which no fool would have done. Sullenberger's A320 went all the way to the water under fly-by-wire control. That means it handled the constant adjustments and repetitive chores of flight by itself, and responded to Sullenberger's larger inputs according to a regime that is known as Normal Law..."
"Suffice it to say that if Sullenberger had done nothing after the loss of thrust the airplane would have smoothly slowed until reaching a certain angle with the airflow, at which point it would have lowered its nose to keep the wings from stalling, and would have done this even if for some reason Sullenberger had resisted. Of course, Sullenberger did no such thing."
"...the best gliding speed - a value which the airplane calculated all by itself and presented to him as a green dot on the speed scale of his primary flight display. During the pitch changes to achieve that speed, a yellow "trend" arrow appeared on the scale, pointing up or down from the current speed with predictions of speed 10 seconds into the future - an enormous aid to settling onto the green dot with a minimum of oscillation."
The article goes into the history of the Airbus planes, and it's pretty informative. It's the longest piece I've seen on the landing. And it makes it crystal clear that any decent pilot could have made the same landing - in that plane.
So yeah, good (if obvious) decision to go for the river, but otherwise, not heroic by any stretch. He was just doing his pilot job. Which the article also mentions is becoming less about flying a plane that sitting there watching it fly itself. I came away from the article with the impression that it would be exponentially more difficult - an incalculably more dangerous - to drive a Los Angeles city bus than pilot an Airbus.
But whichever side of the fence you're on about that river landing, this is a must-read article.
Bukfan
"The law is wrong; I am right"
It's so typical for the media to make somebody a hero (it sells!) and then later on take away the hero status (that sells too!) rightfully or wrongfully...;)
- So now we know! The plane landed itself! All Sully did was to take the obvious choice - the Hudson river...:p
- So now we know! The plane landed itself! All Sully did was to take the obvious choice - the Hudson river...:p
Last edited by a moderator:
Black Swan
Abord the Yorikke!
it was still a beauty to land this thing where it does not belong.
mjp
Founding member
I don't think the article set out to detract at all from what the pilot accomplished. But they state a lot of facts that allow you to draw the conclusion that he did the only thing he could do that wouldn't almost certainly kill everyone on board, and that the technology built into the plane made the landing a lot more about nerve and patience (and remaining calm) than raw flying skill.
A lot of luck was also involved - the river was calm, he was landing in the direction the river was flowing (less resistance), etc. At one point the article describes the Hudson as a straight, ten mile long landing strip. Couldn't have asked for much more than that.
A lot of pilots have flown simulations of the flight since it happened, and not one of them have been able to make either real landing strip, so not trying to do so was where his experience and skill came into play. But different circumstances on the river could have caused a very different outcome, as well. If the plane had hit a tugboat or a container ship, it would have looked like a very bad decision to try the river.
All in all it was a very lucky day for everyone involved. Except the geese. They didn't fare so well.
Last edited: