Miracle on the Hudson investigation. The pilot performed a real miracle. Particularly dangerous geese

On January 15, 2009, an Airbus A320-214, en route from New York to Charlotte, made an emergency landing on the Hudson River. For this date, we decided to remember other extreme airplane landings on water.

Photo: MADE NAGI / EPA/ITAR-TASS
2014-01-14 23:00

Airbus A320-214, New York

On January 15, 2009, the whole world was discussing the miraculous rescue of an Airbus 320 in New York. Immediately after taking off from La Guardia airport, the plane collided with a flock of birds and all engines failed. The team, led by 57-year-old former military pilot Chesley Sullenberger, turned the plane around and, gliding from a height of about a thousand meters, softly landed it on the surface of the Hudson. This emergency landing took 3 minutes. 155 people, including the crew, exited the plane onto the wing, where they were taken off by passing ferries and pleasure boats.

Tu-124, St. Petersburg

In 1963, the Tu-124 made a routine flight from Tallinn to Moscow. During takeoff from Ülemiste airfield, the mechanism responsible for releasing the front landing gear broke down. During the flight, the pilots tried to “knock out” the jammed landing gear and even cut through the bottom of the fuselage - it did not help.

The plane was sent to Leningrad airport. Producing kerosene, the airliner flew in circles around the city. However, the pilots were overzealous, trying to burn out more fuel. The first turbine stalled as the plane flew over the historic center of the city. There was nowhere to land except the river. Having overcome the high trusses of the Bolsheokhtinsky Bridge at an altitude of only forty meters, the plane passed over one of the supports, almost hitting it. With the last movement of the controls, the pilots jointly managed to lift the airliner that “last inch” that was so necessary for salvation. After this, the Tu-124 landed on the Neva.

Boeing 767, Comoros

On November 23, 1996, a Boeing 767, owned by an Ethiopian airline, was flying from Addis Ababa to Abidjan. Three terrorists captured him and demanded that he change course to Australia. The flight there is ten hours, the fuel reserve is only three. But the invaders thought differently. On the way to Comoros the fuel ran out. The pilots were able to land the plane five hundred meters from the beach. The left engine and left wing hit the water and the plane broke apart. Of the 175 people, 125 died, including the terrorists.

Tu-134, Moscow

On July 17, 1972, an aviation accident occurred at the Ikshinsky reservoir involving a Tu-134 aircraft. The plane made a test flight, in which the failure of generators was worked out and the operation of electrical equipment was checked. During the flight, all the fuel pumps on the plane stopped, thereby stopping the supply of fuel to the engines. As a result, both engines stopped. Being at a low altitude and with dead batteries, the crew could not start the engines in flight, so they were forced to splash down on the Ikshinskoye Reservoir. None of the five crew members were seriously injured.

Boeing 737, Bali

On April 13, 2013, a Boeing 737 passenger plane overshot the runway and ended up in the ocean waves off the coast of the Indonesian island of Bali. All passengers and crew of the plane survived. 15 people on board the Indonesian Lion Air airliner were taken to hospital. A total of 101 passengers were on this flight, as well as seven crew members. Nobody died.

On September 8, Clint Eastwood’s film “Miracle on the Hudson,” a drama based on real events about the phenomenal pilot Chesley Sullenberger, played by Tom Hanks, will be released in Russia. In January 2009, Sullenberger landed an Airbus A320 in the Hudson River after both engines failed. On the eve of the premiere, Gazeta.Ru spoke with Sullenberger.

— How do you evaluate the work?

“I think it’s an excellent job, and not only because the resemblance was achieved. It was obvious to me that, in preparation for the role, he watched a lot of documentary material, listened to audio recordings, and watched interviews that I gave. He is one of those who views acting as a technology, treats roles very painstakingly, and this made it possible to make the hero as alive as possible. He physically, mentally and emotionally embraced the role. Tom told me how difficult it was for him to evaluate his performance from the outside, but he managed to capture and convey the tension and drama both at the moment of landing on the water and during the investigation (which was carried out by the Transport Safety Commission. - Gazeta.Ru).

Chesley Sullenberger

— When you decided to make a film about this story, how did you react?

— The producers offered to turn my book “The Highest Duty” into a screenplay in 2010. However, time passed before Clint Eastwood liked this script and he began filming the film. When it became known that Clint was doing this, I was very happy - it was worth the wait to find a director who would bring this story to life in a worthy way.

— How do you feel about the fact that, despite the heroism you showed, you actually ended up on trial?

- Of course, it was a difficult situation.

I think that the commission was trying to get to the bottom of the truth, whatever it may be, without caring too much about my professional reputation, and the rest of the defendants each pursued their own goals.

For many, I could become a scapegoat. But I had no concern that I would be found guilty of what happened. My only concern was whether I had really assessed the situation correctly and whether I had made the right choice.

- Sorry, but I can’t help but ask how you managed to react so quickly in that extreme situation?

“I was the person who was responsible, I was the commander of the ship. My position was called “aircraft commander”. So I took action immediately, even though it was a situation we had never encountered. In addition, these training simulators of ours do not teach how to land on water. The only training we received on water landings was a theoretical discussion at flight school. And yet, for the first time in history, we landed a plane on water and did it correctly in just 209 seconds. At the same time, I was absolutely sure that I could do it. It never occurred to me that I would die that day. I didn't think that I couldn't win. However, I did not know how hard the landing would be or how long the plane could stay on the water.

But I managed to land so that rescuers could arrive as quickly as possible - this was a decisive factor on such a cold day.

— In addition to the crew, you thanked the passengers many times, who behaved very disciplined in such terrible circumstances. How did they do it in such a stressful, deadly situation?

— Despite the fact that each person acted in his own interests, there were people who helped others. There was a woman in a wheelchair, and passengers and crew helped her and her adult daughter out. There was a family of four with two children, one of whom was nine months old, and other passengers were helping them. So it wasn’t like everyone was just for themselves. Of course, there was some shouting and jostling, but I am very proud of the way the passengers and crew behaved. Probably everything ended so well because people acted together in such a difficult situation.

— There are engineers who say that in five years there will be planes flying in the sky that will be controlled by autopilots, but your example shows how important the human factor is in this profession. How do you feel about this prospect?

— I think that the best systems are those that pay enough attention to both human and technical factors.

Every person and every technology has its own strengths and weaknesses, and we must give each their rightful role to make the entire system more resilient.

May I draw your attention to the recent speech of the head of the National Transportation Safety Board, Chris Hart, who spoke at the Civil Pilots Association. He remembered our case and said that today, fortunately, such a situation should not happen again - precisely thanks to technology. But at the same time, he emphasized that people are the less predictable part, but also the most adaptive. Technology can do what it was programmed to do, and humans can deal with what happens unexpectedly.

— What advice can you give to young pilots who are used to relying on technology?

“What makes a pilot successful is what I call a professional approach—discipline plus the ability to deal with distractions. It is necessary to catch mistakes before they can cause harm, and I believe this can be learned.

— “Miracle on the Hudson” will soon be shown in Russia. Would you like to come here and meet Russian pilots who will also watch the film with interest?

- Yes, sure. By the way, I had a conversation with Russian pilots a year after the 2009 story.

And one of them said that the Russians always believed that their pilots were better, but the Americans had better planes.

But after 2009, they decided to reconsider this and came to the conclusion that American pilots are no worse. I was flattered by this compliment.

Source: http://www.aviasafety.ru/inspection/investigations/815-a320-hudson-results

Based on its investigation into this serious incident, the National Transportation Safety Board has issued more than twenty-five new safety recommendations. The investigation revealed the presence of serious problems, which, however, did not prevent the crew from saving the lives of all 150 passengers and 5 crew members of the flight that took off on January 15, 2009 from New York's LaGuardia Airport to Charlotte. Two and a half minutes after takeoff, the plane collided with a flock of Canada geese, with several birds hitting the engines. This caused an almost complete loss of engine thrust, as a result of which the crew decided to splash down in the Hudson River.

The investigative report notes that it was only by sheer luck that the plan for this intracontinental flight included an aircraft equipped with water-recovery equipment. However, it was noted that in some cases the locations of life jackets, ropes and inflatable chutes were either inconvenient to use, out of reach, or did not function properly.

The report said some safety and emergency procedures were either ignored or could not be implemented during the chaotic three minutes after the collision. The crew lost valuable time trying to restart the engines because they did not know that it was impossible to return them to working condition. After making the decision to splashdown in the Hudson, the crew did not prepare passengers for a water landing and were unable to complete the engine failure checklist reading.

Only four passengers managed to put on life jackets and tie them before landing on the water. Only 29 passengers were able to put on life jackets without tying them, and ten of them reported that they had great difficulty removing the life jacket from under their seat. Everyone noted that it was very difficult to tie a vest on themselves, so they did not have time to do it.

During landing, a crack formed in the tail of the plane, into which water began to flow. Because of this, it was not possible to use the two tail chutes, which simultaneously serve as life rafts. Many passengers not caught in the two front chutes involved, which contained 64 people, stood on the wings in knee-deep cold water.

The plane was also equipped with four lifelines that passengers could hold onto to avoid falling into the water, but the lifelines are located at the nose and tail of the plane, which flight attendants could not reach. If one got into water with a temperature of 4 degrees, there would be a high risk that this would lead to numerous casualties, since many people’s bodies cannot withstand more than 5 minutes in such conditions.

A favorable factor was also the fact that in the river area there were numerous boats and watercraft participating in river work. Thanks to their immediate help, everyone was able to be removed from the water.

Documents released by the Council say the crew could technically return to Runway 13 at La Guardia. However, given the time it took to assess the situation, Captain Sullenberger made the most appropriate decision to perform a water landing. The report highlights the speed with which the crew assessed available information and made decisions, as well as the coordinated work of its members.

The Council, first of all, recommends that all aircraft, even those that fly primarily over the earth's surface, be required to be equipped with life jackets and floating seat cushions for each passenger. A similar recommendation to the Federal Aviation Administration was withdrawn in 2003 due to cost-saving considerations.

The Transportation Safety Board also called for a study of the situation in which passengers adopt a crouched position during emergency landings - leaning forward and covering their heads with their hands. With the new shape of the chairs, this position becomes unsafe. During the water landing, two passengers who assumed this position in accordance with the recommendations given in the reminder sheet about what to do in such situations suffered shoulder fractures.

To prevent pilots from attempting to start engines that are inoperable, the Council recommended that the FAA work with NASA and the military to develop technology that can inform pilots about engine status. The Council also recommended new parameters for a water landing when both engines fail at low altitude.

Recommendations have been made to make engines more resistant to direct bird strikes. It is recommended that the Civil Aviation Authority conduct research into whether there is a relationship between the increase in the population of large birds, such as Canada geese and white pelicans, and the number of aircraft collisions with them. Last November, a Frontier Airlines A319 collided with a flock of snow geese, causing one engine to shut down and causing severe damage to another. The plane returned to the departure airfield, where it made an emergency landing.

If large bird strikes continue, the Council will recommend revisions to certification standards to ensure that engines remain operational after larger bird strikes. In the case of the A320 aircraft, the collision occurred with birds weighing about 4 kilograms, while the engines are designed to hit birds up to 2 kilograms. Newer generation engines can withstand collisions with four-kilogram birds, but in nature there are species weighing more than 6 kilograms.

Recently, a new film, “Miracle on the Hudson,” was released, starring Tom Hanks. The audience really liked the film, and critics showered it with positive reviews. The reason for its success most likely lies in the fact that the film is based on real events. It tells the story of a passenger plane that crash-landed on the Hudson River in New York on January 15, 2009. Thanks to the professionalism of the pilots, the lives of 155 people were saved. Next you will find a story about how we managed to make this dangerous landing.

Flight AWE 1549 (call sign - Cactus 1549) was operated by a US Airways Airbus A320-214 en route from New York-North Carolina-Seattle. There were 150 passengers and 5 crew members on board.

The aircraft was released in 1999 (its first flight was on June 15, 1999). On the day of the incident, he had completed 16,299 takeoff-landing cycles and had flown 25,241 hours.

The plane was flown by a very experienced crew.

The captain of the aircraft was 57-year-old Chesley B. "Sully" Sullenberger. Former military pilot who flew the F-4 Phantom II from March 1973 to July 1980.

After his retirement, he continued to fly as a commercial airline pilot. Chesley B. Sullenberger was an aviation safety expert and certified glider pilot. Flight time was 19,663, 4,765 of which were on Airbus A320.

The co-pilot was 49-year-old Jeffrey B. Skiles. Worked for US Airways for 23 years. Flight time was 15,643 hours.

But this was only his second flight on the Airbus A320.

There were three flight attendants working on the plane: Sheila Dyle, Doreen Welsh, Donna, all of whom had more than 30 years of experience.

Flight AWE 1549 took off from New York at 15:24 local time. 90 seconds after takeoff, the pilot reported to air traffic controllers that a bird strike had occurred, causing two engines to fail.

Passengers later recalled that they felt a strong blow, some saw that something gray flashed next to the plane and crashed into the engine. Others noticed the fire.

The plane managed to gain an altitude of 3,200 feet (975 meters). The PIC issued a distress signal and informed the dispatcher that the aircraft had collided with a flock of birds, as a result of which both engines were disabled.

For flight 1549, the landing strip is cleared at LaGuardia Airport, which is 11 kilometers away. But the pilots understand that they will not make it to the airport. You can try to land at Teterboro Airport in New Jersey, but that is also almost 10 kilometers away.

Forced landings on water usually end in disaster. In 1996, an Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 767 capsized during splashdown in the Indian Ocean after an unsuccessful emergency landing attempt.

125 of the 175 people on board were killed.

New Yorkers are reporting seeing a plane flying low over the city. The ship's commander has no time to inform passengers. But they understand that the plane is falling.

Splashdown is the last chance for Flight 1549. But an obstacle 180 meters high appears in the plane's path - the George Washington Bridge.

The plane approaches the bridge from the east at an altitude of only 450 meters. He flies some 100 meters above him. After this, the crew commander makes a U-turn and begins to level the plane over the Hudson.

At an altitude of 150 meters, the crew commander makes a message: “This is the ship’s commander speaking. Prepare for impact.”

The blow was very strong. The plane seemed to jump, then slowed down and grinded. But the passengers were happy that they managed to avoid death. No one had yet suspected that as a result of the impact a crack had formed in the tail of the plane.

Airbuses are equipped with a system that, in the event of splashdown, closes all openings so that the plane does not take on water. To activate the system, one of the pilots must press a button above his head. However, none of the pilots of flight 1549 managed to do this.

The crack in the tail section is growing. The salons quickly fill with water. No one yet knows that in just 24 minutes he will be under water. All the people remaining on the plane could drown in the icy waters of the Hudson.

A minute after splashdown, information about the incident is transmitted to the captains of ferries plying the Hudson. Vincent Lombardi's ferry, the Thomas Jefferson, is closest to the sinking airliner.

It takes the ferry 4 minutes to get to the plane. Not all passengers will be able to hold out for so long: the water temperature is only 2 degrees above zero.

Several plane passengers end up directly in cold water. There is a critical situation at the tail of the plane. The water is rising rapidly. Both emergency exits are already under water; the doors cannot be opened.

3 minutes and 40 seconds after splashdown, the first ferry arrives at the plane. Ferry passengers help bring the ship as close as possible to one of the wings of the plane, which is constantly being carried away by a strong current.

When the second ferry arrives, another problem arises. The ferries are not designed to participate in rescue operations; their decks rise more than 2 meters above the water. Passengers cannot climb them themselves; ferry crews lower nets and rope ladders overboard.

When police divers arrive at the splashdown site, the rescue operation is in full swing.

Seven ships, including a US Coast Guard ship, are scooping people aboard from aircraft wings and life rafts. However, many passengers are still stranded in the icy water.

Scuba divers continue to search for victims. 12 minutes have passed since the start of the operation to rescue the passengers of flight 1549. Rescuers have very little time to get everyone out of the water. The plane is sinking. And there may still be people in it.

At 15:55, 25 minutes after the emergency splashdown, half of the plane was already under water. A raft carrying Chesley Sullenberger is being pulled up to the Athena ferry. The commander of the airbus crew was the last to board the ferry and reported that everyone had gotten out.

The passengers, still in a state of shock, are taken to the port.

78 people received medical treatment for minor injuries and hypothermia.

As a result of landing, rescue and towing operations, the aircraft's airframe received significant damage.

Organic remains and a bird feather were found in the right engine.

The left engine separated during splashdown and sank, but on January 23 it was raised from the river bottom and sent for examination.

After the passengers were evacuated, the plane was towed to a pier near the World Financial Center.

Where he was raised.

After the investigation was completed, the aircraft was acquired by the Carolinas Aviation Museum in Charlotte, North Carolina.

At first the plane was without engines. The aircraft will be fully presented by the fall of 2012.

The investigation into the crash confirmed that both engines stopped after the plane collided with a flock of birds. If it were not for the highest professionalism of the airbus commander Chesley Sullenberger, the fate of the passengers of flight 1549 could have turned out completely differently.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg thanked the pilot for not abandoning the plane until he was sure all passengers had been evacuated.

The survivors received monetary compensation and became the subject of numerous television shows and interviews.

Passengers and crew also regularly gather to celebrate the anniversaries of their miraculous rescue.

Later, on the form usually given to passengers to write reviews of the flight, one of the survivors wrote, “We were very lucky,” expressing the collective opinion of those rescued.

57-year-old American pilot, former military pilot Chesley Sullenberger saved one and a half hundred lives in a few seconds.

After both engines failed due to a bird strike, he landed.

Pavement between bridges

All passengers and crew survived. By the way, according to the US Federal Aviation Administration, from 1990 to 2007, 80 thousand cases of bird collisions with passenger aircraft were recorded in the country. Birds pose a potential threat to approximately one in 10 thousand flights.

But there was a similar case in the USSR. On August 21, 1963, in Leningrad, the world's first successful splashdown was made by an airplane flying from Tallinn to Moscow. Already during takeoff at Tallinn airport, the commander of the Tu-124, Viktor Mostovoy, discovered that the landing gear had jammed.

The commander reported the problem to dispatchers. However, due to thickening fog, an emergency landing in Tallinn was prohibited. Mostovoy was asked to land the car on a spare dirt runway at the Pulkovo airfield in Leningrad, recalls Honored Pilot of the USSR Vladimir Dmitriev.

The plane circled over the city, running out of up to a ton of fuel. On the seventh lap, the flight mechanic reported to Mostovoy that there was more fuel remaining than required according to the instructions. “I’m going one more circle,” the commander reported to the ground. He had no idea that the plane's fuel gauges were faulty. When there were 21 km left to the airport, the fuel supply was exhausted: the left engine of the plane stopped.

To reduce the distance to the airfield, the crew decided to fly over the historical center of the city. However, the second engine also failed over Smolny. Fortunately, the Neva was below,” says Dmitriev. “Vitya, get on the water,” shouted Vasily Chechenov, the co-pilot, a former hydropilot.

And then Mostovoy made the only correct decision in the current situation: to land the plane on the surface of the water - between the Bolsheokhtinsky and Finlyandsky bridges. To avoid panic, the 27-year-old commander ordered the crew members to distract the passengers with conversations.

The plane flew a couple of meters above the Alexander Nevsky Bridge, which was still under construction at that time. Workers standing on metal structures fell into the water in horror. A few tens of meters from the Finland Bridge, the plane plopped into the river.

During landing, the Tu-124 received a hole and almost immediately began to take on water. Only thanks to the actions of Yuri Porshin, the captain of the tug, who hooked a metal cable to the pilots’ wheel and towed the plane to the shore, it did not sink at a depth of 13 meters. It was “moored” to the pier of the Northern Press plant so that one of the wings lay on land, forming a gangway. The aircraft commander was the last to land. He was very calm, but completely gray.

Reward or punish? - this question arose before the Main Directorate of the Civil Air Fleet of the USSR immediately after the accident.

Mostovoy was expelled from the air squad for sloppiness. Allegedly, it was his fault that the Tu-124 first almost crashed into the center of Leningrad, and then almost sank,” continues Vladimir Dmitriev. - Only after the scandal reached the Central Committee of the CPSU, and the heroism of the pilot became known in the West, Mostovoy was awarded the Order of the Red Star, and his crew members were awarded medals.

The plane landed on the plane

But splashdown is not the most exotic landing option. So, on July 8, 2005, a 55-year-old Porsche driver decided to use the runway at the German Bitburg airport to enjoy the speed of his car. Strangely enough, there was permission from the airport management. Therefore, the driver calmly rushed along the strip at a speed of 160 km/h. Suddenly, a light aircraft began to land directly on the roof of the Porsche. The driver braked sharply, causing the plane to slide off the roof and fall to the ground. The 58-year-old pilot was not injured, but his wings were broken. The police later established that it was the pilot who was responsible for the accident: he did not request permission to land. But the most curious thing: they had to prepare a special report to the Porsche insurance company, where they refused to believe that a plane tried to land on their client’s car.

And in Florida they still remember how the pilot of a single-engine Piper Cheruka tried to make an emergency landing on a highway near the city of Dundin. After hitting the road, the plane bounced several times, threw two trucks aside and landed on the roof of a third. The pilot and driver escaped with minor bruises, and several people at the “landing” site were severely frightened.

However, other “landing sites” compete equally with car roofs. For example, in 2001 in the UK, a light plane landed directly on a residential building. After the engine failure, the pilot had an alternative: to sit on the railroad tracks or on the roof of a house. And in October 2008, a sports plane landed directly on the roof of an Austrian police building. And again there were no casualties.

But perhaps the most amazing landing occurred last year in the US state of Texas: when one plane landed directly on another. At the airport, which is located near Dallas, the dispatcher informed the pilot of the landing plane that the runway was clear and gave permission to land. At this time, another airliner pulled out from the taxiway. The accident could not be avoided. Both cars suffered serious damage, but the pilots were not injured.

Meanwhile

According to Valery Shelkovnikov, board member of the World Flight Safety Foundation, approach and landing are the most difficult stages of a flight. Long-term statistics show: annually for this reason, an average of 17 aircraft accidents occur in the world.

other unique plantings

Tu-134 of the State Research Institute of Civil Aviation performed test flights from Sheremetyevo airfield. During landing, two engines failed simultaneously. The commander landed the plane on the water surface of the Moscow Canal. No harm done.

A Boeing 727-230 of a Greek airline was flying from Athens to Thessaloniki. The plane was piloted by experienced pilots. The weather at the destination airport was extremely difficult: thunderstorm, gusts of wind, heavy clouds. The plane flew over the first third of the runway, and as a result, upon landing, it rolled off the runway, its nose hanging over the shore of the Mediterranean Sea. But the crew and passengers - 35 people - remained alive.

The Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 767-260ER was flying from Addis Ababa to Abidjan. Shortly after entering Kenyan airspace, three terrorists hijacked the plane and demanded it fly to Australia. But on the way to the Comoros, the plane ran out of fuel and the engines stopped. The pilots tried to land in shallow water 500 meters from the beach, but the left engine and the edge of the wing hit the water and the car was destroyed. Of the 175 people on board, 50 were saved.

The Philippine Airlines A320-214 was flying from Manila to Bacolod. During landing, the plane drifted to the right side of the runway. He rammed the airport fence and stopped in a small river. None of the 130 people on board were injured.