Back in my flying days I learned that this sort of wishful thinking is why many power off emergencies ended in tragedy.
“I think the natural reaction of most people would be to try and get it back to the runway.”
“Back in my flying days I learned that this sort of wishful thinking is why many power off emergencies ended in tragedy.”
I have “limited” PA experience and am out of license, but recall lessons where instructor would cut engines and say: ..you’ve lost power, choose your landing site. It’s amazing how quickly you lose air speed and have to make choices. The silence is not golden.
The lesson is to determine where to get DOWN safely, ASAP! (before all other choices are lost). With a Pilot and Co, there are options, the PIC has one.
Landing on water is not the best option... it’s harder than “ground” due to variable surface ‘structure’ (think of it as landing on an always changing surface). Grass strips can be as challenging.
I could add other possible ‘interferences’ at the heights involved, such as cross winds from buildings, updrafts, bridges (which he reportedly cleared or was at 900 feet), water born traffic on the river, the time needed for airports to clear landing and take off traffic to clear runways... etc. (we have read about near misses of outgoing flights versus incoming and those that are on taxi ways... these might have been possible thoughts for the Captain?)
Captain Sullenberger’s glider experience will probably be considered a plus. I’ve just seen some video of the ‘flair’ as the plane made contact with the river and it was impressive. Scrubbing off air/speed and positioning for minimal/optimal body contact is not so forgiving as when doing so with wheels down.
FWIW, I’ve stuffed a small plane in and it also was on takeoff. Also have been around a ‘few’ accident sites (tree tops, grass fields, fences, tarmac). All in small residential areas.
Captain Sullenberger did a great job, but with any investigation there will be more to come out (unfortunately).
I’ll also add that initial reports about the plane being able to stay afloat so long was due to the crews training to NOT open the rearward entry/exit doors.
One report told of the planes capability to shut down all external ‘vent’s to prevent water entry.
In another report, a passenger related attempting to help (a) crew member(s) to OPEN a rearward door (which would have immediately caused flooding and sinking).
Thankfully, all worked out well and the incident (well, it won’t be recorded as such by FAA) will be used for future training.