[Tzfat]

His credentials are impeccable. He offers a sober opinion

Contradictory statement: it is his opinion. He is not an engineer. He is an average airline pilot that did what any airline pilot could do if it happened at the same place at the same time.

Like I said, I know Sully. He is a fine pilot, in other words, he is like most everyone else I fly with - but knowing how to fly does not make your opinion of the engineering of an aircraft any more valid than another pilot's.

But, if the ability to land an Airbus in the Hudson makes for credentials, you really need to ask FO Skiles what he thinks of Sully's opinions.

[zipper]

Contradictory statement: it is his opinion. He is not an engineer. He is an average airline pilot that did what any airline pilot could do if it happened at the same place at the same time. Like I said, I know Sully. He is a fine pilot, in other words, he is like most everyone else I fly with - but knowing how to fly does not make your opinion of the engineering of an aircraft any more valid than another pilot's. But, if the ability to land an Airbus in the Hudson makes for credentials, you really need to ask FO Skiles what he thinks of Sully's opinions.

I don't think you get it. Sully thought "out of the box", and saved over a hundred people's lives because of it. I'd wager that 90 plus percent of pilots would not have survived the scenario he faced that fateful day, and that makes him more than an "average airline pilot". And what of the universal praise he received from everyone on the inside and outside of the industry, praise not usually heaped on "average airline pilots"!

Regarding his Airbus criticism, it's all the more believable because he knows the A320 well. He's given this issue a lot of thought. He doesn't have to be "an engineer" -- they are notorious for failing to account for human factors -- like putting a stick in an airliner, that barely moves, moves independently of the other stick, and potentially keeps your inputs hidden from the other pilot!