Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 29, 2014, 08:15:18 PM
Home Help Login Register      
News: LiveATC.net Flyers Released!  Please click here to download & print a copy and be sure to post at an airport near you!


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Air Traffic Monitoring
| |-+  Aviation Audio Clips (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  US Airways 1549 Audio.
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Go Down Print
Author Topic: US Airways 1549 Audio.  (Read 36444 times)
Simcoe2
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


« Reply #45 on: February 18, 2009, 08:58:50 PM »

Regarding what a bird ingestion sounds like from inside a plane. Here is a good example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=CA&hl=en&v=AzfEx_zBmek&NR=1

Sounds like a bang/boom to me and I don't hear many unusual sounds after the ingestion even with the engine at idle during the RTO.

Perhaps this was another cover-up Smiley

Oh and, "A large eagle on the runway [folks]..." I love that!  Give this guy 10-10 for style and creativity. As if he didn't see the damn eagle right on runway, but somehow correctly identified its scientific animilia order and family after the fact. Yeah. 

   
Logged
cessna157
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 708



WWW
« Reply #46 on: February 20, 2009, 10:36:11 PM »

Hey Slumcoe, I wanted to get your interpretation of the attached video I have.  From your previous statements, I will gather you will have 1 of 2 theories:

1)  It is definitely NOT a bird strike.  1 bird cannot do this damage.  It is just coincidence that the bird flew into the engine at the moment thrust was lost here.
2)  It is an intentional bird strike by the pilots as they must have seen the bird flying around the end of the runway, even as they got in the aircraft 30 mins prior.  They had plenty of time to see, identify, and maneuver away from the bird.


As for me, I'm sticking to my martian story.

Logged

CRJ7/CRJ9 F/O, Travel Agent
bibi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #47 on: February 24, 2009, 06:59:33 PM »

here is another video i found, done with CG



(no responsibility is taken for the correctness - just found it at LL and thought i should share)
Logged
big baz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #48 on: March 05, 2009, 10:17:53 AM »

This showed a display of Fantastic Airmanship by the Captain/CoPilot and Crew. I salute you Sully smiley
Logged
Slick Willy
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #49 on: March 08, 2009, 10:16:54 AM »

It is a true reflection on good training when everyone can remain calm in such conditions. There was a moment of dis-belief from one of the ATC's asked how many engines were affected by the bird strike.
You go Sully The Man!!!!!
Logged
Infil85
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #50 on: March 15, 2009, 10:14:45 AM »



Frank Holbert
http://160knots.com

I just want to make it clear that those people in the life rafts are most likely not first class. First class was evacuated first for one thing. Second thing, I know for a fact that my grandfather, who was in first class and is 69, swam out to the wing of the aircraft.
Logged
kea001
Guest
« Reply #51 on: March 15, 2009, 11:02:38 AM »

"First class was evacuated first for one thing. "

Gotcha!  evil

« Last Edit: March 15, 2009, 08:50:34 PM by kea001 » Logged
Simcoe2
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


« Reply #52 on: March 16, 2009, 01:49:42 PM »

"First class was evacuated first for one thing. "

Gotcha!  evil



All were evacuated in unison.  However, 1st class passenger Mark Hood's statement to the media of being second last to disembark is false.  As is his radio interview statement of seeing a blur outside the window. Hood, a Marine, was incidentally unable to distinguish starboard from port and had to be eventually corrected by the interviewer. Hood was also audibly nervous, uncertain and tense, when should've been elated to be alive and happily chatting without recourse or restraint.  He was rattling off claims that went against his moral character; i.e., that which did not happen.   

1549 is an excellent case study in what not to say and do from an ATC perspective, not to mention horrifically bad flying if really hit birds which is a crock.  The La Guardia Departure TRACON controller couldn't even get the callsign right, repeatedly addressing 1549 as "1529."  Oopsy. This aircraft wasn't going to make La Guardia, JFK, Teterboro or anywhere.  The only things an ATC can do in this situation is gather critical data from the crew, number of souls onboard, course direction, landings intentions and instantly relay this info to TRACON data to liason with the respective rescue units.  It's out of Departure's control.  The aircraft is coming down and about the only pertinent info Departure can relay to the crew is wind and verification of Ditch Switch engagement, which 1549 never engaged and why partially sank nor Departure advise.  The controller botched every step. 

Every crew, worth any ounce of aviating integrity, that takes off from La Guardia, has to have multiple emergency landing scenarios down cold before firewalling the throttles, so that there is no thinking involved should anything go wrong after V1, and these include unfortunate river rafting down the Hudson and prepping the aircraft for this very predicament.  The crew flubbed everything but the great water landing.  Sullenberger did not have any emergency landing scenario down at takeoff.  He had to ask La Guardia for possible alternate solutions before weighing the odds in midair, amid desperate futile effort to restart the engines, before solemnly realizing upon reflection that the Hudson was the only out. 

The only worthy representatives of Cactus 1549 at the Superbowl should've been the flight attendants and ferry boat crews.  Sullenberger and co-pilot should've been place kicked through the uprights for aviating conduct unbecoming of even Ernest P. Worrel in a body cast.         

Logged
KSYR-pjr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1722



« Reply #53 on: March 16, 2009, 02:10:47 PM »

The only worthy representatives of Cactus 1549 at the Superbowl should've been the flight attendants and ferry boat crews.  Sullenberger and co-pilot should've been place kicked through the uprights for aviating conduct unbecoming of even Ernest P. Worrel in a body cast.

Recall this famous quote, Simcoe2?

Quote
I'm not ATP, air traffic or associated with any segment of the airline industry, so any comment I say should not be construed as credible. 

That was taken from your first post here, which from how it reads was the only one that made any sense.
Logged

Regards, Peter
ATC Feed:  Syracuse (KSYR), NY
mhawke
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 106


« Reply #54 on: March 18, 2009, 09:58:00 AM »





All were evacuated in unison.  However, 1st class passenger Mark Hood's statement to the media of being second last to disembark is false.  As is his radio interview statement of seeing a blur outside the window. Hood, a Marine, was incidentally unable to distinguish starboard from port and had to be eventually corrected by the interviewer. Hood was also audibly nervous, uncertain and tense, when should've been elated to be alive and happily chatting without recourse or restraint.  He was rattling off claims that went against his moral character; i.e., that which did not happen.   

[/quote]

Not sure how the passenger being a Marine has anything to do with him being able to distinguish starboard from port.  Many a Marine has spent a career without having enough time onboard a ship to gain that instinctive awareness of which side of the ship is red and which side is green.

As for him being uncertain and tense, I assume you have no experience in truely life threatning situations.  It is not uncommon to either have poor recollection after the fact because instinct takes over and you react, or because your mind simply does not want to deal with what has happened.  I have experienced both on board submarines after spening many years working and living on them.

I am also curious how you know that he made claims of things which did not happen?  Were you on board the plane?  Do you know what happened from his perspective?  Eyewitness accounts must always be understood to have happened from a persons perspective which can change everything.  For example, he may very well have thought he was the second to last person to embark because there was only person behind him at the door he left through.  Doesn't make him a liar, doesn't mean he was telling something that didn't happen, it just means that is what happened from his perspective, which is the only way he can tell the story.
Logged
athaker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 288



« Reply #55 on: March 18, 2009, 10:43:39 AM »

I think it may be time to stop humoring this guy.  Times are stressful enough...  cool
Logged
cessna157
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 708



WWW
« Reply #56 on: March 18, 2009, 09:23:17 PM »

Mhawke, you'll have more luck discussing the situation with your desk drawer.  Simcoe's responses will just make your head hurt
Logged

CRJ7/CRJ9 F/O, Travel Agent
Simcoe2
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


« Reply #57 on: March 19, 2009, 02:51:04 PM »

The only worthy representatives of Cactus 1549 at the Superbowl should've been the flight attendants and ferry boat crews.  Sullenberger and co-pilot should've been place kicked through the uprights for aviating conduct unbecoming of even Ernest P. Worrel in a body cast.

Recall this famous quote, Simcoe2?

Quote
I'm not ATP, air traffic or associated with any segment of the airline industry, so any comment I say should not be construed as credible. 

That was taken from your first post here, which from how it reads was the only one that made any sense.



Peter, there's nothing famous to it. It's a standard duty bound disclaimer to alert any reader that, unlike yourself, I'm not claiming to be something I'm not. And they were my words. Not yours.

The irony is that people like you, who claim or tacitly insinuate being expert on all matters of aviation, haven't made any effort to explain how flying into a flock of birds from afar qualifies for the mantle of "Hero"?

Are you so desperate for heroes in your website administrative duties that you're willing to extol the title of heroism to a crew that nearly killed, if did hit birds, everyone onboard from near unprecedented, indefendible negligence with plenty of opportunity to avoid?
 
If you ever care to, then maybe you might also explain how these very engines that compressor stalled over Newark three days before with the cause never addressed by full replacement of brand new powerplants, the only repair option by manufacturer and FAA directive, somehow mended themselves without human intervention and recuperated to 100% airworthiness status in the ensuing 72 hours?   
Logged
KSYR-pjr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1722



« Reply #58 on: March 19, 2009, 02:55:56 PM »

Are you so desperate for heroes in your website administrative duties ...

LOL.  You think I am the website administrator here?   Yet another mistaken assumption on your part. 

You admitted to not having any experience in anything aviation.  Thus, your comments, as per your own warning, are not credible.  I am just honoring your wishes.
Logged

Regards, Peter
ATC Feed:  Syracuse (KSYR), NY
dave
Site Founder
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3648



WWW
« Reply #59 on: March 19, 2009, 02:58:13 PM »

This thread is about to be locked if this goes on any further.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!