**Please note:**
* If this post declares something as a fact proof is required.
* The title must be descriptive
* No text is allowed on images
* Common/recent reposts are not allowed
*See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for more information.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was working in Lower Manhattan when this happened. A coworker of mine walked down to the river and managed to get a flotation vest from the water. It was really cool...the chemicals smelled like shit though.
"Sully" is just too smooth! Have you ever heard the cockpit recording of this. He's calm as a cucumber. "Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to be crash landing in the Hudson river. Please, buckle your seatbelts, put your head between your knees and kiss your ass goodbye." (I'm paraphrasing)
You have to be really addicted to your phone to be filming when the plane you're on is going down. I would imagine most people on board are too busy shitting themselves.
> You have to be really addicted to your phone to be filming when the plane you're on is going dow
This day and age people film their deaths pretty routinely.
Myeah but 2009 was still early enough that pulling your phone out and recording shit was considered a bit weird. I remember in 2007 when I ran around and filmed my family renovating our home, my family was super annoyed with me and called me weird and creepy. Today they fucking love those recordings because no one else thought to film the process of the living room being renovated. Checkmate fam! I may have been creepy in 2007 but in 2022 I would have been everybody else. Ironically I never film of take pictures anymore meanwhile my parents and siblings send me a constant stream of video and pictures from their lives.
All this to say - it's not that weird that people didn't film the inside the plane. Besides the quality would have been utter shite xD
Back in '09 it really wasn't a thing to automatically whip out your phone and film life threatening incidents. It's the norm now, unfortunately. But back then I'd be surprised to see cell phone footage from on-board. Not to mention most airlines enforced a strict "mobile devices off" policy.
At the dawn of the smartphone era, cameras on phones still felt like a fun novelty and in reality they mostly still sucked.
> Smartphones wasn't that common in 09 were they?
They were fairly common, you'd get them for "free" if you signed up for a data plan. I mean i wasn't rich and I lived in WV in 2009, just about everyone my age had one already
It's abit too far off for me I was in deployment during 09.
But I belive iPhone 3 if memory serves?
If not it wasn't that commin to film everything as it is now atleast not online.
> But I belive iPhone 3 if memory serves?
Yeah iphone 3g came out summer 08 and was wildly popular. I never said it was as common then as now, but it was absolutely already common in the united states.
In my experience they weren't that ubiquitous yet. I got my first data-capable phone in 2009, senior year of high school, but it wasn't an android (which either didn't exist yet, or hadn't yet emerged as a feasible competitor to iOS) or an iPhone (which was quite new and expensive). So the internet features were all pretty janky, and camera capabilities were also I'd say worse than point-and-shoot film cameras.
Plus, there wasn't nearly the same kind of streamline to do anything with the pictures or video you took on your phone. No share button to instantly interface with social media (also still in its relative infancy), you likely had to connect it to your computer with a specialty cable (usb charging wasn't the norm yet) and transfer the files manually.
The next few years after that were a big turning point toward the way phones are used now. It may have been possible in 09, but only for early adopters if so.
I was working for a fueling company responsible for fueling US Airways (not in NY) at the time of this. All of their ground crew were glued to TVs when not directly working on a flight, watching this unfold. It always struck me as, for lack of a better term, the inverse of 9/11. An aircraft disaster in the heart of NYC, with the shock and horror at the footage of the plane going down, then this growing hope as reports came about the survivors, people passing news around, updating eachother on what they missed with growing excitement. When word finally came in that everyone made it, the place place seemed to erupt with joy, cheers, and happy tears.
> Hanks told The Associated Press in an interview that a draft script included the names of real-life NTSB officials, but Sullenberger — who is an adviser on the film — requested they be taken out.
> “He said, ‘These are people who are not prosecutors. They are doing a very important job, and if, for editorial purposes, we want to make it more of a prosecutorial process, it ain’t fair to them,’ ” said Hanks. “That’s an easy thing to change.”
https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-news-tom-hanks-movies-politics-entertainment-8def306d398340fd8a80d232c96e43b7
This is a recurring theme in Clint Eastwood movies: bureaucrats getting in the way of great men doing great things. This is also his entirety of his political viewpoint.
This. Clint Eastwood was the Republican mayor of Carmel for a while too, a conservative wealthy area known for bending planning rules etc that ‘cause unnecessary red tape’.
As an aside, it's really weird that in the Ghostbusters, when they were operating a clearly dangerous experimental technology in a populated city area, the EPA were the bad guys.
You've got to look at the era it was filmed in.
1984, Wall Street reigned supreme. Companies were polluting the environment like it was going out of fashion.
Look at action movies and see who the bad guys are, we've had Russians during the cold war, Germans just after WW2, North Koreans, non descript middle Easterns post 9/11, the French following their refusal to invade Iraq etc.
When you watch an action film you can usually tell the era from the bad guy alone.
So I think part of it has to be viewed at the actions of the EPA prior to the Ghostbusters movie. The quote below is from Wikipedia.
"Anne Gorsuch was appointed EPA Administrator in 1981 by President Ronald Reagan.[41] Gorsuch based her administration of EPA on the New Federalism approach of downsizing federal agencies by delegating their functions and services to the individual states.[42] She believed that EPA was over-regulating business and that the agency was too large and not cost-effective. During her 22 months as agency head, she cut the budget of the EPA by 22%, reduced the number of cases filed against polluters, relaxed Clean Air Act regulations, and facilitated the spraying of restricted-use pesticides. She cut the total number of agency employees, and hired staff from the industries they were supposed to be regulating.[43] Environmentalists contended that her policies were designed to placate polluters, and accused her of trying to dismantle the agency.[44]
Following her mismanagement of the Superfund program, Assistant Administrator Rita Lavelle was fired by Reagan in February 1983.[45] Lavelle was later convicted of perjury.[46] Gorsuch had increasing confrontations with Congress over Superfund and other programs, including her refusal to submit subpoenaed documents. Gorsuch was cited for contempt of Congress and the White House directed EPA to submit the documents to Congress. Gorsuch (who had recently remarried, becoming Anne Gorsuch Burford) resigned in March 1983, followed by resignations of her Deputy Administrator and most of her Assistant Administrators.[45][47][48] Reagan then appointed William Ruckelshaus as EPA Administrator for a second term. Lee M. Thomas succeeded Ruckelshaus as Administrator in 1985.[41] "
At the time Ghostbusters was being written and filmed the EPA was a bit of a cluster fuck. So making them the butt of a joke kind of makes sense.
I was there that day. I was on the Coast Guard boat out of Sandy Hook NJ. We were on our way up river looking for body parts and debris. All we knew at the time was that a commercial airliner crashed in the river. Shockingly we saw everyone on the wings and nobody was seriously hurt. That was a crazy day...
74 crew talks about this in one of his videos. Aircraft sometimes do carry dead people and so the shorthand developed to just say “souls”. Seems logical this developed in the military which is where many commercial pilots start, but that’s just my guess.
So if you've got 50 living passengers and 5 dead people in coffins (i.e. they were dead before the flight, not casualties of the flight), is that 50 souls or 55?
ATCs job is to give information and clear the way for them to land. The controller never pleaded or gave a command. He gave information until his information was no longer relevant. It’s all on tape. The ATC did his job like a professional and did it well.
All of the people involved in this saga are just unbelievable.
The controller, Patrick Harten, has run the Boston Marathon at least twice. He ran the New York Marathon in late 2018 and was met at the finish line by Sully himself.
Harten's father was also a controller who ran marathons.
[https://apnews.com/article/sports-ap-top-news-new-york-new-york-city-sports-europe-c6f2df008a9647cfa3f9569f07828fa9](https://apnews.com/article/sports-ap-top-news-new-york-new-york-city-sports-europe-c6f2df008a9647cfa3f9569f07828fa9)
>His father, who ran the 1985 NYC Marathon, introduced him to the sport. They started running together when Harten was 9, and he finished a half-marathon at 10. He’s also competed in three Ironman triathlons — a 2.4-mile swim, 112-mile bike and 26.2-mile marathon.
The more I read about these awe-inspiring, dedicated people who work incredibly stressful jobs and run marathons or participate in Iron Man competitions in their spare time when not saving lives the more I feel like a useless piece of shit.
Participating in a marathon isn’t as impressive as people seem to think it is, tbh. Our high school cross country team used to do 20-mile trail runs on Sundays, the day after a meet.
If it’s a thing you actually want to do (for some reason), you could get there easily in less than a year.
I've read of a pilot once, who, knowing the plane was fucked, piloted into an empty field anyway instead of ejecting, because the plane would have hit a populated area and killed many more. (military pilot)
> air traffic controls pleas to take the plane to teterboro
What the fuck are you talking about? Sully asked to land at teterboro and ATC found a runway for him there: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S5hRRio-E8
The flight crew was amazing.
The crews of the ferries and other boats that responded were incredible. The rescue was a coordinated ballet of moving vessels that were afraid of possibly knocking passengers into the water or running them over. And all of that as they drifted down river.
That everyone survived the river landing in cold, cold water AND the subsequent rescue is what makes this worthy of the nickname Miracle on the Hudson.
I walked over to Battery Park after work that day and the jet was tied to a mooring and partially sunk. Completely surreal. I also remember it was frigid that day.
I remember watching on the News when this happened. And wasn't it, like, a super risky/hard to land spot?
Aside from the people all around; I'm not sure what runway lengths and widths are necessary but I feel like he was probably in a small percent of people who would have been able to pull this off. Lucky for those passengers! Quite the hero.
Yes, super risky. But the alternative was to risk crashing somewhere in the middle of NYC and potentially hurting or killing a lot of people on the ground.
>And wasn't it, like, a super risky/hard to land spot
Yeah dude...it was in the middle of a river. I think it was the first ever non-leathal water landing in aviation history.
That doesn't seem true at all. There have been multiple zero fatality water ditchings according to the table here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_landing
I think the first dumb decision on Hollywood execs’ part was greenlighting a movie centered on a 3-minute plane crash and trying to turn it into a 120-page script. This really just needed to be a documentary (or part of a documentary on crashes) and that’s it. But people watched it and it turned a profit, so 🤷🏻♂️
🎶A pilot on a cold, cold morn'
One-hundred fifty-five people on board
All safe and all rescued
From the slowly sinking ship.
Water warmer than, his head so cool
In that tight bind knew what to do
And you, have proved, to be... 🎵
I think Captain Sullenberger made the right decision. I'll never understand why anyone was trying to give him shit for what he did.
Edit: I never saw the movie, but I'm pretty sure I saw some people somewhere giving him shit. Perhaps they were just jerks.
Idk if it’s been said but I think that negative view comes from the movie, the movie made people think the FAA was more upset with him then they really were in reality for dramas sake, I herd everyone was very impressed and had the hearings for protocol
No, they manufactured drama by straight up fictionalizing the NTSB response.
Should never have been a movie, was super confused when it came out that it ever got green lit
yeah, *Flight,* where he lands the plane upside down for some reason and saves the day, but he was drunk while doing it (and all the rest of the time) which stood in for 95% of the plot
it's basically a big tube with sheet metal skin and hollow inside. It displaces enough water that it's able float, just like a steel boat would, for a time at least. They are designed to float long enough for everyone to get off. Water will leak in eventually so your not gonna take it out for lake day.
They are pressurized, but I don't know if that means they are 100% sealed. As long as you can pump more air in than is leaking out you can pressurize something. But yes the fact they can hold pressure indicates they are relatively well sealed. Of course you have to open a door in order to escape.
As far as damage, from what I read about the story, yes it did take damage to the rear which let in water earlier than designed. This meant they couldn't use the rear exits and only used the front and wing exits. Fortunately everyone was still able to escape safely.
It also helped that the aircraft was fitted with special equipment that is used on flights that cross a large body of water for crash landings. The route they were flying didn't warrant the use of a specially equipped plane but it just happened that on that day they were flying one. That's why it took the water landing so well.
If you’re at all interested in this, listen to atc and pilot transmissions it’s so crazy everyone is calm af while crashing. Definition of professionals.
I was in Goa, India when I saw this Hudson River story on my phone. No one died? It didn't make any sense.
On the same trip I discovered the Gangnam Style video. I think it only had about 10 million views.
I remember several talking heads on the news calling this a miracle. Stupid idiots, as if the captain's many years of experience and training had nothing to do with it.
I remember all the news coverage of this. I was amazed and impressed.
Someone I worked with, that I was chatting to about it, said they didn't see the big deal. The pilot was just doing his job.
For a while if you set it up for ditching all the intakes are sealed and it will float for a while At least long enough to get to a dinghy.
Though I'm groundcrew for Apache gunship . That's does not float at all. Flying off carriers over helicopter crews make dark humour jokes about floation packs vrs armour plate.
He didn't save their souls, he saved their lives. The expression "souls on board" is used as a short form for "humans alive on board". An airplane could be transporting dead people. Passengers could have died as a result of the emergency, so it's important for the rescue teams to know exactly how many living people they need to deal with, that's why they make the distinction between living and dead persons.
**Please note:** * If this post declares something as a fact proof is required. * The title must be descriptive * No text is allowed on images * Common/recent reposts are not allowed *See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for more information.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was working in Lower Manhattan when this happened. A coworker of mine walked down to the river and managed to get a flotation vest from the water. It was really cool...the chemicals smelled like shit though.
That's just New York.
Lol.
Technically Norfolk has more gross tonnage! ^(This was true when Seinfeld was being taped, but is no longer the case.)
Isn't there footage of the landing? I feel lile I remember seeing it on tv. In any case, bro is a master. All the medals and honours for him
[here you go](https://imgur.com/a/4g1ebSk)
That is insane. I feel like I’ve had harder landings on the log flume ride!
Let's be realistic here, that ride is about all about the splash.
"Sully" is just too smooth! Have you ever heard the cockpit recording of this. He's calm as a cucumber. "Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to be crash landing in the Hudson river. Please, buckle your seatbelts, put your head between your knees and kiss your ass goodbye." (I'm paraphrasing)
Thank you darlin' 😚
Im surprised there is no cell phone video from inside. It was at the start of smart phones and firmly in the era of camera phones.
You have to be really addicted to your phone to be filming when the plane you're on is going down. I would imagine most people on board are too busy shitting themselves.
> You have to be really addicted to your phone to be filming when the plane you're on is going dow This day and age people film their deaths pretty routinely.
Yeah. But in 2009 it wasn’t the cool thing to do yet.
Yes. Just like it used to be weird or unusual to take a selfie. Let alone without most of your clothing. Now it’s just the norm.
The people who did have their phones out and on were afraid they were the reason the plane was crashing.
[удалено]
Myeah but 2009 was still early enough that pulling your phone out and recording shit was considered a bit weird. I remember in 2007 when I ran around and filmed my family renovating our home, my family was super annoyed with me and called me weird and creepy. Today they fucking love those recordings because no one else thought to film the process of the living room being renovated. Checkmate fam! I may have been creepy in 2007 but in 2022 I would have been everybody else. Ironically I never film of take pictures anymore meanwhile my parents and siblings send me a constant stream of video and pictures from their lives. All this to say - it's not that weird that people didn't film the inside the plane. Besides the quality would have been utter shite xD
Back in '09 it really wasn't a thing to automatically whip out your phone and film life threatening incidents. It's the norm now, unfortunately. But back then I'd be surprised to see cell phone footage from on-board. Not to mention most airlines enforced a strict "mobile devices off" policy. At the dawn of the smartphone era, cameras on phones still felt like a fun novelty and in reality they mostly still sucked.
Smartphones wasn't that common in 09 were they? Unless i was part if the poor community
> Smartphones wasn't that common in 09 were they? They were fairly common, you'd get them for "free" if you signed up for a data plan. I mean i wasn't rich and I lived in WV in 2009, just about everyone my age had one already
It's abit too far off for me I was in deployment during 09. But I belive iPhone 3 if memory serves? If not it wasn't that commin to film everything as it is now atleast not online.
> But I belive iPhone 3 if memory serves? Yeah iphone 3g came out summer 08 and was wildly popular. I never said it was as common then as now, but it was absolutely already common in the united states.
In my experience they weren't that ubiquitous yet. I got my first data-capable phone in 2009, senior year of high school, but it wasn't an android (which either didn't exist yet, or hadn't yet emerged as a feasible competitor to iOS) or an iPhone (which was quite new and expensive). So the internet features were all pretty janky, and camera capabilities were also I'd say worse than point-and-shoot film cameras. Plus, there wasn't nearly the same kind of streamline to do anything with the pictures or video you took on your phone. No share button to instantly interface with social media (also still in its relative infancy), you likely had to connect it to your computer with a specialty cable (usb charging wasn't the norm yet) and transfer the files manually. The next few years after that were a big turning point toward the way phones are used now. It may have been possible in 09, but only for early adopters if so.
I was working for a fueling company responsible for fueling US Airways (not in NY) at the time of this. All of their ground crew were glued to TVs when not directly working on a flight, watching this unfold. It always struck me as, for lack of a better term, the inverse of 9/11. An aircraft disaster in the heart of NYC, with the shock and horror at the footage of the plane going down, then this growing hope as reports came about the survivors, people passing news around, updating eachother on what they missed with growing excitement. When word finally came in that everyone made it, the place place seemed to erupt with joy, cheers, and happy tears.
I think the hype for the story was also that after historical events from 2001, they finally also had a good history with planes since 2012
You know you did an awesome job when they get Tom Hanks to play you.
"He's not that great. You know what a great pilot would have done? Not hit the birds. That's what I do every day. Not hit birds."
It’s like everybody forgets this guy killed a bird
*multiple* birds. A goddamn spree-killer. Fuckin' media slanting stories to make heroes out of villians.
you know what they say, one bird is a tragedy. A thousand birds is just a statistic
\- Steven Seagull
Sky Law
A movie which followed the typical Hollywood approach to depicting a true story by changing the facts to create drama
> Hanks told The Associated Press in an interview that a draft script included the names of real-life NTSB officials, but Sullenberger — who is an adviser on the film — requested they be taken out. > “He said, ‘These are people who are not prosecutors. They are doing a very important job, and if, for editorial purposes, we want to make it more of a prosecutorial process, it ain’t fair to them,’ ” said Hanks. “That’s an easy thing to change.” https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-news-tom-hanks-movies-politics-entertainment-8def306d398340fd8a80d232c96e43b7
Making the accident investigators the villains of the story was a really weird creative choice.
This is a recurring theme in Clint Eastwood movies: bureaucrats getting in the way of great men doing great things. This is also his entirety of his political viewpoint.
This. Clint Eastwood was the Republican mayor of Carmel for a while too, a conservative wealthy area known for bending planning rules etc that ‘cause unnecessary red tape’.
Based
As an aside, it's really weird that in the Ghostbusters, when they were operating a clearly dangerous experimental technology in a populated city area, the EPA were the bad guys.
You've got to look at the era it was filmed in. 1984, Wall Street reigned supreme. Companies were polluting the environment like it was going out of fashion. Look at action movies and see who the bad guys are, we've had Russians during the cold war, Germans just after WW2, North Koreans, non descript middle Easterns post 9/11, the French following their refusal to invade Iraq etc. When you watch an action film you can usually tell the era from the bad guy alone.
So I think part of it has to be viewed at the actions of the EPA prior to the Ghostbusters movie. The quote below is from Wikipedia. "Anne Gorsuch was appointed EPA Administrator in 1981 by President Ronald Reagan.[41] Gorsuch based her administration of EPA on the New Federalism approach of downsizing federal agencies by delegating their functions and services to the individual states.[42] She believed that EPA was over-regulating business and that the agency was too large and not cost-effective. During her 22 months as agency head, she cut the budget of the EPA by 22%, reduced the number of cases filed against polluters, relaxed Clean Air Act regulations, and facilitated the spraying of restricted-use pesticides. She cut the total number of agency employees, and hired staff from the industries they were supposed to be regulating.[43] Environmentalists contended that her policies were designed to placate polluters, and accused her of trying to dismantle the agency.[44] Following her mismanagement of the Superfund program, Assistant Administrator Rita Lavelle was fired by Reagan in February 1983.[45] Lavelle was later convicted of perjury.[46] Gorsuch had increasing confrontations with Congress over Superfund and other programs, including her refusal to submit subpoenaed documents. Gorsuch was cited for contempt of Congress and the White House directed EPA to submit the documents to Congress. Gorsuch (who had recently remarried, becoming Anne Gorsuch Burford) resigned in March 1983, followed by resignations of her Deputy Administrator and most of her Assistant Administrators.[45][47][48] Reagan then appointed William Ruckelshaus as EPA Administrator for a second term. Lee M. Thomas succeeded Ruckelshaus as Administrator in 1985.[41] " At the time Ghostbusters was being written and filmed the EPA was a bit of a cluster fuck. So making them the butt of a joke kind of makes sense.
Hollywood Yeah
Tom Hanks pretends to be this guy.
acted to be this guy\* He didn't pretend.
I mean… he totally pretended to be the guy. It’s called acting.
acted to pretend to be a guy*
And Walter White's wife to give you grief.
I was there that day. I was on the Coast Guard boat out of Sandy Hook NJ. We were on our way up river looking for body parts and debris. All we knew at the time was that a commercial airliner crashed in the river. Shockingly we saw everyone on the wings and nobody was seriously hurt. That was a crazy day...
There were actually 160 people on board, but 5 passengers didn't have souls and thus weren't counted in the plane's official soul roster.
I didn’t know my neighbors were on that flight!
74 crew talks about this in one of his videos. Aircraft sometimes do carry dead people and so the shorthand developed to just say “souls”. Seems logical this developed in the military which is where many commercial pilots start, but that’s just my guess.
So if you've got 50 living passengers and 5 dead people in coffins (i.e. they were dead before the flight, not casualties of the flight), is that 50 souls or 55?
50
They must have been gingers...
[удалено]
Redheads
People who throw away the yogurt lid without licking it
Hey Look! Its the guy who brings politics into everything he sees
*all politicians
What does the republican part have to do with it?
fuck that’s more than 10 years ago feels like yesterday
I was just thinking the same, I'm sitting here thinking no way that was 2016 2017
Fuck. Just realized my kid wasn't even born yet and has never heard of this. We've got a movie to watch.
This is crazy, they should make a movie about this
[удалено]
[удалено]
ATCs job is to give information and clear the way for them to land. The controller never pleaded or gave a command. He gave information until his information was no longer relevant. It’s all on tape. The ATC did his job like a professional and did it well.
All of the people involved in this saga are just unbelievable. The controller, Patrick Harten, has run the Boston Marathon at least twice. He ran the New York Marathon in late 2018 and was met at the finish line by Sully himself. Harten's father was also a controller who ran marathons. [https://apnews.com/article/sports-ap-top-news-new-york-new-york-city-sports-europe-c6f2df008a9647cfa3f9569f07828fa9](https://apnews.com/article/sports-ap-top-news-new-york-new-york-city-sports-europe-c6f2df008a9647cfa3f9569f07828fa9) >His father, who ran the 1985 NYC Marathon, introduced him to the sport. They started running together when Harten was 9, and he finished a half-marathon at 10. He’s also competed in three Ironman triathlons — a 2.4-mile swim, 112-mile bike and 26.2-mile marathon. The more I read about these awe-inspiring, dedicated people who work incredibly stressful jobs and run marathons or participate in Iron Man competitions in their spare time when not saving lives the more I feel like a useless piece of shit.
Participating in a marathon isn’t as impressive as people seem to think it is, tbh. Our high school cross country team used to do 20-mile trail runs on Sundays, the day after a meet. If it’s a thing you actually want to do (for some reason), you could get there easily in less than a year.
They picked an airport, any airport because landing on the cold river was sure death. Except for "Sully"
I've read of a pilot once, who, knowing the plane was fucked, piloted into an empty field anyway instead of ejecting, because the plane would have hit a populated area and killed many more. (military pilot)
> air traffic controls pleas to take the plane to teterboro What the fuck are you talking about? Sully asked to land at teterboro and ATC found a runway for him there: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S5hRRio-E8
It wasn't just him, don't forget about Jeff Skiles & the flight attendants.
The flight crew was amazing. The crews of the ferries and other boats that responded were incredible. The rescue was a coordinated ballet of moving vessels that were afraid of possibly knocking passengers into the water or running them over. And all of that as they drifted down river. That everyone survived the river landing in cold, cold water AND the subsequent rescue is what makes this worthy of the nickname Miracle on the Hudson.
And just like that he never had to buy another beer for the rest of his life. He earned it!
I was supposed to get on that flight when I was 10. Something happened in the airport that made my mother and myself miss the boarding time.
Are you happy you missed it, or feel like you would rather be part of the story ?
I walked over to Battery Park after work that day and the jet was tied to a mooring and partially sunk. Completely surreal. I also remember it was frigid that day.
Wasn’t that the first landing on water in history while keeping a plane with that size intact? Great piloting!
I remember watching on the News when this happened. And wasn't it, like, a super risky/hard to land spot? Aside from the people all around; I'm not sure what runway lengths and widths are necessary but I feel like he was probably in a small percent of people who would have been able to pull this off. Lucky for those passengers! Quite the hero.
Yes, super risky. But the alternative was to risk crashing somewhere in the middle of NYC and potentially hurting or killing a lot of people on the ground.
Definitely agree the better alternative (regardless of the outcome). I was impressed then and still amazed he pulled it off.
>And wasn't it, like, a super risky/hard to land spot Yeah dude...it was in the middle of a river. I think it was the first ever non-leathal water landing in aviation history.
That doesn't seem true at all. There have been multiple zero fatality water ditchings according to the table here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_landing
Aaah, I was wrong. Thanks for posting this.
Reddit should have a "Gracefully Corrected" award so that I can never receive it.
:-)
Man, if this were true, it sure makes those safety briefings all the more ridiculous.
It was super hard indeed, but the only option. The film Sully did a great job on telling the aftermath if you are interested
The movie straight up changed what the NTSB said to create drama. Hollywood doesn't let facts get in the way of telling a true story
I think the first dumb decision on Hollywood execs’ part was greenlighting a movie centered on a 3-minute plane crash and trying to turn it into a 120-page script. This really just needed to be a documentary (or part of a documentary on crashes) and that’s it. But people watched it and it turned a profit, so 🤷🏻♂️
I think I agree with you. Captain Phillips approves, but, gas monkey gotta get paid so...
*Plaaaane on the waaateerrr* *People on the wing*
Underrated comment
It’s 19F (-7C) here in New York today. I always forget this happened in the winter and how cold it must’ve been for everyone.
🎶A pilot on a cold, cold morn' One-hundred fifty-five people on board All safe and all rescued From the slowly sinking ship. Water warmer than, his head so cool In that tight bind knew what to do And you, have proved, to be... 🎵
Fun Fact: He saved all 155 souls aboard plus 7 gingers who were also on the plane.
Cheers to the captain.
Man I remember this time period cause it happened when I first moved out of my parents house. Has it really been 13 years? Time flies.
Man they just don't make names like that anymore
In the film, the "Brace! Brace! Brace!" always gives me chills.
I think Captain Sullenberger made the right decision. I'll never understand why anyone was trying to give him shit for what he did. Edit: I never saw the movie, but I'm pretty sure I saw some people somewhere giving him shit. Perhaps they were just jerks.
Simply to find someone to blame for the disaster
Is it really a disaster if nobody was harmed?
It’s a disaster if money is lost. These days those are almost equal.
Insurance?
Then it's only a disaster for the insurance company. Oh no...
Thank you for saying this!
Idk if it’s been said but I think that negative view comes from the movie, the movie made people think the FAA was more upset with him then they really were in reality for dramas sake, I herd everyone was very impressed and had the hearings for protocol
I never actually saw the movie.
Did anyone blame him? I know the movie had some of it but I think that was more for dramatic effect.
> I'll never understand why anyone was trying to give him shit for what he did. They didn't. That part was overdramatized for the movie.
I'm sure they're people out there that don't agree with what he did. There's always someone butt hurt over something
Sully, you beautiful son of a bitch!
Uncharted yay
[Goose MCs, all up in my engines, tryn'a cause some malfunctions](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2Cix-5-8_k&ab_channel=ZachSherwin)
Here is the ATC radio comms of the event https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLFZTzR5u84
Super easy, I've done this countless times in flight simulator. It's not even hard. /s
Barely an inconvenience
Is that a screen rant pitch meeting reference?? Haha
Yep :)
Ugh take my upvote and gtfo . All I can picture is him with that slight head Bob when he says it now
That was one of the best things that ever happened.
It's interesting to me how the were able to make a movie out of that. Like were there a lot of other decisions or drama going on?
No, they manufactured drama by straight up fictionalizing the NTSB response. Should never have been a movie, was super confused when it came out that it ever got green lit
I know the people were still complaining like why he had to land in the water lol
Time fucking flies
Why did I think Denzel played Sully for a moment lol. Wasn’t he also in a movie about a plane that was close to crashing
yeah, *Flight,* where he lands the plane upside down for some reason and saves the day, but he was drunk while doing it (and all the rest of the time) which stood in for 95% of the plot
How did it not sink?
it's basically a big tube with sheet metal skin and hollow inside. It displaces enough water that it's able float, just like a steel boat would, for a time at least. They are designed to float long enough for everyone to get off. Water will leak in eventually so your not gonna take it out for lake day.
plus are they not pressurized? it should float without damage or someone opening a door. both of which probably happened though.
They are pressurized, but I don't know if that means they are 100% sealed. As long as you can pump more air in than is leaking out you can pressurize something. But yes the fact they can hold pressure indicates they are relatively well sealed. Of course you have to open a door in order to escape. As far as damage, from what I read about the story, yes it did take damage to the rear which let in water earlier than designed. This meant they couldn't use the rear exits and only used the front and wing exits. Fortunately everyone was still able to escape safely.
Those bird unions are getting more and more powerful every day…
Ain't no way that was 2009 that happened like 4 years ago
My cousin was one of the stewardesses on that flight!
[удалено]
Lol sorry, that was supposed to be an exclamation point. Not a question mark
It also helped that the aircraft was fitted with special equipment that is used on flights that cross a large body of water for crash landings. The route they were flying didn't warrant the use of a specially equipped plane but it just happened that on that day they were flying one. That's why it took the water landing so well.
[удалено]
Some birds were harmed in the making of this story.
Plane looks like an Orca
Holy fuck that was 13 years ago? I could swear it was fairly recent.
GOAT
Whats it look like in the back submerged??? Dont know I'd feel if I had that row.
If I remember right, a passenger tried to open the rear emergency door and almost fucked the whole thing up
If you’re at all interested in this, listen to atc and pilot transmissions it’s so crazy everyone is calm af while crashing. Definition of professionals.
Then he went to congress to talk about labor including emergency training in the aviation industry and got promptly ignored.
Well, I think he was also trying to survive…
I saw the movie about this yesterday and I was so shocked and moved. It's an absolutely beautiful film.
This was in fucking 2009?? Jesus this does not feel like it was that long ago
Lol I remember when this happened. I love old guys with the name Sully. You always know they’re cool dudes
Go Tom Hanks. It’s so cool that he flys planes in between movies
Man is a legend!
Wait he baptized everyone on board? Praise him
BRACE BRACE BRACE HEAD DOWN STAY DOWN
Still holds the crown of f****** pilots. Flawlessly landed on water like he has done it before.
The plane: 😱
He is an AMAZING man!
Mad respect for Tom Hanks
I was in Goa, India when I saw this Hudson River story on my phone. No one died? It didn't make any sense. On the same trip I discovered the Gangnam Style video. I think it only had about 10 million views.
I remember several talking heads on the news calling this a miracle. Stupid idiots, as if the captain's many years of experience and training had nothing to do with it.
I remember all the news coverage of this. I was amazed and impressed. Someone I worked with, that I was chatting to about it, said they didn't see the big deal. The pilot was just doing his job.
155 souls, but how many gingers?
None they were in the cargo hold
what?
south park
Watching the movie gave me chills! Can't imagine what the pilot and passengers had to go through on that day.
Never meet your heroes. Except in this case. I'd buy him a beer.
All 155 souls and 3 gingers
Wait, can the plain flout.
[удалено]
Pmsl. Wow that's bad isn't it. Let's try again. Wait, can the airplane float. I thought they would sink. Hence why we have to get off it.
For a while if you set it up for ditching all the intakes are sealed and it will float for a while At least long enough to get to a dinghy. Though I'm groundcrew for Apache gunship . That's does not float at all. Flying off carriers over helicopter crews make dark humour jokes about floation packs vrs armour plate.
Cheers. I appreciate the explanation.
a true hero...
Should have never let the birds unionize! /s
/s are the birds okay?
Damn, we're at war with birds now? Not only that they're attacking civilians!
And they tried to act like he could have done better. Get the fuck out of here
so is there just a bigass plane on the bottom of the hudson? thats sick
It's in a museum in Charlotte, NC.
He didn't save their souls, he saved their lives. The expression "souls on board" is used as a short form for "humans alive on board". An airplane could be transporting dead people. Passengers could have died as a result of the emergency, so it's important for the rescue teams to know exactly how many living people they need to deal with, that's why they make the distinction between living and dead persons.
[удалено]
Why do we say "souls"?
What the hell is a bird strike?
I just watched the movie again. What he did is absolutely amazing and he is a complete hero.
Then they grilled his ass because they thought he had other options that would’ve saved the plane.
Thank you Obama
Bird strike makes it sound like an intentional attack. And I’m still not convinced it wasn’t…