Out of power, altitude and options, Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger and copilot Jeffrey Skiles ditched the aircraft in the Hudson River near midtown Manhattan. There were 155 souls on board. There were injuries but no loss of life, and the term “Miracle on the Hudson” was coined since it was viewed as one of the most successful ditchings ever performed.

What Is Ditching?

According to the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM), ditching is defined as “a controlled emergency landing of an aircraft on water.” If the aircraft isn’t equipped with floats, it’s usually a one-time-only event, and unlike power-off landings to full stop on a runway, it is not something you can practice. But you can prepare mentally by studying what to do in the unlikely event of a water landing.

Any time you fly over water, you should be thinking about it, especially when the aircraft is beyond gliding distance of the shoreline.

Always Consider It When Flying Over Water

“Do you know how to swim?”

A pilot of the J-3 Cub asked me this the first time I took off from Runway 17 at the Tacoma Narrows Airport (KTIW) in Washington. The airport sits on a peninsula that leads onto the Puget Sound. If you have seen the 1983 movie War Games, the scene with the ferryboat and the island was shot just south of KTIW.

The pilot asked the question after I wondered out loud where we’d land if we had an engine issue. I assured him I could swim as in my teens I trained to be a lifeguard and was thrown out of boats in the middle of a lake fully clothed, with no life vest to test my skills. Until that flight all my training had been over land.

Most of my information about ditching comes from interviewing colleagues who have done it.

• READ MORE: For Those Aviators Attracted to Water

In July 2022, John La Porta, a CFI in the Seattle area experienced an uncommanded loss of engine power while flying a Cessna 150 over the water west of Seattle. La Porta was alone in the aircraft at the time. According to La Porta, the aircraft was at less than 2,000 feet when he noticed a loss of oil pressure. He was attempting to reach King County International Airport-Boeing Field (KBFI), but when the engine lost power, he knew he wouldn’t make it. He didn’t want to take a chance on flying over the hilly terrain, homes, and streets, so he set up to put the aircraft in the water next to Alki Beach.

Things happened quickly, he recalled. He tightened the lap belt and cinched the shoulder harness as tightly as he could. He did not lower the flaps to 40 degrees per the ditching instructions in the POH, but that may have been a blessing as the flaps would have possibly blocked his egress from the aircraft, which flipped over. He was upside down but couldn’t tell in the submerged aircraft.

Although the shoulder harness probably saved his life since it kept him from slamming into the panel, it also pinned him inside the airplane.

“I could not get the belts to release until the airplane’s tail settled into the water. I had one hand on the window, and I was able to sort of stretch up and take a breath of air, and then I found the lap belt and was able to get it undone. I held on to the window as I released the shoulder harness, and then I swam out of the window,” La Porta told FLYING, adding that, if he had someone else in the airplane, he’s not sure if they both would have survived because of the seat belt jamming.

After that experience, La Porta became a big believer in carrying a seatbelt cutter on his person.

Training for the Worst

When it’s more than just you in the airplane, ditching reaches a whole new level, said Amy Laboda, an ATP/CFI and FLYING contributor.

On June 14, 2001, Laboda was in her Cessna 210 with her two daughters, ages 9 and 10, their 15-year-old babysitter, and an adult family friend heading for the Cayman Islands. Shortly after takeoff from Key West International Airport (KEYW) in Florida, as the aircraft passed through 1,500 feet, there was a loud bang and a loss of engine power.

• READ MORE: Stearman Pilot Found Guilty of False Statements in Water Crash

“It was the kind of sound that makes you push the nose over and start turning back,” said Laboda, adding that she drew upon her experience as a glider pilot to get the most distance out of the altitude available but quickly realized she wasn’t going to be able to make it back to land.

She declared an emergency and was cleared to any runway but had to respond, “Unable.”

“The last thing I heard from ATC was ‘services on the way,’” she said.

The aircraft came in like a bobsled, and the windscreen popped out. “It was like getting hit in the face with a fire hose,” said Laboda, noting they were lucky because the water was flat, warm, and smooth.

Laboda boasts years of experience teaching the ditching seminars for the FAA FAASTeam, and from an early age she taught her kids how to quickly put on the overwater safety gear.

“When they were little, we made a game of it,” she explained, adding that part of the preflight briefing is what to do if they had to put it down in the water.

Everyone did what they had been told to do and survived with just cuts and bruises. “There were several boats in the area, and we were in the water for less than 10 minutes,” she said.

Train to Ditch

If you have the opportunity to take a water survival course for aviators, do so. If not, chapter 6 of the AIM provides illustrations and textual descriptions of how to ditch an aircraft. There are a great many variables that result in a successful ditching.

The condition of the landing area is key. Is the aircraft coming down in rough seas or a calm lake? Does the pilot have the skill to come in at the slowest possible airspeed? Was there time to prepare?
The AIM advises stowing or jettisoning loose objects from the cockpit so they don’t become projectiles. Tighten seat belts and unlatch doors because if the aircraft frame is bent, they might jam. If you have time, jam a shoe in the door crack to prop it open.

The National Search and Rescue Manual along with the emergency section of most POHs advise pilots to attempt to bring the aircraft in at a slightly tail-low attitude—slower, the better.

Once the airplane comes to a complete stop, keep your seat belt on and reach for the door. When you have found the door and opened it, release the seat belt. It is important to stay belted until you have grasped the door handle because it helps with orientation. It’s dark underwater, and if the airplane is upside down, you won’t know it. Use the seat belt cutter if you have to—but still hang on to the door.

Once you are free of the belt, pull yourself clear of the aircraft and activate the life vest if you are wearing one. If you are underwater, blow one bubble and follow it to the surface.

Unlacing your shoes so you can kick them off easily is also a good idea because of all the articles of clothing you are likely wearing they are the heaviest and will drag you down.

This feature first appeared in the July/August Issue 949 of the FLYING print edition.

The post The One-Time Water Landing appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

As an airline pilot, I was anxious to watch Sully. Finally, I could attend an aviation movie without my wife having to bear witness to eye-rolling and corrective commentary.

Most likely, as a Flying reader, you have already seen the film; if you haven’t, consider this a spoiler alert. Regardless, I thought it would be more interesting to provide insight into the realities of US Airways Flight 1549 than to offer a critique. I was afforded the opportunity for this insight via a conversation with Flight 1549 copilot Jeffrey Skiles. In addition, I felt it important to consider the movie’s potential effect on my profession and the flying public.

Overall, I was pleased that Sully was a mostly accurate portrayal of our business. It’s difficult to create a cinematic dud when you combine the talents of Clint Eastwood and Tom Hanks, and the film could not have been cast better. It was a welcome relief that even the flight attendants acted with realism, abandoning the stereotypical, phony coffee-tea-or-me demeanor of most airplane movies.

The depictions of pilot banter and checklist completion were superior; I never had to cringe. It was a pleasure to see a mostly sterile cockpit during the takeoff sequence. The fact that Hanks and Aaron Eckhart, as Capt. Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger and Skiles, managed to capture the essence of realistic reactions to the emergency was a testament to a director who listens. I am certain that my colleagues felt the same.

But eventually, Hollywood departed the fix toward poetic license. As frustrating as it may be, that’s the producer’s prerogative. In this case, the rights to Sullenberger’s life story had already been sold back in 2010. That being said, Sully did make contributions to the script.

First on the list of discrepancies is the compressed timeline of events after the ditching. Most of us are well aware that accident investigations aren’t completed in four days inclusive of a hearing. The process for US Airways Flight 1549 took 16 months before the final report was produced. Beyond the media firestorm, this was a textbook National Transportation Safety Board investigation. All of the appropriate protocol was followed.

Despite the movie drama, the simulator profiles of the flight weren’t completed until months after the accident, and certainly not live during the hearing. Sully and Skiles didn’t have an opportunity to hear the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) until six months into the investigation. Interestingly enough, as may have been apparent in the transcripts from the taxiing at LaGuardia, the copilot’s mic was not directly recording transmissions through the CVR, a malfunction discovered later. Skiles’ voice was recorded only through the cockpit-area microphone.

The aspect of the movie I found disturbing was the demonization of the NTSB. OK, I get that the villain versus hero theme sells, but for this circumstance it seemed wholly unnecessary. For any accident, the NTSB’s chartered purpose is to find probable cause such that a similar event never reoccurs. In reality, it treated Sully and Skiles with “kid gloves” — a direct quote from Skiles. After all, they had been proclaimed heroes by the world.

The only real demons originated from the trauma the two pilots faced after their ordeal. Remember, the event was officially classified as an accident. Regardless of a positive outcome, an accident is not a box any airline pilot wants to check off during the course of his or her career.

And after their ultimate decision, Sully and Skiles critiqued themselves. Although self-critique is a habit of a true professional, it carries the side effect of self-doubt. That self-doubt can manifest in sleep disruption, nightmares, personality changes and more.

Having been trained in critical incident stress management and having been involved with a major accident and other incidents as a peer-support volunteer, I am well aware of the effects of post-traumatic stress disorder. Those effects were a reality for the entire crew of Flight 1549. The fact that Sully and Skiles were able to demonstrate such poise while being inundated with media appearance requests is a testament to their fortitude.

One of the other less realistic aspects of the movie was the presentation of a relatively quiet cockpit after the bird strike. The cockpit was actually anything but. The electronic centralized aircraft monitor (ECAM) was displaying so many warning messages that they were being prioritized in order of severity. In addition, aural warnings included a potential conflict with traffic that automatically announced through the TCAS, “Traffic, traffic,” and then, “Clear of conflict.” This was followed by the predictive wind shear command “Go around, wind shear ahead,” followed by numerous enhanced ground proximity warning system alerts: “Too low. Terrain,” then “Too low. Gear,” and finally “Terrain. Terrain. Pull up.”

And as if the automatic distractions weren’t enough, the ECAM does not display an electronic checklist for a dual engine failure. The emergency was considered an “ECAM exception,” which requires the use of a print checklist. After Sully took control of the airplane, Skiles was tasked with reading the challenge-and-response items of the quick reference handbook. Amid the controlled chaos, both Sully and Skiles had to perform the actions required.

Lastly, although the movie depicts only Sully wading through the frigid water to the back of the airplane in search of remaining passengers, in reality both pilots were involved. Their goal was to procure life jackets for the people standing on the wings. Sully and Skiles performed this final task by handing out the life jackets to a pair of volunteers standing by the over-wing exits.

I asked Skiles whether the adrenaline rush allowed him to feel the temperature of the water. He said: “Are you kidding? It was so cold it hurt. That’s why we climbed on the armrests.” I can only imagine.

Beyond the deviations from the actual story, I applaud Warner Bros., Clint Eastwood and Chesley Sullenberger for one of the best portrayals to date of a modern-day airline pilot. It is gratifying to have our profession put on a pedestal by colleagues who did a superior job under extraordinary circumstances.

Although many of my fellow pilots may not have received the recognition of a Hudson River landing, they certainly have performed in superior fashion under other extraordinary circumstances.

The post An Airline Pilot Evaluates ‘Sully’ appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

“We’re going to be in the Hudson.” It was Capt. Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger announcing they were going to dead stick US Airways Flight 1549 into the Hudson River. It is a story most of us are familiar with. After the loss of both engines in their A320, Capt. Sullenberger and First Officer Jeff Skiles first intended to return to La Guardia and then decided they couldn’t make it. Next, they were offered Teterboro Airport, and Sully said, “We can’t do it.”

Ultimately, they pulled off the “Miracle on the Hudson” — ditching with no fatalities and no major injuries. They skillfully missed bridges and steered toward operating boats on the icy water to maximize the chance of rescue. They didn’t have time to make precise calculations. They didn’t have the guidance of a localizer or glideslope. Their primary resource was the view out the windscreen.

Why were Sullenberger and Skiles able to do this? They knew how to fly by TLAR — “that looks about right.” They were both flight instructors, and Sullenberger was a longtime glider pilot.

In contrast, Asiana Flight 214, with both engines running, was unable to successfully complete a visual approach to Runway 28L at San Francisco International when the ILS was out of service. The Boeing 777 struck the seawall short of the runway. Three passengers died and 187 were injured. The pilots weren’t accustomed to making approaches without an ILS.

TLAR (pronounced “T-LAR”) is a skill that every pilot should possess for several reasons. One is that, like the pilots of US Airways 1549 and Asiana 214, sometimes you just won’t have all the resources you are accustomed to. If you have TLAR skills, you can safely get by without those resources.

Of course, developing TLAR skills is part of every pilot’s primary training. That’s why we practice engine-out emergencies. But it might be a good idea to take your TLAR development a step further for operations around airports, which are where most accidents happen.

You might pay special attention to what 1,000 feet agl looks like out the window. You can use the runway length to gauge what a mile on final looks like. The standard 3-degree glidepath is 300 feet per nautical mile, so you might focus on what 300 feet agl looks like when on a 1-mile final.

Another thing to focus on is what the pitch attitude of the airplane looks like when at the proper approach speed and configuration. Likewise, you want to pay attention to what the engine power setting on final approach should sound like. Plus, you want to be able to keep the airplane yawed into the relative wind by being aware of side forces instead of having to always rely on the slip-skid indicator.

Your TLAR in-the-pattern graduation test would be to fly the airplane completely around the pattern with the altimeter, airspeed indicator and maybe more instruments covered up. (It would be a really good idea to have an instructor with fully developed TLAR skills with you.)

Another reason for developing TLAR skills is they allow you to take action quickly without having to first make precise calculations or change the flight plan in your GPS. In all of life, timeliness is often better than perfection. It is especially true in flying. Striving for perfection can sometimes lead to paralysis and inaction, and distract you from situational awareness.

Sometimes we only have the time or resources for a roughly good job. If you have to make a diversion for weather, the first thing to do is turn to an approximate heading for your new course. If you know your groundspeed in miles per minute, a quick look at a chart can give you a good idea of how long it will take you to reach your new destination. Using quick estimates will keep you from continuing toward the bad weather while you figure out the details of your new route and enter it in your GPS receiver.

Sometimes the need to have everything planned out in detail deters a pilot from taking timely action when he or she needs to. There was a pilot who had spent months planning a trip from the Midwest to the West Coast. He talked to other pilots about exactly what route and altitude he should fly on each leg. He created a flight log with every leg planned out in magnificent detail.

On the leg crossing the Rockies, he ran into icing conditions but continued with his planned route, even though a simple diversion would have gotten him out of the icing. He and his wife died in the crash.

His friends told investigators they thought he had spent so much time and energy planning the legs in detail that he wasn’t able to adjust mentally and divert when circumstances required it. Although detailed planning is a wonderful thing, having additional TLAR skills gives a pilot the confidence to quickly create and execute an alternative plan when needed.

There is a misconception that pilots have to be perfect and precise all the time. Of course, there are times when precision is critical, such as when flying an approach procedure in IMC. But, as we have seen, there are times when being willing to be approximate can be less risky than shooting for absolute precision.

Sometimes implied precision can provide a pilot with insufficient margins. On the knowledge test, the FAA used to ask for precise answers requiring interpolation on airplane performance charts. This falsely implied pilots could rely on those precise numbers in their own flying. The reality is the numbers were generated in ideal conditions and may be unachievable in everyday flying. It’s far better for pilots to pick the more conservative conditions rather than interpolating.

There is a concern that modern aviation technology is luring pilots away from maintaining TLAR skills. The digital precision of GPS is indeed fetching. But it takes time to program the avionics, and a failure leaves a pilot who has no TLAR skills without alternatives. Maintaining TLAR skills is important. Pilots who lack them are like painters who can only paint by number. They may look like good artists, but without the numbers they are helpless.

The post Why Learning to Fly by TLAR Is Important appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

They didn’t call the successful landing of a U.S. Airways Airbus in the icy waters of the Hudson River a miracle for no reason. The Airbus makes a really lousy seaplane. But that afternoon in January 2009, Capt. Chesley (Sully) Sullenberger and his first officer Jeff Skiles called upon their decades of cockpit experience just minutes after takeoff from New York’s LaGuardia airport, to synthesize a river landing because they saw no other option after both engines quit at 3,000 feet. The pilots were successful in plunking the roughly 160-ton airliner down in the water with barely a ripple to the aluminum skin, and only five of the 155 people on board suffered serious injuries.

Now the Miracle on the Hudson will come to the big screen when director Clint Eastwood’s Sully premieres in early September, with actor Tom Hanks as the Texas-born Sully and Aaron Eckhart playing Jeff Skiles. But rather than simply recreating the event for a movie audience, Eastwood looks closely at some of the issues that surrounded both the investigation and the years since, like Sully’s choice not to turn back to LaGuardia, believing the “bus” would run out of altitude long before reaching LGA.

Sully later told reporters a decent night’s sleep evaded him for weeks after the crash too, with the first few being the worst as he found himself plagued with the “what ifs,” second-guessing himself and his decisions that day. Replaying the accident later in a simulator, some pilots were able to maneuver the aircraft back to LaGuardia, but of course, they were prepared for the event long before both engines flamed out. Sully and Skiles’ entire flight that day lasted just 208 seconds from throttles up to touchdown in the water. Sullenberger retired from U.S. Airways (now part of American Airlines) in March 2010.

Watch the trailer below.

The post Sully Sullenberger Movie Premieres Soon appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

This time around the US Airways jetliner, which has been housed in a New Jersey warehouse since it was pulled from the river in January 2009, is taking to the roads as part of a large, slow-moving caravan.

Strapped to a specially designed trailer, the 120-foot fuselage of the Airbus is traveling south along the East Coast, drawing crowds and scores of attention as it heads toward the Carolinas Aviation Museum, which purchased the airplane earlier this year.

Escorted by more than 30 trucks, the fuselage of Flight 1549 is at times moving no faster than 10 miles per hour, allowing viewers to catch a solid glimpse of the airplane as it makes its way to North Carolina. The airplane left New Jersey this weekend and is not expected to arrive in Charlotte until Friday. Viewers can track the airplane’s progress on Twitter at @CarolinAirMusem.

The airplane will be on permanent exhibit at the Carolinas Aviation Museum after it is reassembled, a process that a museum spokesperson said will likely take months.

Sully and other crew members will be on hand Saturday at the museum for a sold-out event commemorating the famous flight. Sully became a household name after the event dubbed the “Miracle on the Hudson,” in which he safely landed the A320 carrying 155 people after losing power in both engines. He has since retired from the airlines and is now working as an aviation safety analyst.

Check out a video reconstruction of Flight 1549’s crash landing by Exosphere3D below.

The post Hudson Airbus Journeys to Charlotte appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The post Famous Name in Aviation Literature Addresses Hudson Ditching appeared first on FLYING Magazine.