What's the temperature in the area at the moment? I've been in cold water before and it feels like you're dying. I can't imagine in full clothing, swimming for your life.
If everyone's alive that's a wonderful lucky stroke though.
I would assume most of them will get a jolt of adrenaline and that should boost their heart rate and keep them warm enough as long as they make it out of the water soon enough. As long as everyone makes it out of the water within an hour or two they should be alright, allthough Im sure some will require hospitalization if they get stuck soaking wet.
I'm used to hearing about snowmobilers (not snow machines, you fucking Alaskan inbreds) falling through the frozen lakes in Minnesota.
The water temp is probably 40-50 degrees. 50 percent chance of surviving 50 minutes with a life jacket on.
But like others have said, looking at the pictures everybody is in the life rafts.
What's the temperature in the area at the moment? I've been in cold water before and it feels like you're dying. I can't imagine in full clothing, swimming for your life.
If everyone's alive that's a wonderful lucky stroke though.
I would assume most of them will get a jolt of adrenaline and that should boost their heart rate and keep them warm enough as long as they make it out of the water soon enough. As long as everyone makes it out of the water within an hour or two they should be alright, allthough Im sure some will require hospitalization if they get stuck soaking wet.
I'm used to hearing about snowmobilers (not snow machines, you fucking Alaskan inbreds) falling through the frozen lakes in Minnesota.
The water temp is probably 40-50 degrees. 50 percent chance of surviving 50 minutes with a life jacket on.
But like others have said, looking at the pictures everybody is in the life rafts.
I was also assuming that people wouldnt immediately be soaked, that it would probably take awhile for water to fill up and for everyone to instantly be wet. It all depends on how fast water went into the plane, how fast people got out, and whether or not they had to sit and soak, or were able to get aboard ferrys or rafts.
BrotherVoodoo on
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
edited January 2009
Random bystander on CNN they interviewed was saying that the pilot was trying to gain altitude even to the last minute, and according to him, if the pilot hadn't pulled the plane up like he did it might have crashed much harder than it did.
Name the last water landing where people survived in a plane this size. (And not the one from Lovefield in DFW from a few years back because they just ran off the runway.)
To my knowledge this is this is the first successful water landing of a plane that size.
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
Name the last water landing where people survived in a plane this size. (And not the one from Lovefield in DFW from a few years back because they just ran off the runway.)
To my knowledge this is this is the first successful water landing of a plane that size.
...
No. Well, I guess it depends on how you define "successful". Actually, no, it doesn't. Because this isn't the first water landing to have a 100% survival rate. There were two before this.
In 2002, a Boeing 737 crashed off the coast of Java. One fatality.
In 1996, a 767 was crashed 500 metres from the shore of Ethiopia. 52/175 survived.
In 1970, a DC-9 ditched off the coast of Saint Maarten. 40/63 survived.
And there are others!
Apparently, every water landing of a passenger plane has had survivors! The worst survival rate was the one I mentioned in 1996!
Name the last water landing where people survived in a plane this size. (And not the one from Lovefield in DFW from a few years back because they just ran off the runway.)
To my knowledge this is this is the first successful water landing of a plane that size.
water landings are bad news. You almost always die in the plane crash if it is in the water. If you are on a ground landing at least you can run away from the plane before it explodes and you die of the fire or of smoke inhalation.
JebusUD on
and I wonder about my neighbors even though I don't have them
but they're listening to every word I say
Name the last water landing where people survived in a plane this size. (And not the one from Lovefield in DFW from a few years back because they just ran off the runway.)
To my knowledge this is this is the first successful water landing of a plane that size.
...
No. Well, I guess it depends on how you define "successful". Actually, no, it doesn't. Because this isn't the first water landing to have a 100% survival rate. There were two before this.
In 2002, a Boeing 737 crashed off the coast of Java. One fatality.
In 1996, a 767 was crashed 500 metres from the shore of Ethiopia. 52/175 survived.
In 1970, a DC-9 ditched off the coast of Saint Maarten. 40/63 survived.
And there are others!
Apparently, every water landing of a passenger plane has had survivors! The worst survival rate was the one I mentioned in 1996!
Well there was that one flight that left New York that got blown up, that was kind of a crappy water landing.
Preacher on
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
In 2002, a Boeing 737 crashed off the coast of Java. One fatality.
Photographs taken shortly after evacuation show that the plane came to rest in knee-deep water.
Ya fucking amazing they landed in knee deep water. :P
The 767 landing in 1996 is the closest thing to what I was talking about. That one could have been better if the pilots weren't wrestling with hijackers on landing.
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
0
Options
Gabriel_Pitt(effective against Russian warships)Registered Userregular
Name the last water landing where people survived in a plane this size. (And not the one from Lovefield in DFW from a few years back because they just ran off the runway.)
To my knowledge this is this is the first successful water landing of a plane that size.
water landings are bad news. You almost always die in the plane crash if it is in the water. If you are on a ground landing at least you can run away from the plane before it explodes and you die of the fire or of smoke inhalation.
...
Seriously, wtf. It's water, not acid. Planes are full of floaty things for just this purpose.
The plane made a controlled emergency landing. All the control surfaces were intact, it didn't suddenly plunge from 30,000, and there was no breach of the cabin. Everyone surviving is of course great, but it's not a 1 in a 1,000,000 miracle.
In 2002, a Boeing 737 crashed off the coast of Java. One fatality.
Photographs taken shortly after evacuation show that the plane came to rest in knee-deep water.
Ya fucking amazing they landed in knee deep water. :P
The 767 landing in 1996 is the closest thing to what I was talking about. That one could have been better if the pilots weren't wrestling with hijackers on landing.
Here's a picture - this is what usually happens in a "water landing," you're right afaik.
Planes are designed to be landed on landing gear on a flat surface. When you ditch in water there is a good chance a wing will catch and flip the whole plane over.
If I were landing in water I guess what I would try to do is get the plane as low and slow as I could and then put it down tail first and try to keep the nose up as long as I could. I hope there's a video somewhere of them landing this thing.
Name the last water landing where people survived in a plane this size. (And not the one from Lovefield in DFW from a few years back because they just ran off the runway.)
To my knowledge this is this is the first successful water landing of a plane that size.
water landings are bad news. You almost always die in the plane crash if it is in the water. If you are on a ground landing at least you can run away from the plane before it explodes and you die of the fire or of smoke inhalation.
...
Seriously, wtf. It's water, not acid. Planes are full of floaty things for just this purpose.
The plane made a controlled emergency landing. All the control surfaces were intact, it didn't suddenly plunge from 30,000, and there was no breach of the cabin. Everyone surviving is of course great, but it's not a 1 in a 1,000,000 miracle.
Leave it to D&D to argue about how amazing or not amazing people surviving a plane crash is.
People are better off when they keep things in perspective.
Im going to have to clarify. Controlled water landings go well. Water crashes are worse.
JebusUD on
and I wonder about my neighbors even though I don't have them
but they're listening to every word I say
0
Options
Gabriel_Pitt(effective against Russian warships)Registered Userregular
edited January 2009
I believe it was also out of fuel, with panicking hijackers in the cockpit.
Yes, water crashes suck, but I think it's kind of a toss up whether it's worse to impact with ground or water at high speeds. Either way it's going to suck.
I believe it was also out of fuel, with panicking hijackers in the cockpit.
Yes, water crashes suck, but I think it's kind of a toss up whether it's worse to impact with ground or water at high speeds. Either way it's going to suck.
eh, I heard on the history channel, I think, that it is better to crash on ground.
JebusUD on
and I wonder about my neighbors even though I don't have them
but they're listening to every word I say
In 2002, a Boeing 737 crashed off the coast of Java. One fatality.
Photographs taken shortly after evacuation show that the plane came to rest in knee-deep water.
Ya fucking amazing they landed in knee deep water. :P
The 767 landing in 1996 is the closest thing to what I was talking about. That one could have been better if the pilots weren't wrestling with hijackers on landing.
Here's a picture - this is what usually happens in a "water landing," you're right afaik.
Planes are designed to be landed on landing gear on a flat surface. When you ditch in water there is a good chance a wing will catch and flip the whole plane over.
If I were landing in water I guess what I would try to do is get the plane as low and slow as I could and then put it down tail first and try to keep the nose up as long as I could. I hope there's a video somewhere of them landing this thing.
I don't know what a normal water landing looks like, but that shot of images is of a plane water landing while the pilots are fighting hijackers in the cockpit and the control flaps aren't working.
I believe it was also out of fuel, with panicking hijackers in the cockpit.
Yes, water crashes suck, but I think it's kind of a toss up whether it's worse to impact with ground or water at high speeds. Either way it's going to suck.
eh, I heard on the history channel, I think, that it is better to crash on ground.
Depends what the ground looks like and how far from land you are in the water. And the temperature of the water. And sharks.
As a pilot, let me tell you guys how incredible this probably will turn out to be: pretty fucking.
Protip: the Hudson in that area isn't particularly shallow - it's where a lot of the deep sea-going vessels sail through.
Anyway, here's my guess. They had partial power in at least one engine, managed to trim out the rudder nicely to compensate for engine loss, and did really spectacular work in setting up an appropriate flight pattern as if the Hudson was just a nice big ol' regular runway. I'd put some money on the theory that at least one of the pilots had some glider/sailplane experience, too.
All in all, that's a really nice piece of controlled water landing, there.
As a pilot, let me tell you guys how incredible this probably will turn out to be: pretty fucking.
Protip: the Hudson in that area isn't particularly shallow - it's where a lot of the deep sea-going vessels sail through.
Anyway, here's my guess. They had partial power in at least one engine, managed to trim out the rudder nicely to compensate for engine loss, and did really spectacular work in setting up an appropriate flight pattern as if the Hudson was just a nice big ol' regular runway. I'd put some money on the theory that at least one of the pilots had some glider/sailplane experience, too.
All in all, that's a really nice piece of controlled water landing, there.
I hear a lot of commercial pilots come out of the Navy. That's a reassuring thought, commercial pilots don't often have to land on a moving target in zero visibility.
ViolentChemistry on
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
edited January 2009
Apparently Bush is going to be referencing this plane crash in his address the the nation tonight.
As a pilot, let me tell you guys how incredible this probably will turn out to be: pretty fucking.
Protip: the Hudson in that area isn't particularly shallow - it's where a lot of the deep sea-going vessels sail through.
Anyway, here's my guess. They had partial power in at least one engine, managed to trim out the rudder nicely to compensate for engine loss, and did really spectacular work in setting up an appropriate flight pattern as if the Hudson was just a nice big ol' regular runway. I'd put some money on the theory that at least one of the pilots had some glider/sailplane experience, too.
All in all, that's a really nice piece of controlled water landing, there.
I hear a lot of commercial pilots come out of the Navy. That's a reassuring thought, commercial pilots don't often have to land on a moving target in zero visibility.
CNN just reported the senior pilot served over two decades in the USAF.
Can someone who has done some aerospace engineering explain why they don't put heavy metal mesh over the front of the engines? Reduces airflow?
Already addressed to some extent, but I'll chip in that any such mesh (particularly if it was heavy enough to actually stop a bird) would probably pose an unacceptable FOD danger. Basically your odds of avoiding a crash because a bird was going to take out your engines would probably be offset mostly or entirely by the odds that the mesh would somehow fail and wind up putting metal through the engine. No real point.
Posts
It's a conspiracy I tell you!
The water temp is probably 40-50 degrees. 50 percent chance of surviving 50 minutes with a life jacket on.
But like others have said, looking at the pictures everybody is in the life rafts.
I was also assuming that people wouldnt immediately be soaked, that it would probably take awhile for water to fill up and for everyone to instantly be wet. It all depends on how fast water went into the plane, how fast people got out, and whether or not they had to sit and soak, or were able to get aboard ferrys or rafts.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
The entire flight crew deserve all kinds of medals. Just keep finding more until we've loaded them down like 5 star generals.
so so alone
Name the last water landing where people survived in a plane this size. (And not the one from Lovefield in DFW from a few years back because they just ran off the runway.)
To my knowledge this is this is the first successful water landing of a plane that size.
uhhh
a plane landing in a river and no casualties?
planes have had gentler crashes and killed just about everyone on board
Also a plane with no functioning engines is pretty much the opposite of controlled. The flight crew are heroes, end of story.
but they're listening to every word I say
...
No. Well, I guess it depends on how you define "successful". Actually, no, it doesn't. Because this isn't the first water landing to have a 100% survival rate. There were two before this.
In 2002, a Boeing 737 crashed off the coast of Java. One fatality.
In 1996, a 767 was crashed 500 metres from the shore of Ethiopia. 52/175 survived.
In 1970, a DC-9 ditched off the coast of Saint Maarten. 40/63 survived.
And there are others!
Apparently, every water landing of a passenger plane has had survivors! The worst survival rate was the one I mentioned in 1996!
water landings are bad news. You almost always die in the plane crash if it is in the water. If you are on a ground landing at least you can run away from the plane before it explodes and you die of the fire or of smoke inhalation.
but they're listening to every word I say
Well there was that one flight that left New York that got blown up, that was kind of a crappy water landing.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Ya fucking amazing they landed in knee deep water. :P
The 767 landing in 1996 is the closest thing to what I was talking about. That one could have been better if the pilots weren't wrestling with hijackers on landing.
...
Seriously, wtf. It's water, not acid. Planes are full of floaty things for just this purpose.
The plane made a controlled emergency landing. All the control surfaces were intact, it didn't suddenly plunge from 30,000, and there was no breach of the cabin. Everyone surviving is of course great, but it's not a 1 in a 1,000,000 miracle. People are better off when they keep things in perspective.
...No shit.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
Here's a picture - this is what usually happens in a "water landing," you're right afaik.
Planes are designed to be landed on landing gear on a flat surface. When you ditch in water there is a good chance a wing will catch and flip the whole plane over.
If I were landing in water I guess what I would try to do is get the plane as low and slow as I could and then put it down tail first and try to keep the nose up as long as I could. I hope there's a video somewhere of them landing this thing.
Im going to have to clarify. Controlled water landings go well. Water crashes are worse.
but they're listening to every word I say
Yes, water crashes suck, but I think it's kind of a toss up whether it's worse to impact with ground or water at high speeds. Either way it's going to suck.
eh, I heard on the history channel, I think, that it is better to crash on ground.
but they're listening to every word I say
I don't know what a normal water landing looks like, but that shot of images is of a plane water landing while the pilots are fighting hijackers in the cockpit and the control flaps aren't working.
Another thing that president Cheney err Bush can take credit for.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Depends what the ground looks like and how far from land you are in the water. And the temperature of the water. And sharks.
Protip: the Hudson in that area isn't particularly shallow - it's where a lot of the deep sea-going vessels sail through.
Anyway, here's my guess. They had partial power in at least one engine, managed to trim out the rudder nicely to compensate for engine loss, and did really spectacular work in setting up an appropriate flight pattern as if the Hudson was just a nice big ol' regular runway. I'd put some money on the theory that at least one of the pilots had some glider/sailplane experience, too.
All in all, that's a really nice piece of controlled water landing, there.
I hear a lot of commercial pilots come out of the Navy. That's a reassuring thought, commercial pilots don't often have to land on a moving target in zero visibility.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
CNN just reported the senior pilot served over two decades in the USAF.
Really? In what way was he involved in anything that happened? Or is he seriously going to declare War On Migratory Birds?
He's going to reference the fact that a plane went down with 0 casualties.
Not base a speech around it.
XBL
The windchill here is fucking -30F, you pansies.
I didn't think he was going to base a speech around it, just try to use it as an example of how we don't know how good we had it, as it were.
Boo. *throws a tomato*
Bloomberg and the Governor of New York are holding a press conference right now, midway through.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
Already addressed to some extent, but I'll chip in that any such mesh (particularly if it was heavy enough to actually stop a bird) would probably pose an unacceptable FOD danger. Basically your odds of avoiding a crash because a bird was going to take out your engines would probably be offset mostly or entirely by the odds that the mesh would somehow fail and wind up putting metal through the engine. No real point.
I made that joke earlier gooey, you are so far behind!
pleasepaypreacher.net