If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
See and Avoid - Birds
The thing that is perhaps most interesting to me about the A320 Hudson
incident is the report that the first officer, who was pilot flying, saw the canada geese and "made note of it". Why didn't he take immediate evasive action? It will be very interesting to see the CVR transcript. I wonder how much training is given in the airlines related to avoiding bird strikes. Not the recovery from a bird strike induced engine loss, but avoiding the bird strike in the first place. I have spent hundreds of hours in level C and level D sims but don't remember seeing a canada goose in the visuals or an instructor selectable bird strike scenario. Are there any? Andy |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
See and Avoid - Birds
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 08:08:37 -0800, Andy wrote:
The thing that is perhaps most interesting to me about the A320 Hudson incident is the report that the first officer, who was pilot flying, saw the canada geese and "made note of it". Why didn't he take immediate evasive action? It will be very interesting to see the CVR transcript. I wonder how much training is given in the airlines related to avoiding bird strikes. Not the recovery from a bird strike induced engine loss, but avoiding the bird strike in the first place. I have spent hundreds of hours in level C and level D sims but don't remember seeing a canada goose in the visuals or an instructor selectable bird strike scenario. Are there any? Andy X-Plane (FAA-approved) is able to simulate bird strikes. And I think you can't see most birds when they're approaching. I remember "shooting" a carrier pigeon, crossing from left to right. Plane was ~100km/h, no chance to react. Bigger birds and faster planes won't make any difference, do they? And: If you notice the birds, do you know how they react? John |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
See and Avoid - Birds
Considerations for all back seat drivers, arm chair quarterbacks, sim
"pilots", and Microsoft Flight aces: 1. Departure procedures from most all major airports are essentially flown under Instrument Flight Rules. That means the pilot flying both controls and navigates the aircraft using the cockpit instrumentation. This requires quite a bit of heads down concentration looking inside at the instrument panel. The pilot not flying is the one who is clearing the flight path. This is especially true during an instrument approach. 2. Departure climbout airspeed is to accelerate to 250 knots. But even an atypical climb restricted to 200 knots means the jet is travelling twice the velocity at which most us glider pilots start sucking the seat cushion up our behinds--and causes the world to go by twice as fast and accordingly adverse situations develop twice as quickly. 3. The human eye discerns relative motion. Birds in flight (and gliders for that matter) aren't easily noticed until the motion is made noticable by relative proximity. Who knows when, exactly, the copilot saw the geese, but my guess it was likely too late to do anything about it. But even if, 4. A 170,000# jet at 200-ish knots, at that point in the climb with slats and flaps retracted, manuvers like an overengorged PIG. You see something and make a flight control input you might as well count 1- mississippi, 2-mississippi... 5. Frightened birds tend to dive. Assuming the flock was initially above and ahead of the airliner, a manuver to pull up would act to ascerbate the possibility that birds would be ingested by the engines. Lateral manuvers only work if you see the impending conflict far enough out, and a push over manuver with an airplane full of passengers is counterintuitive. 6. The copilot is a 23-year USAir "veteran" in his own right. Assuming he flys, comercially, the industry average 800 hours per year (NTE 1000 hour), and taking into account the 2000 flight hours USAir was requiring to be hired as a pilot 23 years ago, he presumably has over 20,000 hour flight time under his belt. And (also industry standard) one can assume half that time is as the sole manipulator of controls flying every other leg. His not being a "captain" in his own right by now is due to his airline shrinking in size and lack of pilot retirements, not due to inexperience. 7. The two pilots, through combined skill and coordinated effort, took a dire situation resulting simply from the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time and, in the terms of potential for loss of lives, accomplished something statistically miraculous. 8. If all the second-guessing is any indication, the sad fact is they'll likely be sued regardless of the heroic outcome. So how 'bout let's give this line of suspicious inquiry a rest and get back to the forum's normal programing excitement (like how best to sand off gelcote/how fast would a glider fly final on Mars/flaps vs. spoilers)! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
See and Avoid - Birds
On Jan 19, 1:51*pm, wrote:
Considerations for all back seat drivers, arm chair quarterbacks, sim "pilots", and Microsoft Flight aces: The reason for the post was not to cast doubt on the competence of this, or any other, US Airways crew but to start a discussion of pilot's reactions to nearby birds, particularly very large ones. That is directly related to the purpose of this discussion forum. A second interest was the training given to airline crews in bird strike avoidance and that perhaps should be explored elsewhere. Andy |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
See and Avoid - Birds
O.K. Andy, here goes:
Flying a glider--Go where the birds are. Not flying a glider--Go where the birds aren't. What the airlines teach their pilots about birdstrikes-- Priceless! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
See and Avoid - Birds
On Jan 19, 2:03*pm, Andy wrote:
On Jan 19, 1:51*pm, wrote: Considerations for all back seat drivers, arm chair quarterbacks, sim "pilots", and Microsoft Flight aces: The reason for the post was not to cast doubt on the competence of this, or any other, US Airways crew but to start a discussion of pilot's reactions to nearby birds, particularly very large ones. That is directly related to the purpose of this discussion forum. *A second interest was the training given to airline crews in bird strike avoidance and that perhaps should be explored elsewhere. Andy I've heard the FAA is considering some kind of action against the pilot (Sully) For landing in the Hudson. He does not hold a multi engine turbine seaplane rating. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
See and Avoid - Birds
Sorry--a little late am I to this discussion, so I suppose it's
been sorted out by now to everyone's satisfaction. But I'll add this anyway: Flt 1549 unique? Yes. But as far as "miraculous" goes, I see no evidence of Divine intervention. I would agree that a better prepared Captain, and a finer spokesman, than Sullenberger would be rare indeed. Bird strikes I've had were mostly a matter of recognition either in real time or after the fact, and not something that could be avoided. The target is too small and the speeds too great. And with a ship full of people we don't start jinking on suspicion. Bird strikes have been deadly in small, fast, very maneuverable aircraft as well, so it's also not just a question of maneuverability. I enjoy flying _with_ the birds in a sailplane, where the speeds can be nearly matched, and I have a close up view of the real masters of the sky at work. When I am at work, bird strikes are as much a roll of the dice as almost anything else that can happen. And the original poster's Q., "Why didn't he take immediate evasive action?" is priceless indeed. Anytime I can snap in 4 or 5 g's, I'll happily do it. Flying an airliner ain't one of those times. Jack |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
See and Avoid - Birds
Jack wrote:
Sorry--a little late am I to this discussion, so I suppose it's been sorted out by now to everyone's satisfaction. But I'll add this anyway: Flt 1549 unique? Yes. But as far as "miraculous" goes, I see no evidence of Divine intervention. I would agree that a better prepared Captain, and a finer spokesman, than Sullenberger would be rare indeed. Bird strikes I've had were mostly a matter of recognition either in real time or after the fact, and not something that could be avoided. The target is too small and the speeds too great. And with a ship full of people we don't start jinking on suspicion. Bird strikes have been deadly in small, fast, very maneuverable aircraft as well, so it's also not just a question of maneuverability. I enjoy flying _with_ the birds in a sailplane, where the speeds can be nearly matched, and I have a close up view of the real masters of the sky at work. When I am at work, bird strikes are as much a roll of the dice as almost anything else that can happen. And the original poster's Q., "Why didn't he take immediate evasive action?" is priceless indeed. Anytime I can snap in 4 or 5 g's, I'll happily do it. Flying an airliner ain't one of those times. Jack I have a question...IF this youtube animation of the flightpath is correct, it shows a couple of turns that appear to have been made away from the airport of departure. I also noticed there is a runway at 90 degrees to the departure runway at the departure end. Here's a "what if"...couldn't he have made a 270 degree left turn (from the initial departure heading) and landed on that cross runway? In the video, it looks like he might have been able do it. I have no idea what the wind direction/velocity was that day, so my theory might have made for a downwind landing, but it would have been on dry land...regardless, he DID do a good job of putting the ship down and everyone walked away, and as they say, "Any landing you walk away from is a good one. A great one is when you can still use the airplane!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZPvVwvX_Nc Scott |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
See and Avoid - Birds
*In the video, it looks like he might have been able do it. *
The key word in your post was 'might'. He also 'migh't have made it to Teterboro, which too was rejected. The Hudson was the only sure bet. At least if that plan went south it was only 155 people instead of an entire neigborhood or urban block's worth as well... -Paul |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
See and Avoid - Birds
On Mar 11, 11:33*am, sisu1a wrote:
*In the video, it looks like he might have been able do it. * The key word in your post was 'might'. * He also 'migh't have made it to Teterboro, which too was rejected. * *The Hudson was the only sure bet. At least if that plan went south it was only 155 people instead of an entire *neigborhood or urban block's worth as well... -Paul AFAIK, there is no procedure for a double engine failure - Sully was writing the book as he went. The man deserves enormous credit for pulling it off. I did hear that one simulation showed that IF he had turned for Teterboro exactly at the time of the bird strike, he MIGHT have made it with a very thin margin. For it to work, the option would have had to have been pre-planned. All things considered, the Hudson was the best option. For glider pilots, the take home lesson is that we all need well considered options in mind for every takeoff. The probability of a PTT is infinitely greater than a double engine failure. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
C-182's to avoid? | Alan Browne | Owning | 27 | November 17th 07 08:58 PM |
See & Avoid | Ol Shy & Bashful | Piloting | 27 | August 2nd 07 01:27 PM |
See and avoid... | Ramy | Soaring | 22 | January 30th 07 09:18 PM |
See and Avoid Failure | Steve Leonard | Soaring | 3 | October 28th 05 01:54 AM |
See and avoid | Kees Mies | Piloting | 39 | March 22nd 04 08:31 PM |