Skip to comments.
Passengers report scare on earlier US Airways Flight 1549
CNN ^
| 01/19/09
| Abbie Boudreau and Scott Zamost
Posted on 01/20/2009 4:40:14 AM PST by DFG
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
1
posted on
01/20/2009 4:40:15 AM PST
by
DFG
To: DFG
The moral of this story: DON’T fly US Airways flight 1549 out of LaGuardia
2
posted on
01/20/2009 4:42:12 AM PST
by
clee1
(We use 43 muscles to frown, 17 to smile, and 2 to pull a trigger. I'm lazy and I'm tired of smiling.)
To: DFG
"it sounded like the wing was just snapping off." It was... it was a chickadee wing breaking off. Two days later it was a goose wing breaking off...
3
posted on
01/20/2009 4:59:37 AM PST
by
theDentist
(Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll)
To: DFG
4
posted on
01/20/2009 5:03:18 AM PST
by
WakeUpAndVote
(I is a dis in french fried voter.)
To: DFG
the hero will become the goat ... it’s the template, you see
5
posted on
01/20/2009 5:03:53 AM PST
by
NonValueAdded
(Confidential to MSM: "Better Red than Read" is a failed business model.)
To: DFG
I think maintenance records revealed the aircraft had compressor stalls just days before the flight. Compressor stalls would give similar symptoms as a massive bird strike. Wonder how the previous stalls were troubleshot and what was the fix? Maybe USAIR has some ‘splainin to do?
No matter what caused the failure - Pilot and crew is to be commended!!!
6
posted on
01/20/2009 5:17:03 AM PST
by
appleseed
To: DFG
about 20 minutes into the flightDam. Must have been some high flying geese.
7
posted on
01/20/2009 5:21:18 AM PST
by
McGruff
To: NonValueAdded
the hero will become the goat ... its the template, you see Yeah. If this "Sully" guy was such a great pilot, why didn't he just dodge the geese in the first place? Huh?
</sarc>
8
posted on
01/20/2009 5:46:47 AM PST
by
Yo-Yo
To: clee1
The moral of this story: DONT fly US Airways flight 1549 out of LaGuardia
Or if you do make sure the plane is an American made one
9
posted on
01/20/2009 6:06:09 AM PST
by
chainsaw
To: chainsaw
Final Destination IV
To: clee1
DONT fly US Airways flight 1549 out of LaGuardiaWhy not? You'll have a different plane, anyway...
11
posted on
01/20/2009 6:44:27 AM PST
by
Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
To: McGruff
Must have been some high flying geese.
Canada geese fly at altitudes up to 9000 feet. Other species fly at up to 30,000 feet.
12
posted on
01/20/2009 6:47:25 AM PST
by
Atlas Sneezed
(Guns don't kill people. Criminals and the governments that create them kill people.)
To: clee1
The moral of this story: DONT fly US Airways flight 1549 out of LaGuardia If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going???
13
posted on
01/20/2009 6:47:44 AM PST
by
T-Bird45
(It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
To: appleseed
I think maintenance records revealed the aircraft had compressor stalls just days before the flight. Compressor stalls would give similar symptoms as a massive bird strike. Wonder how the previous stalls were troubleshot and what was the fix? Maybe USAIR has some splainin to do? Doesn't it seem unlikely that it would happen to both engines at once? I'm still thinking it was a flock of birds.
14
posted on
01/20/2009 6:48:34 AM PST
by
Ramius
(Personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)
To: Ramius
I'm still thinking it was a flock of birds. "
It was reported that the pilot(s) reflexively ducked when the geese came by. I don't think they would have ducked for a mere compressor stall. Still, the engines are where the questions need to be directed. Why couldn't they be restarted?
15
posted on
01/20/2009 8:27:22 AM PST
by
Paladin2
(No, pundits strongly believe that the proper solution is more dilution.)
To: Paladin2
Heh. I guess I’d duck too.
I expect that the engines were too badly damaged to restart, though it’s also possible that there simply wasn’t time or altitude enough to do that sort of procedure.
16
posted on
01/20/2009 8:41:15 AM PST
by
Ramius
(Personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)
To: T-Bird45
If it ain't Boeing, I ain't goingThat was my mantra, but my last few Airbus flights did seem a bit more comfortable than the comparable Boeing planes, I'm unhappy to report. Now I have to give each fair consideration, FWIW.
17
posted on
01/20/2009 8:43:38 AM PST
by
Teacher317
(wo xue zhong wen)
To: Paladin2
18
posted on
01/20/2009 9:04:32 AM PST
by
mfccinsd
To: mfccinsd
LOL. Tastes like chicken.
19
posted on
01/20/2009 1:03:29 PM PST
by
Paladin2
(No, pundits strongly believe that the proper solution is more dilution.)
To: Teacher317
Airbus seems to use larger fuselage diameters. Seems to be all good, but the use of plastic is always bad. Fly by wire has many potential issues.
20
posted on
01/20/2009 1:05:40 PM PST
by
Paladin2
(No, pundits strongly believe that the proper solution is more dilution.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson