71 Trans Am wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:24 am
This is a pointless argument - If you read the report on the hudson ditched aircraft you would see that the aircraft still had power and was able to both climb and turn before total failure and the river was the intended soft landing . And yes any pilot will fly the aircraft until the last minute - What else can he do ?
And with regard to back up pumps - These are called accumulators Charged on one side with nitrogen and on the other with oil and they do work and have enough charge to deploy landing gear which is their primary function when problems arise - But as i said earlier you can call it Flying, Gliding anything you like but you are still coming down quicker than planned.
Sully's aircraft ditched due to the fact it had a complete loss of thrust. Fact! Do you really think any professional pilot would ditch if they had enough thrust to make an on airport landing? 8 different sets of crew ran this exact scenario in the simulator, all expecting the failure at some point obviously - a luxury the crew in question didn't. Do you know how many made a runway?
Back up pumps - no, these are not accumulators, a totally different thing. Accumulators are in addition to back up pumps. Accumulators are most commonly found in aircraft braking systems (amongst others, some aircraft do have them in the landing gear circuits) not the primary flight control systems. Hydraulic EMP's are a backup for the engine driven pumps, which obviously will not work in the event of a total loss of thrust. They generally restore hydraulic services in the event of a main system failure, albeit sometimes at a slower rate than the engine driven pumps do.
But as i said earlier you can call it Flying, Gliding anything you like but you are still coming down quicker than planned.
Pilot's plan for many scenario's. A double engine failure is not at all common, but it is practiced in the simulator. Plan for the worst, hope for the best.
From the NTSB report:
Simulation flights were run to determine whether the accident flight could have landed
successfully at LGA or TEB following the bird strike. The simulations demonstrated that, to
accomplish a successful flight to either airport,
the airplane would have to have been turned
toward the airport immediately after the bird strike. The immediate turn did not reflect or account
for real-world considerations, such as the time
delay required to recognize the extent of the
engine thrust loss and decide
on a course of action. The one simulator flight that took into
account real-world considerations
(a return to LGA runway 13
was attempted after a 35-second
delay) was not successful. Therefore, the NTSB concludes that the captain’s
decision to ditch on
the Hudson River rather than attempting to land at an airport provided
the highest probability that the accident would be survivable
