dunk

Whilst we're in PPRUNE/airliners.net mode, IIRC the service was scheduled on to SEA after CLT. Would it have been fuelled for the entire trip ?

(Seems like a long way in an A320 ... )

bernardd

IIRC JetBlue flies A320's from coast to coast so it's not unusual. Also AA uses 737-800's. I'm sure there are others.

Isn't there an expression about costing fuel to carry fuel? I would assume it was only fuelled for LGA-CLT plus diversions.

frankvb

It would not necessarily have been the same aircraft perhaps. I've seen this at least with international 'direct' flights with a stopover. Long-haul plane for the TATL sector, short-haul plane for the internal connection. Never flown one of these completely intra-US connecting flights with the same flight number though.

bernardd

Almost all oil products are lighter than water so even full tanks would have provided bouyancy - one way to look at it is even supertankers are basically very thin skins to hold the oil together so it will move as one piece - they aren't so much carrying it as surrounding it.

I'm not sure it matters how the place lands - it's attitude in the water will quickly settle based on the center of gravity versus the centre of the displacement due to shape (heck, there's a term for that but it's been years since I thought about it). My guess is however it's more likely the rear of the structure was damaged, possibly from the first impact, and some sections were quickly flooded - I would have guessed the plane would have floated fairly level if simply lowered into the water because the C-o-G is reasonably close to the middle of the fuselage.

Edited to add:

I understand the power plants have been shorn off and are at the bottom of the river. That would move the C-o-G back which could well account for its nose up, tail down attidute.

TravellerFrequently

Good points, well made.

Sort of puts a certain airline's current TV advert into perspective........

Re the US Airways flight deck and crew: well done and thank goodness there were no casualties.

sunrisegirl

I have to admit in this situation I would also prefer a more mature FA with many years of flying experience than a younger FA who's fairly new to the role.

I appreciate it may not be PC to say this and that all crew are trained to handle just such a situation, but I guess being on the "more mature" side myself it's just the way I feel.

Yakitori

As well as having more flying experience, having more exposure to 'things in life' could potentially prepare them better for a rather interesting event.


When I had my first emergency in my early days, although I felt calm and quite OK about handling the situation myself, I was thankful that I was with someone with a lot of experience (although he had never had a similar occurrence before, his experience in general counted a lot). Experience is something you just cannot buy or gain quickly, and I really value that.

YVR Cockroach

It's a mix. Very often for N. American flights, the same flight number does carry on through the hub but a/c may be changed last minute for operational reasons.

YVR Cockroach

320s can do CLT-west coast easy. Even US used to fly CLT-SEA with 733s. I've flown PIT/PHL-SEA several times on US 319s and 321s (mercifully up front).

YVR Cockroach

B6's 320s are short-legged for some reason. If you look at the B6 forum, you'll find several complaints of their westbound west coast flights (from JFK and possibly BOS) very often having to make tech stops to refuel when headwinds are strong.

AS flies MIA-SEA (and v-v) nonstop which, at 2,724 miles, I believe is the longest non-stop flight in the "lower 48" states using a 737 (CLT-SEA is only 2,279 miles).

bernardd

Yes, B6 seem marginal when they get strong headwinds, and also ex-BUR though I think that's a runway length problem. I haven't heard how Virgin America are getting on? Also weren't there BA liveried A320's flying to SSH at one point? That must be a similar distance?

MIKESILV

Some of us should stick to discussing topics we actually know something about.
So by that logic Sulpuric acid tankers should sink because the acid is denser than water?

Now I would like to hear your explanation why ships made of steel float and a pin made of the same material sinks.

mike

bernardd

We weren't talking about sulphuric acid - the subject was the specific gravity of oil products. Let me give you a clue - go look up the specific gravity of crude relative to ice. Moving a ULCC is like moving an iceberg, but the majic thing is both float on their own without the need to displace additional water. Now back to the topic - the fuel tanks of an aircraft will also float whether full of Jet-A or empty which is the statement I believe I made.

dcmike

BBC World is showing video of a passenger in the hospital wearing a pilot's shirt. He says that he was freezing after being pulled from the water and one of the pilots literally gave him the shirt off his back to help him keep warm.

I just find this whole story amazing. It's just great.

MIKESILV

Nonsense...some 'heavy' crudes do not float and you seem to have compounded the your misunderstanding by confusing displacement with 'floating' however the entire premise of your argument has no real scientific basis.
Want to prove it?
Go fill a beer can with petrol and see if it floats.

mike