Sully the film

Sterling Archer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjKEXxO2KNE

Thought i'd give it it's own thread, it's slightly aviation related

jimbis

I had wondered how they could turn an event that lasted a few minutes into an entire movie but it actually looks good.
Kind of a real life version of densel Washington in Flight, but with less drink, drugs and inversions

Skyknight

jimbis wrote: »

I had wondered how they could turn an event that lasted a few minutes into an entire movie but it actually looks good.

Money and the possibility of a lot of waving flags...Its directed by Mr. C.Eastwood :rolleyes:

maximum12

First time I've heard they landed it back in La Guardia in the simulator.

Tenger

maximum12 wrote: »

First time I've heard they landed it back in La Guardia in the simulator.

Hadnt been aware of that myself. Might be just movie hyberbole?

AFAIK accident investgation teams try to recreate incidents in a simulator to study the actions of the crew and assess if/how the inflight procedures should/could be improved/amended.

EG. The crew on this flight did not close the pressurisation valves which allowed the aircraft to fill with water. The reason being it was nearly the last item on their checklist. I believe that new A320 SOP has moved this action up since then.

goingnowhere

The sim scenario
1. You know exactly what is about to happen
2. Execute an immediate turn back to La Guardia

If you follow the training and procedures in the time it takes you to evaluate the situation have lost the time window to get back

Sully did override the check list by getting the APU on almost as first step taken, that kept the FBW and systems fully working

To be fair the huge hole in the back of the A320 let the water in, as did someone who cracked open a door at the rear. The plane stayed afloat all the same

Irish Steve

Doing an exercise in the sim and for real are indeed 2 very different scenarios, in the sim, there's always the knowledge that if it goes wrong, the only thing damaged is your pride, but there is a very valid case to be made for allowing people to explore the envelope in the sim, so that they know what the real thing is capable of if the unthinkable happens, the modern SOP mantra has resulted in a large number of people who don't ever get to explore or understand what the real limits of the aircraft performance are, and while you don't want to be going there under normal circumstances, knowing how to do so safely has in some cases been the difference between success and failure in dealing with extreme emergencies.

A very long time ago, we had an exercise that we did in the sim that was a bit of fun, but it developed the ability to handle the aircraft a long way outside of the SOP envelope. On one occasion, we ended up taking a 747-400 back in to Kai Tak (I did say it was a long time ago) with a CAVOK straight in approach over Stone Cutters Hill, using a descent rate of close on 6000 Fr per minute, throttles at idle all the way to the runway. It all worked for us, but I don't know that I'd be happy doing it for real!

maximum12

Re the sim and real life being very different, there's some evidence that can work in the pilot's favour in real life. The United DC-10 Sioux city crash landing was re-run multiple times in the simulator and none of the pilots made it as far as the airfield.

Irish Steve

maximum12 wrote: »

Re the sim and real life being very different, there's some evidence that can work in the pilot's favour in real life. The United DC-10 Sioux city crash landing was re-run multiple times in the simulator and none of the pilots made it as far as the airfield.

The pilot that almost did get it down had the advantage that he'd spent time in the sim doing research on that sort of issue and how to handle it, outside of the normal rostered sim sessions that were required, and there are other examples (Gimli glider Air Canada 767) where experience outside of commercial aviation made the difference between success and failure.

The opportunity to investigate the handling in the sim is not there in the same way any more, partly due to bean counter pressures, and partly due to higher utilisation, and partly due to increased pressure to do everything in accordance with "Standard operating procedures". I'm not convinced that it's a good development.

I didn't mention earlier that 3 line trained crews trying the scenario I mentioned broke the aircraft in the air, and the main reason was that they had no raw data flying skills or experience, they were so accustomed to flying the magenta line on the screen, when they had to fly by the seat of their pants and effectively make it up as they went along, those skills were just not there to be able to do it. It was very thought provoking.

Shannon757

Out December 2nd.

jamo2oo9

Shannon757 wrote: »

Out December 2nd.

It's already out?

Shannon757

jamo2oo9 wrote: »

It's already out?

Not according to the trailer I saw last night.

billie1b

Seen it already, not too bad

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

lord lucan

The NTSB aren't happy with how they were portrayed in the movie,and probably with good cause. I can only assume that it was the filmmakers way of making an angle on what was an exceptional event were almost everything went right. It's pretty harsh on the NTSB imo.

Good movie though and they seemed to have paid a lot of attention to getting the detail right in terms of aviation with no glaring mistakes that I could see.

NTSB response to the film here:http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-07/crash-investigators-pan-their-portrayal-as-villains-in-sully

bkehoe

jamo2oo9 wrote: »

It's already out?

Unusually these days it was released in the US over 2 months ago.

Bsal

Tom Hanks is on Graham Norton next Friday to talk about the film.

Bazzy

Just out of curiosity more than anything how did they recover the plane?

Did they strip it down and take it back by road ?

Or put it on a barge like our friend in Sligo

Shannon757

Bazzy wrote: »

Just out of curiosity more than anything how did they recover the plane?

Did they strip it down and take it back by road ?

Or put it on a barge like our friend in Sligo

I saw the fuselage of it on a trailer. I think it's in a museum.

airportlackie

Really good movie but didn't focus enough on the baggage handlers

Foggy43

airportlackie wrote: »

Really good movie but didn't focus enough on the baggage handlers

What about the Geese? Get a good lawyer and there might be something in it for them. Maybe the geese should be issued with TCAS. So there!

Pat Dunne

Now who could you get to star in a movie to extol the dynamamic world of the Baggage Handler and a snappy title to go with it

Staring Jack Nicholson, in "YOU CAN HANDLE THE BAGGAGE"
Michael Caine in "A BAG TO FAR"
Arnie Schwarzenegger in "CONAN THE BAGGAGE HANDLER"
Daniel Day-Lewis in "LAST OF THE BAGGAGE HANDLERS"

OK, now getting one's hat and coat

PukkaStukka

^^^

Obviously Pat wants to get a bit of baggage of his chest..:D

Stovepipe

Tom Hanks in "Bag", all about a boy who wanted to be a baggage handler, when he grew up.

Tenger

Bazzy wrote: »

Just out of curiosity more than anything how did they recover the plane?

Did they strip it down and take it back by road ?

Aircraft stayed afloat and came to rest downriver against a bridge before sinking.
It was tied up there before they got a crane to lift it onto a lowloader. The wings were removed to allow for road transport.

Pics of the fuselage show the battering the lower fuselage received on impact with the river.


Re the baggage handlers, the think we may have missed the sarcasm. Im assuming the script had to work hard to make the film of sufficient length.

EchoIndia

Shannon757 wrote: »

I saw the fuselage of it on a trailer. I think it's in a museum.

Yes, it's in a museum close to Charlotte International Airport. I visited it between flights few years ago.

N106US A320-214 "Miracle on the Hudson" aircraft by Irish251, on Flickr

N106US A320-214 "Miracle on the Hudson" aircraft by Irish251, on Flickr

N106US A320-214 "Miracle on the Hudson" aircraft by Irish251, on Flickr

N106US A320-214 "Miracle on the Hudson" aircraft by Irish251, on Flickr

Bazzy

Tenger wrote: »

Aircraft stayed afloat and came to rest downriver against a bridge before sinking.
It was tied up there before they got a crane to lift it onto a lowloader. The wings were removed to allow for road transport.

Pics of the fuselage show the battering the lower fuselage received on impact with the river.


Re the baggage handlers, the think we may have missed the sarcasm. Im assuming the script had to work hard to make the film of sufficient length.

I often wondered about it , she must have got a right wallop, thanks for your snippet of info

Bazzy

EchoIndia wrote: »

Yes, it's in a museum close to Charlotte International Airport. I visited it between flights few years ago.

N106US A320-214 "Miracle on the Hudson" aircraft by Irish251, on Flickr

N106US A320-214 "Miracle on the Hudson" aircraft by Irish251, on Flickr

N106US A320-214 "Miracle on the Hudson" aircraft by Irish251, on Flickr

N106US A320-214 "Miracle on the Hudson" aircraft by Irish251, on Flickr

She got a right wallop

Amazing pictures

PukkaStukka

I saw the movie last night on an android box.

As movies go, I'd give it 6 /10. Aerosexual will love it because there's plenty to get ones teeth into. For the average Joe, there's very little in it in terms of edge of the seat action.

I won't say any more as I don't want to spoil it for anyone planning to see it. But enjoy nonetheless....

duskyjoe

I couldn't be bothered seeing it. Why? Same ole stuff IMO just like Dezel Washington movie but this time it's for real. What happened Capt Sully on that fatefully day was one of unforgettable airmanship landing a A320 in the Hudson. How no one was killed or injured with underslung engines amazes me. Sully deserved all the awards and more. My problem is Sully has now gone on to be a celeb/movie personality which I'm uncomfortable with. I think many of us who are seasoned professionals in the same scenario would have grimaced at the celeb bright lights aura and lure. Just my 2c