Passengers who land the plane
A recent YouTube distraction of mine has been to watch videos about situations in which airplane passengers in small private planes were faced with the frightening necessity of landing the aircraft when the pilot of the planes suddenly died.
Pretty amazing. In both cases, the passengers (and pilots) were elderly; the passengers had some familiarity with flying (mostly observing it as passengers sitting next to the pilot), but they either never had a lesson or had had just a few lessons many years ago. These folks are made of very sturdy stuff.
First we have the story of a 77-year-old Brit named John Wiley, whose friend had taken him up in a Cessna for an excursion:
Next (and this is just an audio) there is Helen Collins, an 80-year-old woman whose husband died while piloting a Cessna in which they both were riding:
And here’s a bit of video of Helen Collins’ landing:
Don’t try this at home.
It is interesting what people can do under stress. As suggested, in many instances it was the spouse of the pilot who had many hours in the air, if not at the controls.
Back in the day, I had the opportunity to take family members into a simulator that I used. Now, a simulator is harder to fly than an airplane–at least most pilots think so; and this was not a light plane. But, in every instance there was a crash, despite superb instruction. And invariably the crasher was disappointed. For some reason many people expect to be able to fly an airplane without training or experience.
Just saw the movie Sully; and have been discussing it with an old (younger) friend who is a recently retired US Airways A320 Captain. He said that the detail in the movie is very accurate; e.g. uniforms, cockpit detail, etc. He also said that many of the supporting characters; e.g., the simulator pilots, the ferry boat crews, the police swimmers (maybe even the Flight Attendants) were US Airways employees or
the actual people. Apparently Clint Eastwood chose to use real people in many roles.
There was one error in the cockpit scene that I found humorous, but my friend shrugged it off. I challenged him to spot it and he claimed that he did, but did not think it significant enough to mention.
Oddly, a rather big deal was made in the movie about Sully starting the Auxillary Power Unit (APU) before it was called for in the check list. Although it is not procedural, my friend tells me that action is emphasized in the simulator, and is common practice. It certainly makes sense.
Off subject, but may be of interest to people who will see, or have seen, the movie.
Oldflyer:
I figured we might hear from you in this thread!
I saw the movie “Sully.” I thought it pretty good—it’s an inherently wonderful and dramatic story, and apparently the parts about the flight were very very accurate.
However, when it got to the hearings, it rang a false note to me. In particular I didn’t think the board would be so stupid as to omit the 35 seconds. I was so troubled by this that when I got home I looked it up. Sure enough, that part was fictionalized. They actually had run simulations with and without the time lag. And the hearings were not as contentious as portrayed.
Well, movies gotta be movies, don’t they?
The AOPA and many other organizations offer a “pinch hitter” course for spouses of pilots.
I actually went through all that this morning. I passed my Biennial Flight Review in a Piper Arrow II. Afterwords, I walked away and the plane was still flyable (big grin)
Neo, they had to compress the hearing of course; more than most people might realize. An investigation like this would last a year or more.
According to my sources they ran about twelve simulations–before they had a successful one. That obviously negates any validi comparison. I don’t know, but surmise that Sully was aware of that. My understanding is that the hearing was certainly not as contentious as portrayed. And I understand that the board made a statement to that effect after the movie. On the other hand, without question, there is pressure when these things happen to find the pilot at fault –it really simplifies things. It is even simpler if he is dead. Airbus had a notorious example early on when one of their own senior pilots flew into the trees on a demo flight. They tried very hard to pin it on him, because otherwise it revealed a flaw in the control laws programmed into the plane. It got very nasty.
The story is that the company intended to fire Sully out of hand immediately without an investigation, but reconsidered when they realized that he was a public hero. (The pilot – company relationship has allegedly been toxic for a long time.)
My friend says that there are still idiot pilots who fault Sully’s decision. Fortunately, they are few in number.
The NTSB is the gold standard for accident investigation. Still, there is at least the perception that they became somewhat politicized along the way. I don’t know if that is accurate.
I was surprised at the degree of the emotional effect on Sully as portrayed in the movie. I assume that was accurate.
I met the man who was the “extra” in the cockpit of the United DC-10 that crash-landed at Sioux City, Iowa in 1989. He was the one who actually manipulated the engines to effect some control because there were no normal flight controls. I also corresponded by letter with the Captain. They had heavy loss of life; but, many survived because of the skill with which that awful situation has handled.. Their own survival was nothing short of miraculous. I did not sense the same level of angst; but, time had passed and perhaps they had learned to conceal or sublimate it.
Oldflyer:
No, that part was not correct either. They exaggerated the emotional effect for the sake of the movie. In reality, he did have a couple of nightmares the first couple of weeks. He was not tormented, didn’t second-guess himself, none of that sort of thing.
There is an excellent documentary at YouTube on that Iowa flight, and it features interviews with the man you describe, Dennis Fitch. Amazing story, amazing guy. His interview was particularly powerful. The documentary is here. Highly recommended.
Unfortunately, Fitch died in 2012 of a brain tumor.
In reality, he did have a couple of nightmares the first couple of weeks. He was not tormented, didn’t second-guess himself, none of that sort of thing.
Without guilt for failing to fulfill duties or letting people die, or dishonoring memories and such, PTSD rarely happens. People still got post adrenaline effects, such as nightmares or immediate recall. Adrenaline, for survival reasons, also etches memory deeper. So that humans can recall it later for survival benefits, in all its glorious detail. That amplifies positive emotions but also negative ones.
Now if a person successfully lands and then couldn’t do anything to deal with another problem, then they might start feeling guilty and the stress could transfer over. But it would have to be a pretty unique context.
While I haven’t been up in the air flying things, I’m a tad intimately familiar with adrenaline injection levels from life or death situations or just merely from pain or stress challenges. The effect on memory is quite pronounced, until you get to a certain endorphine, adrenaline, hormone mix, heartbeat rate, and then the memories might black out, along with all emotion and auditory brain processes. My theory is that the brain just shuts down all non essential parts, in order to better utilize oxygen in the brain on what matters for survival. Visual cortex and mid brain upper spinal cord motor controls.
The thing about doctors saying the motor control is in the conscious parts of the brain, is slightly erroneous. That is the “safety switch”, that a person has to think about. For complex motor controls, like flying, a person cannot turn that off or else they won’t survive. For muscle memory or spinal reflexes or things like walking or running, conscious control is unnecessary and often slow. The spine can process and command the body, far faster than the conscious mind can micromanage with overriding commands. When a person touches something too hot or cold, the spine and the upper part of the spine in the brain, pulls the hand back. When the conscious parts of the brain recognize this, they can send a feedback command to stop and to reverse it, if they really need their hands in the fire to do something.
From testimonies of other people, though, their personal subjective experiences are sometimes very different from mine. For everybody, I suppose, they experience their change physically and mentally a little bit differently. For me it is more or less a natural progress. I don’t have recollections where I spend 10 minutes talking, while doing an action while under adrenaline that took 10 seconds. I do sometimes lose memory of parts, blackout almost, but physically I know I’m still moving. It’s just there is no memory recording or recall during a certain slice of time. I suppose it’s like what drunk people experience later on, if their memory fails due to blood toxicity levels. Except too high an adrenaline can get the same result, for a better purpose.
For complex motor controls, to survive, the brain can consciously override the instinct to start running from danger, but it takes a certain amount of willpower. It will probably get rid of things like emotions, once a person starts doing what it takes to survive. That in itself isn’t usually what is traumatic or emotionally impactful. Because emotions have a purpose, but it has no use in a true life and death situation. Even fear is gone after it serves its purpose of alerting the biological human to danger and demanding a plan of action.
38 years in aviation and I have little to offer about non-pilots making successful landings. In aviation lore, any landing you can walk away from is successful. I observe that in both cases the non-pilots were self-actuating people and that they had observed the action of piloting close up. Also, they had audible directions from others that was invaluable. They took matters into their hands and, with the help and guidance of others, made it to the ground. Probably would have been good pilots in their own rights had they taken it up.
I haven’t seen “Sully” yet. Will probably go this weekend.
Neo, I am glad to hear that Sully was not the emotional wreck that was depicted in the movie. It did not seem to ring true, but I had not seen anything to dispute it.
I heard Dennis Fitch give a presentation some years after the accident. He, kind of like Sully, had gone into the aviation safety business, and traveled around giving talks. I think he was friends with one of the pilots in my company (British Aerospace Inc). His presentation was powerful. Since the advent of simulator training, the reactions to emergency situations are nearly automatic. But, there was no training for what he encountered; and no precedent for the actions he took. Other than the narrative about the accident itself, the message was straight forward; stay calm, think outside the box, use whatever is available, and never give up. Pretty good advice.
I felt for Captain Haynes. He really had nothing to work with, and once Fitch took control of the thrust levers he was little more than a passenger; but, he was responsible.
I met Captain Al Haynes a couple of times. He went around the country giving lectures on safety, primarily about crew resource management (CRM) in training for accidents and incidents. That accident was a great example of just that. UAL had a DC-8 crash in Portland, Oregon in 1978 in which the Captain ignored input from his co-pilot and flight engineer. The investigation lead the company and the industry to start pursuing the doctrine of crew resource management (CRM) – using all the talents and resources available in the cockpit rather than a one man show with the Captain ignoring other inputs. By the time of the UAL 232 accident in 1989 that doctrine was well implemented at the airline.
My impression of Al Haynes was that the accident had been a “Come to Jesus moment” for him. He was so deeply thankful for surviving that he decided to devote his life to helping others be ready to handle accidents and incidents, He was humble, gentlemanly, knowledgeable, and deeply committed to his mission in aviation safety. His story would have made a great motion picture as well. Sully’s story is a bit more satisfying in that no one died, but Al’s story has all the elements of an outstanding aviation story.
J.J.:
It was made into a movie—a TV movie. I saw it at the time. It wasn’t a low-budget thing, either: Charlton Heston was Haynes and James Coburn was in it, too. A lot of the focus was on the rescue and how so many were saved.
Shush my mouth. How did I miss that TV movie?
Well, I’ve never been a huge movie fan, either on the telly or in the theater. I see it was shown in 1992, which explains why I missed it. That was my last year on the line, and when I wasn’t flying, I was working on our retirement digs. My mind was focused on the big R and a place to live in for our leisure years. Amazing how different those plans turned out.