Eaglefly,

You will find in one of the other threads an entire discussion of the role of the violation of sterile cockpit rules in the Buffalo mishap.

I was quite adamant in stating that the violation of sterile cockpit roles has never caused a crash that I know of. What has caused many crashes is a generic lack of SA, a lackadaisical attitude, etc.

What's the difference many ask? Well, if I was flying an ILS down to mins in icing conditions, was focusing 100% on the control of the aircraft, the performance of the aircraft, and the navigation of the aircraft - but was singing "Mary had a little lamb" to myself or telling a joke to my Capt - well, that would be violation. But, if I were on the same ILS but was half asleep and allowing myself to get 10 kts slow, etc - but being perfectly quiet except for checklist callouts - that would not. Which case would be more likely to result in a crash? It's the attitude and SA that matters, not the conversation. The attitude and SA leads to the conversation.

If you find that discussion, you will find many on this board that completely agreed with the media in that the discussion several minutes prior to the mishap was worthy of highlight. Although no procedures were violated (except for sterile cockpit) during the conversations, they were supposedly worth mentioning. It would seem that it's not just the media that takes these things out of context.

I read this the other day..and was thinking the same thing....the double standard is amazing

Yeah, I've been saying this all along, and some on this forum have actually been trying to defend these creeps...

Can't even imagine what a sham going to work every day must feel like for those media-types...?

I keep reading the head lines, and they (media half-wits) are calling the landing a "miracle on the Hudson." I'm just a bit disturbed by this. With no disrespect, I believe something on the order of, "fantastic execution of a much practiced emergency scenario" might be a little more accurate. Am I alone on this? Miracle just seems a bit too angelic.

Nice post, that was a good read starting around page 38. Do you think they'll ever release that actual audio recordings since no one died in this one? I know they generally are not released.

Spot on! Couldn't agree more!

Out of curiosity, how much do commercial pilots practice total thrust lost scenarios? While during private and commercial training, we did them all the time, but I imagine a archer or 172 handles a bit differently than a larger aircraft. I know much remains the same, but when would have been the last time they practiced them? I know when I went for my ME add on, I asked about total thrust lost and my instructor said it is not considered. When I went for my MEI, I asked if I should teach total thrust lost and was told same thing.

Bob Hoover practices it all the time.:D But seriously, you've practiced it with the SEL, and a twin isn't going to be much different, the weight is greater, but the drag is less due due to feathering of both engines, should be about the same. I've pulled both engines to idle and practiced, I couldn't tell the difference in a bug smasher.