Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
ba747
Topic Author
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:47 pm

US Airways flight 1549

Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:22 pm

I have always been wondering about amount on crew on that particular flight. After seeing the movie, videos and interviews it does not make sense to me that if the flight was full how come there were 3 F/A and not 4. Doesn't each door has to be manned by a F/A?. And also the F/A on the back of the plane was her seat really facing forward? Is a FAA regulation that all cabin crew seat face rear right?
Last edited by SQ22 on Wed Jun 10, 2020 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The World`s Favorite Airline
 
Moosefire
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 12:47 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:27 pm

ba747 wrote:
I have always been wondering about amount on crew on that particular flight. After seeing the movie, videos and interviews it does not make sense to me that if the flight was full how come there were 3 F/A and not 4. Doesn't each door has to be manned by a F/A?. And also the F/A on the back of the plane was her seat really facing forward? Is a FAA regulation that all cabin crew seat face rear right?


The movie was very accurate, at least as far as flight-technical issues and yes, crew manning.

No, each door does not need to be manned, nor does every Jumpseat need to face aft
MD-11F/C-17A Pilot
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14426
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:44 pm

Also, US had been US Airways for more than a decade by the time of 1549.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
iflyalexair
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 3:54 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 12:09 am

The total capacity of the US A320 was 150 total, so only 3 flight attendants required.
 
santi319
Posts: 1004
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 3:24 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 12:11 am

The flight was full so that means 150 passengers and 3 crewmembers (1 FA per 50 passenger).

Absolutely the jumpseat that the aft FA sat on had a lot to do with her injuries. In fact the NTSB recommended aft facing jumpseats as far back as the ALM 180 ditching. But of course the FAA ignored it. Just like they continue to ignore the 10 hrs minimum rest rule for FAs. And people are surprised about the Max saga.. FAA is owned by corporations.. they don’t care for safety.
 
Corpsnerd09
Posts: 575
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 2:05 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 12:13 am

It's 1 FA for every 50 passengers, US had an interesting scheduling system for their A319/320/321 fleet, they scheduled 3 FAs flying together the entire line which would cover any 319/320 flight and then they had a lone FA line called the "chaser" which would fly only 321 flights joining the 3 FA group for only that 1 flight.
 
User avatar
southwest1675
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2016 2:03 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 12:57 am

I know FO Jeff is flying the 787 for AA now. We all know what Sully is doing. What did the 3 FA’s end up doing after 1549?
Herb Kelleher 1931-2019
 
NateGreat
Posts: 493
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:02 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 3:27 am

Any idea where I can find the documentary: “Hudson Plane Crash What Really Happened” for free and without any kind of website membership? I believe it was on National Geographic. It’s essentially the exact same documentary as BBC’s “Miracle On The Hudson”, but with a different layout and narrator. BBC’s version has a British female voice, while NatGeo’s has an American male voice. I remember watching it for the first time on TLC in February or March 2009, then again around August timeframe of that same year.
 
User avatar
Moose135
Posts: 3148
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 3:45 am

southwest1675 wrote:
I know FO Jeff is flying the 787 for AA now. We all know what Sully is doing. What did the 3 FA’s end up doing after 1549?

Flight attendant Doreen Welsh, who sustained a severe leg injury in the crash, retired and never returned to flying. Donna Dent and Sheila Dail continued flying with US/AA, however Dent retired in 2017 and Dail retired in January 2019 on the tenth anniversary of the crash.

http://news.aa.com/news/news-details/20 ... fault.aspx
KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
 
Clipper002
Posts: 663
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:24 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 10:56 am

The number of flight attendants is dictated by the number of seats on an aircraft, not the number of passengers, hence one f/a for every 50 seats.
Ed
 
alasizon
Posts: 2579
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:11 pm

Moose135 wrote:
southwest1675 wrote:
I know FO Jeff is flying the 787 for AA now. We all know what Sully is doing. What did the 3 FA’s end up doing after 1549?

Flight attendant Doreen Welsh, who sustained a severe leg injury in the crash, retired and never returned to flying. Donna Dent and Sheila Dail continued flying with US/AA, however Dent retired in 2017 and Dail retired in January 2019 on the tenth anniversary of the crash.

http://news.aa.com/news/news-details/20 ... fault.aspx


And Jeff has now retired as well.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
catiii
Posts: 3517
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:14 pm

alasizon wrote:
Moose135 wrote:
southwest1675 wrote:
I know FO Jeff is flying the 787 for AA now. We all know what Sully is doing. What did the 3 FA’s end up doing after 1549?

Flight attendant Doreen Welsh, who sustained a severe leg injury in the crash, retired and never returned to flying. Donna Dent and Sheila Dail continued flying with US/AA, however Dent retired in 2017 and Dail retired in January 2019 on the tenth anniversary of the crash.

http://news.aa.com/news/news-details/20 ... fault.aspx


And Jeff has now retired as well.


Did he ever hold Captain?
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3331
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:19 pm

And what about the aircraft? It did keep all 150 pax afloat until rescue and did not breakup upon impact with the water (though the panels buckled). I believe its in a museum in Charlotte right?
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 2069
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:58 pm

william wrote:
And what about the aircraft? It did keep all 150 pax afloat until rescue and did not breakup upon impact with the water (though the panels buckled). I believe its in a museum in Charlotte right?


Seek (via Google as in so many things ;) ) and ye shall find:

https://www.carolinasaviation.org/exhib ... he-hudson/

I saw the aircraft the evening of the ditching, barely afloat in the Hudson and up against Battery Park.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
phllax
Posts: 588
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:53 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:07 pm

santi319 wrote:
The flight was full so that means 150 passengers and 3 crewmembers (1 FA per 50 passenger).

Absolutely the jumpseat that the aft FA sat on had a lot to do with her injuries. In fact the NTSB recommended aft facing jumpseats as far back as the ALM 180 ditching. But of course the FAA ignored it. Just like they continue to ignore the 10 hrs minimum rest rule for FAs. And people are surprised about the Max saga.. FAA is owned by corporations.. they don’t care for safety.


Her injuries were due to where she was sitting, not because it was forward facing. A piece of metal came up through the floor and gashed her leg. Indeed jumpseat seating assignments is an airline decision. Airways could have easily assigned the B F/A to sit in either of the rear facing jumpseats back in the galley, but they don't.
 
santi319
Posts: 1004
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 3:24 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:10 pm

phllax wrote:
santi319 wrote:
The flight was full so that means 150 passengers and 3 crewmembers (1 FA per 50 passenger).

Absolutely the jumpseat that the aft FA sat on had a lot to do with her injuries. In fact the NTSB recommended aft facing jumpseats as far back as the ALM 180 ditching. But of course the FAA ignored it. Just like they continue to ignore the 10 hrs minimum rest rule for FAs. And people are surprised about the Max saga.. FAA is owned by corporations.. they don’t care for safety.


Her injuries were due to where she was sitting, not because it was forward facing. A piece of metal came up through the floor and gashed her leg. Indeed jumpseat seating assignments is an airline decision. Airways could have easily assigned the B F/A to sit in either of the rear facing jumpseats back in the galley, but they don't.


Absolutely, nothing to do with the rear facing jumpseat, I was just speaking in general. However the fact that those swivel jumpseats are approved by the FAA is absolutely terrifying and unsafe. I feel for the way FAs are treated by the FAA.
 
Miamiairport
Posts: 586
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 8:14 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:15 pm

The plane never broke up. Paxs evacuated to the wings with some IIRC falling into the water. However, they were rescued within minutes with the number of ferry boats on the Hudson.
 
tjerome
Posts: 338
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:03 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:20 pm

william wrote:
And what about the aircraft? It did keep all 150 pax afloat until rescue and did not breakup upon impact with the water (though the panels buckled). I believe its in a museum in Charlotte right?


That is correct.
 
User avatar
Crosswind
Posts: 2580
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2000 4:34 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:26 pm

phllax wrote:
santi319 wrote:
The flight was full so that means 150 passengers and 3 crewmembers (1 FA per 50 passenger).

Absolutely the jumpseat that the aft FA sat on had a lot to do with her injuries. In fact the NTSB recommended aft facing jumpseats as far back as the ALM 180 ditching. But of course the FAA ignored it. Just like they continue to ignore the 10 hrs minimum rest rule for FAs. And people are surprised about the Max saga.. FAA is owned by corporations.. they don’t care for safety.


Her injuries were due to where she was sitting, not because it was forward facing. A piece of metal came up through the floor and gashed her leg. Indeed jumpseat seating assignments is an airline decision. Airways could have easily assigned the B F/A to sit in either of the rear facing jumpseats back in the galley, but they don't.


It isn’t up to the airline. The aisle jump seat on the A320 has to be occupied to comply with the Direct Viewing Requirements of the cabin for the cabin crew. This is an FAA/EASA certification requirement. But you are quite correct, the rear flight attendant was injured due to disruption of the cabin floor from the impact, nothing to do with facing forward.

Best Regards
CROSSWIND
 
User avatar
rida79
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2017 5:56 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:24 pm

The title is very misleading. I thought you were referring to a very old accident back when it was called US Air. Please correct that.
 
barney captain
Posts: 2337
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:41 pm

Corpsnerd09 wrote:
It's 1 FA for every 50 passengers, US had an interesting scheduling system for their A319/320/321 fleet, they scheduled 3 FAs flying together the entire line which would cover any 319/320 flight and then they had a lone FA line called the "chaser" which would fly only 321 flights joining the 3 FA group for only that 1 flight.


WN uses the same strategy for the "D" position on the -800 - they stay with the aircraft.
Southeast Of Disorder
 
32andBelow
Posts: 4809
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 8:46 pm

rida79 wrote:
The title is very misleading. I thought you were referring to a very old accident back when it was called US Air. Please correct that.

It’s not misleading at all. Everyone knows that flight number is miracle on ice feature captain “1500 hours” sully
 
debonair
Posts: 3778
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 10:50 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Tue Jun 09, 2020 10:31 pm

Moosefire wrote:

The movie was very accurate, at least as far as flight-technical issues


As far as I remember this movie, and being an ex Airbus cabin crew myself, the handling of the slides and rafts were incorrect.
 
User avatar
Moose135
Posts: 3148
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Wed Jun 10, 2020 1:03 am

FlyHossD wrote:
william wrote:
And what about the aircraft? It did keep all 150 pax afloat until rescue and did not breakup upon impact with the water (though the panels buckled). I believe its in a museum in Charlotte right?


Seek (via Google as in so many things ;) ) and ye shall find:

https://www.carolinasaviation.org/exhib ... he-hudson/


Unfortunately, the museum has been closed since last summer as they figure out a new home. I'm not sure where they have N106US stored right now. A number of their aircraft are parked outside near their old hangar.

Image

Image


FlyHossD wrote:
I saw the aircraft the evening of the ditching, barely afloat in the Hudson and up against Battery Park.


We probably crossed paths that night.

Image

Image

This was the next day, shooting from the Jersey side of the river.

Image

And Sunday, after they pulled it out of the water.

Image
KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
 
Maverick623
Posts: 4722
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:13 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Wed Jun 10, 2020 1:15 am

debonair wrote:
Moosefire wrote:

The movie was very accurate, at least as far as flight-technical issues


As far as I remember this movie, and being an ex Airbus cabin crew myself, the handling of the slides and rafts were incorrect.


In the behind-the-scenes, Hanks and/or Eckhart said that they actually weren't told how to detach the slide. They happened to see the knife pouch and used it to cut the slide loose. Afterwards, Sully told Hanks they had the same exact issue (Sully happened to be on set that day).

The biggest inaccuracies were the flight attendants walking the cabin after the bird strike, the NTSB interrogation and finger pointing (they came out almost immediately and said everyone performed perfectly), and the aircraft used for filming was of ex-HP stock with IAE engines instead of CFMs, and a slightly different galley configuration.

Heck, when the first trailer aired, a couple seconds worth of wide shots showed liveries that didn't exist in 2009
They went back and edited them to 2009 standards!

The cockpit scenes were ripped straight from the CVR transcript.
"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
 
User avatar
rida79
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2017 5:56 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Wed Jun 10, 2020 7:28 am

32andBelow wrote:
rida79 wrote:
The title is very misleading. I thought you were referring to a very old accident back when it was called US Air. Please correct that.

It’s not misleading at all. Everyone knows that flight number is miracle on ice feature captain “1500 hours” sully



I always tell my students to never say "everyone" because that's generalization, which isn't a good thing to do. I did not know that flight number and I am sure there are others who have better things to do than memorize every accident's flight number. Hence my previous comment about the title being misleading stands.
 
boerje
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 9:16 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:04 am

catiii wrote:
alasizon wrote:
Moose135 wrote:
Flight attendant Doreen Welsh, who sustained a severe leg injury in the crash, retired and never returned to flying. Donna Dent and Sheila Dail continued flying with US/AA, however Dent retired in 2017 and Dail retired in January 2019 on the tenth anniversary of the crash.

http://news.aa.com/news/news-details/20 ... fault.aspx


And Jeff has now retired as well.


Did he ever hold Captain?


"Although Skiles was flying as a co-pilot on flight 1549, this was due to a staff reductions at US Airways. He had flown as a Captain, prior to the staff reductions"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Skiles
 
catiii
Posts: 3517
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Wed Jun 10, 2020 4:53 pm

boerje wrote:
catiii wrote:
alasizon wrote:

And Jeff has now retired as well.


Did he ever hold Captain?


"Although Skiles was flying as a co-pilot on flight 1549, this was due to a staff reductions at US Airways. He had flown as a Captain, prior to the staff reductions"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Skiles


Thanks. Curious post merger.
 
alasizon
Posts: 2579
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Wed Jun 10, 2020 5:11 pm

catiii wrote:
boerje wrote:
catiii wrote:

Did he ever hold Captain?


"Although Skiles was flying as a co-pilot on flight 1549, this was due to a staff reductions at US Airways. He had flown as a Captain, prior to the staff reductions"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Skiles


Thanks. Curious post merger.


As far as I know, he has been on the 787 as an FO the entire time. He did retire as an FO.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
HardeesBiscuit
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2019 1:46 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Wed Jun 10, 2020 6:50 pm

rida79 wrote:
The title is very misleading. I thought you were referring to a very old accident back when it was called US Air. Please correct that.

Cubsrule wrote:
Also, US had been US Airways for more than a decade by the time of 1549.


no need to be pedantic about whether US was USAir or USAirways at the time of the accident. People know you're talking about the plane that crashlanded in the Hudson, and it was before the AA merger. US will always be USAir to many of us, it's ok. Not misleading at all.
 
isp2
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Wed Jun 10, 2020 8:29 pm

Crosswind wrote:
phllax wrote:
santi319 wrote:
The flight was full so that means 150 passengers and 3 crewmembers (1 FA per 50 passenger).

Absolutely the jumpseat that the aft FA sat on had a lot to do with her injuries. In fact the NTSB recommended aft facing jumpseats as far back as the ALM 180 ditching. But of course the FAA ignored it. Just like they continue to ignore the 10 hrs minimum rest rule for FAs. And people are surprised about the Max saga.. FAA is owned by corporations.. they don’t care for safety.


Her injuries were due to where she was sitting, not because it was forward facing. A piece of metal came up through the floor and gashed her leg. Indeed jumpseat seating assignments is an airline decision. Airways could have easily assigned the B F/A to sit in either of the rear facing jumpseats back in the galley, but they don't.


It isn’t up to the airline. The aisle jump seat on the A320 has to be occupied to comply with the Direct Viewing Requirements of the cabin for the cabin crew. This is an FAA/EASA certification requirement. But you are quite correct, the rear flight attendant was injured due to disruption of the cabin floor from the impact, nothing to do with facing forward.

Best Regards
CROSSWIND


Tell that to JetBlue. Their A320 #3 and #4 flight attendants have never used the cabin facing aisle jumpseat in their 20 year history. Try again.
 
User avatar
Crosswind
Posts: 2580
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2000 4:34 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Wed Jun 10, 2020 10:44 pm

isp2 wrote:
Tell that to JetBlue. Their A320 #3 and #4 flight attendants have never used the cabin facing aisle jumpseat in their 20 year history. Try again.


The cabin Direct Viewing requirements are an aircraft certification requirement, applying to more modern types including the A320. This is how the aircraft was certified by both EASA and the FAA, and airlines have to operate in accordance with these rules.

In JetBlue's case (not US Airways) they had the clear forward bulkhead and no class divider to comply with these requirements.

Image

In the new A320 configuration JetBlue have, without the viewing window in the forward bulkhead, I would assume either the forward facing jumpseat attached to the rear toilet must be occupied, or with a single cabin crew at Door 1 it is the aisle side jumpseat that must be occupied to give a clear aisle view. The cabin viewing requirements are also the reason on more recently certified aircraft there are often cutouts and viewing windows in cabin bulkheads, and why depending on configuration certain jumpseats have to be occupied.

Do you want to try again?

Best Regards
CROSSWIND
 
phllax
Posts: 588
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:53 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Thu Jun 11, 2020 2:44 am

Crosswind wrote:
isp2 wrote:
Tell that to JetBlue. Their A320 #3 and #4 flight attendants have never used the cabin facing aisle jumpseat in their 20 year history. Try again.


The cabin Direct Viewing requirements are an aircraft certification requirement, applying to more modern types including the A320. This is how the aircraft was certified by both EASA and the FAA, and airlines have to operate in accordance with these rules.

In JetBlue's case (not US Airways) they had the clear forward bulkhead and no class divider to comply with these requirements.

In the new A320 configuration JetBlue have, without the viewing window in the forward bulkhead, I would assume either the forward facing jumpseat attached to the rear toilet must be occupied, or with a single cabin crew at Door 1 it is the aisle side jumpseat that must be occupied to give a clear aisle view. The cabin viewing requirements are also the reason on more recently certified aircraft there are often cutouts and viewing windows in cabin bulkheads, and why depending on configuration certain jumpseats have to be occupied.

Do you want to try again?

Best Regards
CROSSWIND


On the Phase 1 & 2 birds there is a cut-out in the forward bulkhead with a counter, which is/was used as a snack station during flight. In addition, the original non-flex aft galley has a camera the cockpit can view as well as a rear view mirror for the F/A's to use to see up the aisle.
 
isp2
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Us Air flight 1549

Thu Jun 11, 2020 10:50 am

Crosswind wrote:
isp2 wrote:
Tell that to JetBlue. Their A320 #3 and #4 flight attendants have never used the cabin facing aisle jumpseat in their 20 year history. Try again.


The cabin Direct Viewing requirements are an aircraft certification requirement, applying to more modern types including the A320. This is how the aircraft was certified by both EASA and the FAA, and airlines have to operate in accordance with these rules.

In JetBlue's case (not US Airways) they had the clear forward bulkhead and no class divider to comply with these requirements.

Image

In the new A320 configuration JetBlue have, without the viewing window in the forward bulkhead, I would assume either the forward facing jumpseat attached to the rear toilet must be occupied, or with a single cabin crew at Door 1 it is the aisle side jumpseat that must be occupied to give a clear aisle view. The cabin viewing requirements are also the reason on more recently certified aircraft there are often cutouts and viewing windows in cabin bulkheads, and why depending on configuration certain jumpseats have to be occupied.

Do you want to try again?

Best Regards
CROSSWIND


No, I don’t.

A blanket statement was made about the aft aisle facing jump seats being required to be used. That was factually incorrect. Thanks for clarifying by noting the exception where if you have a see through bulkhead in the front, you do not have to utilize the aft aisle jump seat.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos