Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Jet safety warning days before Hudson crash

Tuesday 20 January 2009 20:00 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The US Airways Airbus 320 that made an emergency landing on New York's Hudson River last week had an engine compressor failure two days earlier, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said. The compressor, or fan, draws air into the engine.

An NTSB spokesman, Peter Knudson, said the flight had a different pilot that day, and the board planned to interview him. NTSB investigators so far have not uncovered "any anomalies or malfunctions with Flight 1549 from the time it left the gate at LaGuardia airport on 15 January to the point the pilot [Captain Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger] reported a bird strike and loss of engine power", Mr Knudson said.

Passengers on Flight 1549 that left LaGuardia on 13 January reported hearing loud bangs followed by an announcement from the pilot that the aircraft was either returning to LaGuardia or going to try to land. There were differing accounts of the pilot's statements. But the passengers said that a short time later the situation appeared to return to normal and the flight continued to Charlotte, North Carolina.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in