Hudson River ditching: Does it really matter who opened the rear door?

[Gidney N Cloyd]

It's sounding like it was really a flight attendant and not a passenger but either way, some human panicked and did something stupid. Is anything gained by the whole world knowing exactly who did it?
Even if it's all about civil suits it seems like misplaced concern.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jCgE8KpmtvmBh1TqBLy963SaumpwD98KS3H00

Witness to challenge flight attendant's story

WASHINGTON (AP) — Passengers on the plane that ditched into the Hudson River in January have told a federal safety panel that it was a flight attendant — not a panicked passenger — who opened a rear door on the aircraft, sending water rushing into the cabin.

The National Transportation Safety Board has scheduled three days of hearings next week on safety issues arising from the forced landing of US Airways Flight 1549 into the Hudson between New York and New Jersey on Jan. 15. The first two witnesses are the flight's captain, Chesley Sullenberger, and passenger Billy Campbell, who was seated in the second-to-last row of the Airbus A320.

Board member Robert Sumwalt, who will chair the hearing, said that Campbell has told NTSB investigators that it was flight attendant Doreen Welsh who cracked open the door, not a passenger.

Following the ditching, Welsh said in media interviews and testimony before Congress that a passenger pushed past her to open the door.

"That's what we want to straighten out. We want to get his testimony on that, was it a passenger or a flight attendant?" Sumwalt said in an interview.

[stray cat]

1. If it was a lie that isn't good - but no it really doesn't matter

[Hepburn]

3. I agree that if there was a lie, it was a bad thing...

...but why investigate this? It has nothing to do with what caused the plane to lose both engines.

[Hepburn]

2. Why does that matter?

The issue as I see it is how to prevent bird strikes.

[TheCowsCameHome]

8. Beyond that, if the plane had filled with water and sunk with no rescuers nearby

it could have been a disaster.

I think their point is did a trained flight crew member use poor judgement, or was it indeed only a panicked passenger.

[babylonsister]

4. If she lied by blaming someone else, yes. Plus, her training

should have kicked in and it might not have.

At the least, she should lose her job.

[Vickers]

5. If a flight attendant did it, he/she should own up.

If there was ever a time for justified panic, that would've been it.

I mean seriously, your plane just fell out of the SKY and landed on a RIVER...who would be thinking straight?

:shrug:

[hedgehog]

6. The only reason to go into this is to examine the need for further training.

I understand that the pilot had put in a lot of unrequired extra hours on simulators; building muscle memory made a big difference when it came time to land the plane. There is no real time to think in those situations, the unconscious brain has to know how to react.

[TheCowsCameHome]

7. Why did she fabricate the story? It only makes things worse.

It doesn't really matter at this point, but what was to gain by concocting a story?

Somehow she seemed out of sync with the rest of the crew in the post-accident appearances.

It will be intersting to see what the investigation reveals.