I hope someone can help me with this question.
In January 2009, “Sully” Sullenberger of Danville, Calif. landed a US Airways Airbus A320 bound for Charlotte, N.C. “on”/“in” the Hudson river.
Please explain why “on” is wrong, if indeed it is. If an aircraft is strategically landed, would it be “on the river” or “in the river”.?
Thank you.
davidmich
If it lands and remains on the surface, it’s landing on the water. If it then sinks, it’s in the water.
However, if it just stuffs it into the drink, it was never really on the water and went from in the air to in the water.
And remember: Any landing you can walk away from is a good one. If you get to use the plane again, it’s a great landing. This one was only so-so, because they had to use boats.
He himself said that his destination was “in the Hudson.” If it was a seaplane, designed for landing on water, I’d say “on” but in this case, “in” seems most appropriate since the plane took on water quickly and sunk.
I’d say ‘in’ for the A320 flight because it wasn’t a seaplane, and it was a crash landing. I’d go with on for a plane designed for water landings that landed succesfully.
ETA: It seems to be the consensus opinion.
This came from Wkipedia…
“The downed US Airways Flight 1549 floating on the Hudson River”.
Either would be appropriate when speaking of floating.
I vote for “on” because it seems more akin to what the pilot is attempting. On denotes on the surface of, while in denotes imo underwater. Either way, on or in is not a place you want to be no matter how “succesfully” its done. And if im ever in that place, grammar usage is going by the wayside for me ,!:eek:
Reminds me of that cartoon where a fireball is hurtling from the sky at two guys, and one is asking the other, “I can never remember. Are we about to be killed by a meteor or a meteorite?”
George Carlin: About this time, someone is telling you to get on the plane. “Get on the plane. Get on the plane.” I say, “fuck you, I’m getting IN the plane! IN the plane! Let Evil Knievel get ON the plane! I’ll be in here with you folks in uniform! There seems to be less WIND in here!”
And don’t EVEN get him started about “nonstop flights”!
You are all missing the bigger point. A plane cannot land either on or in a river, it needs to water on or in the river.
Ok so the plane watered in the river. I’m fine with that. But then, what does that mean I’m doing to my plants??? :eek:
Actually, that’s quite right. Technically, you don’t land a plane in or on the water, you ditch a plane in the water. If it remains afloat long enough for you and the crew to abandon ship, then hallelujah!
Unless, of course, the aircraft is a seaplane designed to land in or on the water, as has already been established.
Ditching implies an emergency situation with an aircraft that isn’t a seaplane.
Bird Strike would make a hell of a band name if you spelled it Bürdstryke.
ROCK ON, DUDE!!!pretend I have big hair. Oh, and “fnord”.
I don’t know about about your plants, but if the plane is doing a Springsteen and going down to the river, then I’ma be waterin’ my pants.