On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:55:06 -0500, Kurt Ullman
wrote:

In article ,
Smitty Two wrote:



It is only "considered a crash" by the media. Pilots call that an
"off-field landing." A plane crashes when structural failure or pilot
error causes the plane to no longer be under the control of the pilot.
This was not the case, here.


Wouldn't the engines flying apart be considered structural failure and
turning an airplane into a glider would seem to suggest the pilot isn;t
in control (serious question, honestly)


The engines are not structural - to answer the first part of your
question - and the pilot was obviously in control to direct the plane
onto the river and land it with not much more than a "bump".