The film Sully, starring Tom Hanks, presents a compelling narrative of Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger’s heroic emergency landing of US Airways Flight 1549 on the Hudson River. While the film captures the essence of the event and Sullenberger’s remarkable piloting skills, it takes significant liberties with certain aspects of the post-landing investigation, particularly in its portrayal of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
The Accuracy Spectrum: Where Sully Shines and Where it Stumbles
The core event, the successful ditching of the aircraft and the miraculous survival of all 155 people on board, is undeniably and accurately depicted. The flight dynamics, the bird strike, the failed engine restarts, and Sully’s split-second decision to land on the Hudson are all substantiated by the official NTSB report and witness accounts. The film also correctly highlights the initial uncertainty surrounding the event, with many questioning if Sully could have made it back to an airport.
However, the film’s depiction of the NTSB investigation is heavily dramatized and, according to individuals involved in the real investigation, presents a distorted view. The movie portrays the NTSB as aggressively questioning Sully’s judgment and relentlessly pursuing a narrative that suggests a safe return to LaGuardia or Teterboro airports was possible. This is where the film deviates most significantly from reality.
Key Areas of Deviation
-
The NTSB’s Role: The film positions the NTSB as almost adversarial, seemingly eager to blame Sully. In reality, the NTSB investigation, while thorough and critical, aimed to determine the cause of the accident and prevent future occurrences, not to persecute Sully.
-
Simulator Tests: While simulator tests were indeed conducted, the film portrays these tests as definitively proving that a return to an airport was feasible. In reality, the initial simulator tests were flawed. The pilots in those simulations knew exactly when and where the bird strike would occur, and they had the element of surprise working in their favor. Later, more realistic simulations, with a delay reflecting the time it took Sully to react, showed that a successful return to an airport was highly unlikely.
-
Sully’s Reputation: The film suggests Sully’s reputation was jeopardized during the investigation. While he undoubtedly felt pressure and scrutiny, there is no evidence to suggest his career was seriously threatened. In fact, he was widely hailed as a hero from the outset.
Addressing Common Questions: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Here are some frequently asked questions regarding the accuracy of the movie Sully:
Q1: Did the bird strike really happen at the altitude shown in the movie?
Yes, the bird strike occurred at approximately 2,800 feet, as depicted in the film. This is consistent with the NTSB report and pilot accounts. The altitude is critical because it limited the amount of time Sully had to react and make critical decisions.
Q2: Was Sully really being second-guessed by the NTSB to the extent shown in the film?
No, this is one of the most significant areas of exaggeration. While the NTSB conducted a rigorous investigation, the film portrays them as far more adversarial than they were in reality. The goal was to understand the accident, not to find fault.
Q3: Did the simulator tests used by the NTSB initially suggest Sully could have made it back to an airport?
Yes, the initial simulator tests, where pilots were informed of the exact timing and location of the bird strike, did suggest a return was possible. However, these tests were later deemed unrealistic and revised. The film accurately depicts the existence of these initial simulations but fails to adequately represent the subsequent, more realistic, simulations.
Q4: How accurately does the film portray the passengers’ experience during the landing?
The film generally portrays the passenger experience accurately, based on survivor accounts. The fear, uncertainty, and eventual relief upon successful landing are all well-documented. The quick and effective evacuation also aligns with witness testimonies.
Q5: Did Sully and Jeff Skiles (the co-pilot) really have such a close working relationship?
Yes, Sully and Jeff Skiles had a strong professional relationship, which the film portrays accurately. Their teamwork and communication were crucial to the successful landing.
Q6: Was there really a delay in understanding the severity of the situation on the ground?
Yes, the initial response from air traffic control and emergency services reflects the ambiguity of the situation immediately after the landing. The film accurately depicts the gradual realization of the gravity of the event.
Q7: Did the NTSB really reveal the simulator results publicly before informing Sully?
This is a point of contention. The film suggests the NTSB presented the potentially damning simulator data at a public hearing before directly informing Sully. This is highly dramatized and likely did not occur in the way presented.
Q8: How accurate is the depiction of the rescue efforts by the ferries and emergency responders?
The film accurately portrays the rapid and effective rescue efforts by the New York Waterway ferries and other emergency responders. Their swift action was instrumental in ensuring the safe evacuation of all passengers and crew.
Q9: Were there really delays in determining if the engines were truly disabled?
Yes, determining the exact state of the engines required a more detailed examination than was immediately possible. The film accurately portrays the ambiguity surrounding the engine damage in the immediate aftermath of the landing.
Q10: Did the film accurately depict the PTSD experienced by Sully after the event?
The film portrays Sully struggling with the weight of his decision and the potential for disaster, which is consistent with accounts of PTSD experienced by individuals in similar high-pressure situations. The film highlights the emotional toll the event took on Sully, even amidst public praise.
Q11: How did the real Sully feel about the film’s portrayal of the NTSB?
Sully has publicly stated that the film dramatizes the NTSB’s role for cinematic effect. While he acknowledges the need for dramatic tension, he emphasizes that the NTSB investigators were ultimately professional and thorough.
Q12: Should I trust the film as a completely accurate account of the events surrounding Flight 1549?
While Sully is a compelling and inspiring film, it should not be considered a completely accurate historical record. It takes creative liberties, particularly with the NTSB investigation, to enhance dramatic tension. Consulting the official NTSB report and other primary sources is recommended for a more nuanced understanding of the events.
The Verdict: Entertainment vs. Historical Accuracy
Sully is undeniably an entertaining and inspiring film that celebrates human resilience and the extraordinary skill of Captain Sullenberger. However, it is crucial to recognize that it is a Hollywood dramatization, not a documentary. The film’s portrayal of the NTSB investigation is its weakest point in terms of accuracy, serving primarily to create dramatic tension. While the core event and the heroic actions of Sully and his crew are faithfully depicted, viewers should approach the film with a critical eye, acknowledging the liberties taken for cinematic effect. To fully understand the intricacies of the Miracle on the Hudson, consulting the official NTSB report and other reliable sources is highly recommended. The true story is compelling enough without needing embellishment, and understanding the real complexities of the investigation adds another layer of appreciation for the incredible outcome.