|
|
Barry Hancock wrote:
Guys, all of your comments are right on target. It does not take away from what's being said, but let's remember we are dealing with *very* preliminary information. We do not know if he lost power, etc.
I second the notion of holding off blaming the pilot or speculating on what happened till we know a little more. Was there an engine failure? Some other mechanical problem? A mid-air with a bird? A medical problem? Was this at the end of a 4 hour flight at 12,500 with no oxygen resulting in impaired pilot judgment? We need to wait for more facts, rather than creating our own facts by repeating speculations -- theories and speculations, when repeated enough, can and do take on the authenticity of facts.
I have had the opportunity to review the data from the CFS system in a few accidents (this is NOT one of them) and the one thing that really stands out for me in all of them is that the initial speculation in the media and aviation mailing lists has been just that, speculation, and often very far off from the truth. Yes, the pilot should not have been that far below the glide slope, but lets not speculate as to how or why he got there.
Regards,
Hamid
|
|