The ADR (accident data recorder) and the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) don't match. The information the crew was using in their conversations was not reflective of the physical speed of the plane. These planes can't be flown without their computers.
The speed of the plane as determined by the air crew was different from that of the physical speed of the plane. Not just a little bit, a lot. The throttles were at idle and the air speed was slow. the flaps were correct, but, there wasn't enough air moving under the wings to create LIFT. It wasn't until the 'attitude' of the plane was realized VISUALLY on the final decent did the crew decide they weren't approaching the airport in a reasonable dynamic to land the plane safely. By, then it was too late. 1.5 seconds before impact for a change of flight path in another ("go round") is not enough time for the tower to formulate a strategy and communicate back to the plane for any tower recorder to make a history of it.
One of the comments (and I didn't get the name of the man that spoke before the lady from the NTSB) that man stated was the approach to the airport was on visual with glide path assistance within accepted practice and even exceeded that standard. He didn't elaborate on exactly what that means. What exceeded REGULATIONS.
Having the throttle at ideal sounds wrong, but, it isn't necessarily. If the air speed and lift were sufficient to land the plane the next step that happens is brakes and reverse throttles. So, having the throttle ideal is not necessarily unrealistic.
I remind this is a Space Shuttle adaption to these aircraft. The Shuttle did nothing but glide.
There was a disconnect between the information the crew was operating on and the actual physical attitude of the plane. IF that is accurate and that is what I heard; the AVR and FDR didn't match in the crew's conversations; then the problem is what was the flight deck receiving in data on approach to the airport?
There should be absolutely no interference by anyone of the NTSB in this investigation. The NTSB has to operate autonomously, thoroughly and can ask for information as they need it to complete their investigation. The airline industry should not be involved at all unless information is required.
I remind, we currently have a documentary questioning the decisions made by the USA regarding a plane crash in 1996. We don't need to revisit this flight, too.
The speed of the plane as determined by the air crew was different from that of the physical speed of the plane. Not just a little bit, a lot. The throttles were at idle and the air speed was slow. the flaps were correct, but, there wasn't enough air moving under the wings to create LIFT. It wasn't until the 'attitude' of the plane was realized VISUALLY on the final decent did the crew decide they weren't approaching the airport in a reasonable dynamic to land the plane safely. By, then it was too late. 1.5 seconds before impact for a change of flight path in another ("go round") is not enough time for the tower to formulate a strategy and communicate back to the plane for any tower recorder to make a history of it.
One of the comments (and I didn't get the name of the man that spoke before the lady from the NTSB) that man stated was the approach to the airport was on visual with glide path assistance within accepted practice and even exceeded that standard. He didn't elaborate on exactly what that means. What exceeded REGULATIONS.
Having the throttle at ideal sounds wrong, but, it isn't necessarily. If the air speed and lift were sufficient to land the plane the next step that happens is brakes and reverse throttles. So, having the throttle ideal is not necessarily unrealistic.
I remind this is a Space Shuttle adaption to these aircraft. The Shuttle did nothing but glide.
There was a disconnect between the information the crew was operating on and the actual physical attitude of the plane. IF that is accurate and that is what I heard; the AVR and FDR didn't match in the crew's conversations; then the problem is what was the flight deck receiving in data on approach to the airport?
There should be absolutely no interference by anyone of the NTSB in this investigation. The NTSB has to operate autonomously, thoroughly and can ask for information as they need it to complete their investigation. The airline industry should not be involved at all unless information is required.
I remind, we currently have a documentary questioning the decisions made by the USA regarding a plane crash in 1996. We don't need to revisit this flight, too.
