Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ForgedCrank

(2,473 posts)
3. It is
Sun Dec 29, 2024, 01:05 PM
Dec 29

way too early for analysis and speculation. These media "experts" drive me nuts.
Generally speaking, when something like this happens, there are numerous failures that lead up to the disaster. Sometimes, a large number of simultaneous system failures and warnings can easily overwhelm the crew to a point that they can't even identify which are the most critical in the very short amount of time that they have to react, identify, and troubleshoot. The gear-up landing could have been on purpose as a reaction to reduce the risk of losing something more critical. Of course these disasters also often include crew mistakes or poor judgement or reactions. It's impossible to know right now.
But this crew was in deep doodoo no matter what because the runway they had to work with was half the required length for this equipment loaded out, even on a good day with a functioning airplane. This is all assuming I am getting valid information. What I read stated the runway length at only 2,800ft, which is impossibly short for this equipment and load out even if it were functioning properly.
What a terrible tragedy, it's very sad.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Reuters: Experts question...»Reply #3