The fact that this is being transmitted from the stricken plane means that some electrical systems were still available, running on battery power with the aircraft in the descent, in the glide. On this occasion the glide did not work out for these most unfortunate people.
I do though wonder what the theoretical glide performance of this particular aircraft, in the given circumstances would have been.

battery maintenance
 

twincommander, I can only concur with your comments. Earlier in the thread someone posted a list of instruments that would still be available after generator loss. I'm unclear if that was for a 146 or an RJ now. Losing all your EFIS in an RJ would be a scary event, especially at night.

BBC is now reporting that the plane ran out of fuel: Chapecoense air crash: Leaked tape shows plane 'ran out of fuel' - BBC News

The British press are still reporting that the flight was from São Paulo to Medellin via Santa Cruz with Lamia but other agencies are saying the leg to Bolivia was a commercial flight. Lamia had been refused by the Brazilian aviation authorities as it was not registered. Somebody in Brazil was keen that the team used Lamia come what may. This stinks of backhanders and commissions . What a tragedy for those innocent people

Will the black boxes CVR reveal a low fuel enunciation?

Hi profile flight.
If you declare an emergency with such valued customers you might lose your job.

Some simple maths:

Total fuel 9360kg
Minus fixed reserve of 900kg gives
8460kg
Taxi/takeoff/climb first hour 3000kg gives
5460kg
5460kg/2200 per hour burn gives 2.48 hours.
1+2.48 = 3.48 hrs @ 380ktas equals
1322nm range nil wind with no variable reserve.

This is somewhat less than the reported 1600nm sector.

I rest my case.

And if you don't, maybe you and your pax lose your life. Not that hard of a choice, is it? (Hmm, I say that full well admitting that there is a certain idea among certain pilots that "it is better to die than to look bad" but I never considered that a PoV among transport/passenger carrying pilots).
Afterthought, having now read the BBC article: That one hurts right in the heart strings. :{ He may not have realized that someone in that company was relying on good luck for this flight to get them there ...

sTeamTraen, the BBC are still incorrectly calling the plane a BAe 146 though instead of an RJ85 along with many other media sources. Why don't they check ?

Once the engines flame out it is almost certainly all over in this scenario.....

"From what I understand, there was going to be a stop in Cobija. But the plane that was bringing the players from Chapecoense to Bolivia was delayed. As a result, they couldn't land in Cobija, there are no night operations at Cobija, in fact there are no lights on the runway. So they decided to fill the tank completely, with fuel. In addition to that, the players had to train. It would have been enough to get there, but they were forced to wait which used up all the fuel.
They took the decision to fill the tank completely, which isn't something they usually do but it would have been possible to land, considering they were only 17 miles from the airport, about 3 to 5 minutes. Being in holding traffic is what ended up using all the fuel that was left. However, we have to await the analysis of the black boxes to find out, for certain, what really happened."

Said the son of the co-pilot, who is in his last year of training to be a pilot.

@Sidestick... You don't appear to understand the concept of using an en-route alternate to reduce contingency (or statistical contingency) fuel.

It is not a shady practice and is written into most EASA Ops Manuals. The entire amount of Contingency fuel may be used at the Captain's discretion any time after dispatch.

With English translation
Apologies if already posted

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=...&v=6Ab5x_C-CFg

Really? Do you have any experience of operations in this locale? "Dios es un piloto Boliviano"

The 146 has been proven to glide rather well. But not recommended in the vicinity of high terrain.

I am now truly wondering if he mistakenly aimed for the VOR.
"gear down" was clearly heard. And the holding/witness aircraft reported steep descent.

First off, nice illustration of a fuel planning approach. :ok: Now just to play devil's advocate: if forecast winds aloft are 70-90 knots tail wind component at planned FL, you can see how someone might talk themselves into figuring that they can make it.
I prefer your approach, however.
Later Edit: I did a little poking about at some met sites, and from what I found, a tail wind approaching that value was not available for that night's flight. Maybe that was a bad example of how one might talk one's self into making this a one leg flight.

I hope he learns about fuel reserves !

With poor airspeed control and a conservative glide/ratio they would have had a good 30 miles of glide from FL210.

If we're going to be picky, the downed aircraft is certificated as a British Aerospace-built Avro 146 Series RJ85.

So referring to it as a BAe 146 is not unreasonable.