Originally Posted by
anchorhold
As we reach the end of day three of the AAIB investigation, the fact their are no ADs and the aircraft type has not been grounded suggests the following.
(a) There is no reason to suspect that the aircraft was in anyway defective.
(b) The primary causal factor is a result of the aircraft sustaining damage during flight as a result with contact with a structure or other object.
(c) If not (b) then due to the handling of the aircraft by the pilot in command, pax or both, either in error or intentionally.
That is an irresponsible thing to post.
We for sure do not know a, but one can guess at anything. For b, primary causal factor is
TBD. C. Maybe, and maybe not, but
Where Are You Getting Intentionally From? That, sir (or madam) is utterl
y Irresponsible.
Dear members of the media who may wander by here, none of that which anchor posted is supported by information, given the lack of same.
Anchor: you are jumping the gun a bit there. I'd recommend dropping the short attention span act and waiting for the first (of many) reports. They'll be arriving in due course. Whether or not your guesses are close, or far, from the actuality will in time be shown.
Originally Posted by
GrayHorizonsHeli
in the interest of further safety, thats not a bad thing is it?
It is a bad thing if misinformation is spread by an instant, and wrong, answer. That's why fast isn't a good metric unless an early indication prompts the AIIB to issue an alert. Not jumping the gun is the AIIB being responsible, and doing their duty.
Regarding your idea of hitting something on the way in: what evidence are you pointing to that prompted that speculation?