Originally Posted by
SLFinAZ
According to the Reuters report 4 witnesses were specific to sound which is historically much more accurate and telling than sight. Not with regard to specifics but abnormality. It's common for individuals to do a "double take" specific to visual clues since you tend to need to
process and double check an anomaly but we respond much more decisively to aural clues.
If I've learned anything in life, it's not to jump to conclusions, least of all based on eyewitnesses. The CVR and FDR should answer most of the questions. Mine you I still can think of no good reason why with the technology now available internal and external video recording is not also captured on all new airframes.