Originally Posted by
lomapaseo
I am concerned about the media (talk shows and late night comics) pushing the public towards demanding more in-flight safety devices like CVRs/FDRs/ and Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS). Based on this accident and high profile VIP.
Just what perspective in this accident investigation supports this among the public?
In my curent myopic vision (pls help me change) The pilot said he was going up above the clouds. Does that also entail a change in course that would have been imprudent and prevented by a TAWS system?
In what way would a CVR have pointed to a single pilot mis-application?
Can the wreckage recovery still proceed to a point where it can determine if a mechanical fault occurred without reliance on a DFDR ?
Can we still not come up with a probable cause to satisfy the basis of continued safety?
I believe that it is premature to start calling for equipment changes before an investigation is completed
I feel the same. The narrative of the NTSB is "we cannot answer any speculative questions, we can only deal with known facts - and we know nothing at this stage", yet there is this apparent snipe at the FAA for "failing to implement" their recommendations intended to avoid a specific cause of accident. They are indirectly suggesting the cause before they've even begun the investigation.