Originally Posted by
compressor stall
It wasn't already obvious?
43Inches As for
Tuninter 1153, it's broadly but not as clear cut as you make out. Sure, the PIC did not follow SOPs well, both in dealing with the dual EF and the ditching. But importantly that part of the world, despite its civilised culture and fine wines, has a legal propensity to pursue fatal (transportation) accidents to attribute blame. Look at the chasing of Concorde prosecution to both sides of the Atlantic, and Frank Williams etc being prosecuted by the Italian authorities in the wake of Senna's F1 crash to name two that spring to mind..
Oh that was in response to some assertions that Australians are the only ones that worry about what can happen in case of emergency decisions. And yes many nations you will most likely end up in actual court if somebody is injured or dies in a transport accident, especially, but not exclusively, if the national transport investigator finds crew error as a causation. Australia you need only worry about negligence in most instances, but you will still most likely at least be interviewed by the ATSB if you broke a rule during an emergency, and even if you didn't. Point is if the ATSB investigates an emergency and its found in the course of the investigation that you contributed to it, and your decision was not sound, then many things can happen afterwards where you will need solid legal advice.
Also the Coroners interest may be peaked beyond the ATSB report as what happened in Tasmania recently, leading to additional investigations.
And no, I'm not part of the Lead Balloon consciousness.