BYMONEK
Do not get so worked up, I was only answering the question put to me by INVICTUS
I am sure it involves not making assumptions and getting the facts before you dive in with solutions.
So if the facts (QRH) state that they only needed 1700 m, why did they use 4200m ?
Your ASSESS,ACTION,MANAGE model is fine and similar to mine with the difference that the asses phase in my proposition may be more pragmatic.
If you have a double failure, the QRH will state what is affected and how for that x-list only. It is of course impossible otherwise.
With a combination of failures some effects may not become apparent trough the combination of different X-lists.
My method concentrates on what do I have, how will I use it and why.
In determining the estimated touchdown speed you are forced to ASSESS all elements: Weight (ZFW + Fuel), config + Vref + additive, Wind, slope and the influence of high field and temp.
Ek manual states that ;"a low flypast should only be undertaken when there is good reason to believe that Knowledge of the state of the landing gear can be improved from such a manoevre".
That’s fine, but I would still leave that decision to the staff on the ground, question of doing everthing possible. In this case an approach to land close enough to the ground and go-around.
I realise its at night but it wasn’t IMC was it? If you can see the runway to land surely they can see you, what happens after that is:
review the proccess ie back to the assess stage just in case things have changed or may,for whatever reason,not be delivering the desired result.
Do not get so worked up about it, it is not good for your blood pressure.
The referance to the Dubai pilot union is just a little touch with reality. The primary task of a pilot union is to defend the profession and not the salary. You guys are on your own, that's all i meant by putting it in my post.