Well done CONF iture! You have managed to drag down this thread into very irellevant details, upon which you insist as if they're of utmost importance. So:
Originally Posted by
CONF iture
... but you still don't seem to have the big picture regarding Habsheim
Correct!
All the pictures I have are only of 320x200 resolution, but there are more than 2000 of them, sequentially aranged and with soundtrack attached. They show flypast of A320 with 6 crew and 130 passengers onboard. Can you, or for that matter anyone PPRuNeing, defend this flypast as being executed safely, even prior hitting the trees? If so then we can proceed to discuss minor anomalies that might have happened, if not - and that's my point of view - any possible fault is irelevant in view of flypast that was done below reasonably safe level, below reasonably safe airspeed and with below reasonably safe thrust.
For the entertainment of those who think that previous paragraph is my attempt of evading CONF iture's well aimed questions, here are some answers to them. Still I insist that these answers, while correct as my knowledge allows, are absolutely irellevant to cause of Habsheim disaster or alleged Airbus technology defects.
Alpha floor on current A320 in CONF3 fires imediately below 14° AoA. By no means it's certain that it would save the airplane and also MA didn't disable autothrust, he merely disconnected it. However, it was noted that A320entered service with AF only six weeks before accident and already pilots were practicing flypasts atr speeds down to alpha floor - at RA greater than 100 ft that is. It is entirely possible that MA was unaware that flying at 30 ft would deprive him of alpha floor protection.
Regarding the absence of soot it's entirely concievable that black boxes were away of flames as tail section is largest unburnt part of airplane but it was drenched in foam by firemen as precaution. So no evidence of forgery here.
Radar track of low flying airplane is notoriously hard to obtain (did you know that radars used by ATC work only to the line of sight?) and it's irelevant in the view of FDR data, video footages and a couple of hundred witnesses and those gave much more precise account of airplane's final flightpath than any radar could.
With videos is same old story: some people claim that sound of spooling engines was engineered as engines were actally not spooling up. Sure but then what's kicking the dust moments before airplane contacted the trees if not engine exhausts? Or do you claim that it was photoshoped? And on the videos you can se airplane sinking into woods with no significant bank or yaw, so theory of one engine stalling goes out the window.
I was very disgusted after reading Roger's report. There was that distinguished pilot who put the weight of his authority behind some severly insensible notions in hope he would push them through. I might have overreacted in asking what was wrong with this guy during his active service as it's possible that his condition developed post retirement. Unlike his protege, Jacquet, he at least had the wits to indulge in conspiracy theorizing after being withdrawn from service use. You see, unlike medical, one's pension can not be taken away on mental health grounds.