Galdian,
although I know deep down you realise I'm actually right!
If everyone agrees then this place will be damn boring! But, when I feel I'm right, I say I'm right, when not, I say I'm not right, when I am unsure, I'd say so... same on my opinions on other people's opinions... Differences is what makes us learn something everyday!
As to out of the slot and unrecoverable... unrecoverable is a subset of out of the slot... but that's just my personal opinion.
I've had a good look at the thread in "reporting points" we have had the following suggestions/conjecture/thoughts/observations/musings from various people such as Ppruners/various investigators/reporters/government officials/ministers etc that the cause or mitigation was:
downdraft/flap failure/normal flight was OK above 1000'AGL/flap assymetry/operational and non-operational equipment on dispatch/losing of "plot"/flaps in or not in position/ high plane speed/no report to ATC of any configuration problems/airport vehicle on runway/Captain "good" Co-pilot "average or less"/absentmindedness/crew argueing or not/go-around calls or not/Captain "experienced", Co-pilot "young"/go-around call too late/"no argument" and "co-ordination between them about flight safety"/go-around asked, recommended, called for by Co-pilot/go-around call made too late.
"Subtle incapacitation" that has surfaced in the last few days did not come from anywhere in the investigation nor Garuda. If the investigators or Garuda subscribe to that view than it won't be me receiving "fixed info" but me giving them a fix. All the NTSC will say to subtle incap for the moment will likely be "we're looking into it"...
As an example you included in one of your posts what added up to "Captain good, Co-pilot average" however the (now apparent?) CVR fact that he 3 times voiced his concerns with growing intensity greatly impresses me for an asian F/O and is worthy of note.
The stage's not set at all! He voiced his concerns, so what? Does that make him an impressive (asian) F/O? No, he didn't take over like someone else (another asian F/O) did and saved the day. He just sat there and let it happen.
That is one of the things that confuses me about some of your posts - are you simply passing on information as relayed to yourself or are you also doing some editing to move things in certain directions?
This place is a discussion forum and not a place for indoctrination nor it is a news agency... None that I've written are guaranteed to be accurate. As to whether I'm simply passing the info or me editing it at the same time, well, it's up to you to decide.
I always wonder whether they are trying to lead you to a path that is true or a path that deviates.
So, am I being led to or am I leading people to a certain path? Then, do I receive fixed info or am I fixing info or perhaps there's truth? Disect the threads, but don't forget the timestamps on the posts and also those of newspaper articles and see which one... *coz I dunno myself!*
---
Unctuous,
1. The damn wrong FDR was fitted so some parameters are missing! I have yet to see the info on A/T and A/P conditions in the flight and when were they deployed. But I myself find it eyebrow raising that GA seems to use "A/T at all stages of the approach" down to that 27' feet... but I have yet to see it on the manual with my own eyes.
2. Speedbrake deployment? Well, the detailed data of the FDR hasn't been released, but, from what I've seen, unless I've forgotten the details, no, they were not deployed once the flaps were set.
One thing that peeved me off so far in this accident is people's definition of "landing" and "approach". I'm beginning to think that the public/media's view of landing was when the plane taxies off the runway, and everything else before that was approach. This of course does not help us understand the chain of events prior to the landing... until the FDR data was sighted...
PK-KAR