You should be a little patient with journalists unfamiliar with aviation attempting to accurately dissect events, especially before assuming errors and "editorialising".
Theamrad in particular has taken half sentences from the SMH to poke fun at the coverage of the preliminary report.
He posts:
Quote:
Fire engines and rescue vehicles were unable to reach the crash site quickly and were not properly equipped.
Not equiped with what? Warp drive? It did come to rest in a rice field!
Quote:
The weather was calm, contradicting the pilot's claims of a massive down draught.
Accuracy again - obviously the Sydney Morning Herald has not had the benefit of browsing this thread!
Quote:
failure of emergency services to respond quickly could have contributed to the crash
mmmmm - yeah, I can see the logical progression there.
1. the report criticises the type of foam and hoses available, and the lack of an internal access road to the crash site.
2. Please tell me more about the winds, I couldn't find what he was referring to on the thread.
3. the actual story stated the 60 metre safety run-off ANd the failure of emergency services....could have contributed to the crash AND the number of fatalities