Originally Posted by Dream Land
This accident could have been prevented a few different ways, let's see:
.
2. An auto thrust system similar to the Boeing's that retards thrust automatically at a certain height,
.
4. Another idea by Tyro, whereby T/R deployment is dependent on spoilers being deployed, thereby giving you the go around option.
They are points, however invalid points...
In a Boeing, you only get the thrust to go back to idle automatically in an autoland, just like an Airbus. The approach was flown landed manually.
The "T/R deployment" is commanded to the FADEC from the spoilers (SEC), in this case they did not deploy as with a thrust lever angle greater than 20 degrees above IDLE the logic is for a touch and go or rejected landing, it has been reported that the right thrust lever was left in the approach setting, therefore the split in the thrust levers in this accident is something like 15-20cm (6-8").
An attempt to move them BOTH to idle like on any aircraft when landing, even with one at IDLE and the other at 15 degrees above IDLE (less than a 10 degree rearward shift in the thrust lever) of thrust lever angle the spoilers would have deployed (20 to 35 degree range in the diagram below).
Nothing stops a Boeing from going down a runway with a thrust levers at 70% N1 or 1.20 EPR and the other at idle, on some Boeing types you can also have on in reverse and one above reverse.