Originally Posted by PBL
you suggested prioritising causes based on the availability of countermeasures. Now I think you are introducing a more subtle variation, namely prioritising countermeasures based on (say) previous rates of occurence.
PBL, I usually make it a rule - as civility demands - to reply to any post addressed to me. But in your case I find it impossible to find anything to say, because nothing you say in reply to me seems to have any relevance to what I have posted.
Trying once more - I am of the opinion that one TL being left out of the 'Idle' position caused the accident, because (besides resulting in substantial forward thrust which cancelled out the effect of reverse thrust on the No. 1 engine) it ALSO ensured that neither the ground spoilers nor the autobrakes deployed. Further (because of the lack of any warning system as to one TL not having been fully retarded) the pilots were left confused as to what had gone wrong - for the vital few seconds which sadly proved to be all the time they had left to live.......
Just to get it straight - what IS your opinion? It APPEARS to be that, because the runway was 'only' 6,500 feet long, the accident would have happened anyway?
Is that correct?