Originally Posted by PBL
1) The task was to consider a warning system which would remind the pilots to reduce thrust to idle on flare. But this is not necessary: there is one already.
Originally Posted by RWA
Have cordially to disagree with that, PBL; and therefore with much of the rest of your anaysis.
Tony, I was giving the reasons which Yannick Malinge gave at his appearance before the CPI on 9 August. This was one of them, indeed it was the primary one.
Marcio, you are apparently also guilty of misconstruing also!
I was reconstructing what I take to be AI's position from the comments that Malinge made. It is a coherent reconstruction (as it has to be; I couldn't imagine AI or any other airframe manufacturer presenting dumb arguments on such an important issue).
And it has merit. What do you expect from those clever people?
Disagree with it all you like. Just attach the initials "AI" to it, not the initials "PBL".
Read it again next year, and the year after, when this is argued in court, and see if I am right that these arguments will be used, or wrong.
PBL