In response to HDD's Post #149:
What are you on about?
FADEC controlled engines can fail in all manner of interesting ways if the FADECs do something odd. They are designed not to, but it seems likely to me, from the facts in the public domain to date (including the very carefully worded and excellent AAIB initial report), that something went wrong with the FADECs or another element in the control systems linking the cockpit to the engines. The AAIB report specifically states that the engines failed to respond, NOT that they flamed out, spooled down, went to idle, etc. I cannot believe the aircraft ran short of fuel, as the evidence in the report does not support such a conclusion.
Knowing that the AAIB are very careful with their choice of words in such circumstances, I believe we can take it as read that the engines did just that, i.e. failed to respond. As yet, we don't know what level of thrust they were producing, but by the grace of God it was enough to get the aircraft over the airfield boundary fence.
By the way - all those people who voted "Aliens" in the poll; thank you! It was the best laugh I have had all day
And also, to the chap who said this accident would put pilotless airliners back a few years, I heartily agree with you, and a good thing that is too.