Having taken the time and trouble to read all the BA 777 crash threads and analyze them (all) for their intrinsic worth, I've concluded the following about (by far) the most meritorious line of probable cause:
huggychair said (in post
160 of this thread)
I Think that Riverman (
post #137) may be on the money here, icing may not have been an immediate issue here but a contributory one to the sensor points/connections (moisture).
The fact that it was picked up by the FAA on the G.E. powerplant rather than a Rolls-Royce one (on the same aircraft design) should make little difference to the underlying cause. Just because the FAA didn't put out an APB on the Trent engine doesn't mean they're infallible to the same control/FADEC issues!... it just meant they hadn't dealt with them at that time....etc etc
He was picking up the theme originally started by Belgique
in the previous thread at
post 939
and commented upon by UNCTUOUS in the previous thread at
post 954 - but NOT later referred to by Riverman in this thread.
then interpreted further (in this thread) in
that post (#137 of
this thread) by Riverman (referred to by Huggychair)
Among all the 1000's of rabbiting Pprune posts about the accident (and a
very few that have commented upon these four in particular) only those four posts seem to be quite "on the money" and inspirational as to a real possible and plausible cause.
.
Hats off to those gents (i.e. they like more than the sound of their own rants)