Few Cloudy,
I appreciate your taking the time to post "mainly" for me but I fear you have entirely misunderstood me. None of my posts was meant as a criticism. As a non-airman, I was - and still am - genuinely seeking enlightenment on technical matters. At no time did I suggest that the aircraft had been inadequately fuelled. How the hell would I know whether it was or not? In one post I wrote that I found it difficult to believe - and I still do - that a catastrophic depletion of fuel could occur without the crew detecting it. In this instance, the fuel on board dropped from - what, 2 hours or so(?) to 10 mins (if press reports can be believed) - before the crew called an emergency. Man, if this scenario is valid, it scares the living bejeezus out of me (SLF)! Finally, I never claimed the flight crew's first priority in an emergency was to put out a distress call (although I note that Capt Piche didn't waste much time doing so). My question was - and remains - why did he only when his aircraft was running practically on fumes and not earlier? Did he really have no prior indication that he was becoming dangerously low on fuel? I wasn't at today's press conference but, judging by the media reports, the fuel management aspect of this incident was essentially glossed over and I, for one, am none the wiser. Predictably, the reporters apparently didn't ask any pointed questions. The CBC announced, with a straight face, that Airbus Industrie has sent a team to the Azores to find out why the engines stopped.
SunSeaSandfly,
Thanks for your post. That was my understanding (from extensive reading, SW radio monitoring and flight simming) and led directly to my "shrill" query.
I'm still
Rockhound