I applaud both the guys at the front and the CC for a job well done
If our paths should cross at any time in the future then the beers are on me - you have done our profession proud, all of you!
FD crew, an especially excellent job - I also have a lot of gliding time and wonder if I would have been able to make such an excellent job when faced with the same hand of cards. I have never flown a 'bus so can't relate it to this accident, but I know I wouldn't much fancy it in the 73 (would any of us?).
I hope it becomes the recurrent sim profile. No more engine failure at V1, run thru the QRH drills, hold, fly ILS to mins, miss, back into the pattern for another ILS or a divert. Take-off, lose both, ditch, time for coffee.
I was just thinking this and then your post came up - I am in a position to do something about this where I work. I will be calling a meeting in 4 hours time to get a re-evaluation regarding Subpart D, which will affect the 7 large (CAT) types for which I have some input. Heathrow, Rome and now this accident all in a year, I think there is enough call to mandate it as a sim training element!!!
On a different note, a few months ago I was appraising a 320 TR programme and was jibing the HT about the bus facility of having a ditching button and the fact that it must be provided by bus to make the crew feel better that they were about to pop off to meet Davy Jones. I shall now go back to same HT and eat a serious slice of humble pie - well done Airbus for providing this, I would never have thought it but seems you were right on the money with this quirky facility
RIX
Edit to add - I am not suggesting engine fail at V1 shall come out of SP D, but I think management and mitigation of loss of both/all powerplants shall be from now on considered as part of recurrent.