Kramer
Stubborn or something else. What something else? Dunno. You had me lost for words.
Sceptical about some of the crew actions? No, critical of some decisions/actions - taking off overweight, not re-calculating limits to take account of the chnaged conditions and shutting down the wrong engine at the wrong time.
But not expecting, or ever advocating that they should have tried to think creatively outside the box. Procedures and checklists are there to help, and should be adhered to. It's standard procedure to stuff the nose down to maintain speed, landing if that's the end result. It goes against every grain of sense to let the speed bleed away in an attempt to reach a particular landing site. Is there a QFI out there who's ever taught anything different. This should not be controversial on a pilot's forum, let alone a professional pilot's forum. A forced landing may kill you. Spinning in definitely will.
You quoted glueb: "overcome the limitations of simulator training and its "mind set" of always being able to return a crippled jet to an airport." NOT MY WORDS, NOT SOMETHING I'VE AGREED WITH.
As to the article. 5K words in a UK aviation mag, possibly 1K in a major Daily newspaper, and almost certainly a radio news feature. Timings/dates still to be decided.
BUT please can we get back to the other questions and away from this sterile force landing/crash landing one. PLEASE!