takata;
they would be left to radio com and the aircraft had radio issues before departure).
Interesting - could you help out?...I don't recall reading this, (which just means, "I don't recall"); do we know what the nature of the issues was? Thanks!
they would be left to radio com and the aircraft had radio issues before departure).
Precisely.
As I mentioned early in the thread, with only the ACARS messages in hand, the investigative process would logically take each message in turn, look upstream to try to determine which fault might result from previous fault(s) to see what would generate the message, and downstream, to try to develop likely scenarios which might result from upstream failures and the "consequent" messages we see . This appears to be the approach taken with the work quoted from the Airliners.net forum - it will be interesting and helpful to see what the investigators come up with to see how close this is.
The temptation is to over-analyze is absolutely the case here - no wonder this is a mess. There is the latent problem too, to fall into the hind-sight bias trap if sufficient caution and suspension of judgement isn't exercised when examining the Air Caraibe and other incidents. That doesn't mean these incidents are to be dismissed - that would be equally inappropriate.
Thursday will hopefully be helpful with new information and not just a summary of what we have heard already.