In response to this and your kind PM, might I say that it doesn't render your contributions worthless. Although you have been particularly unreceptive in understanding the general opinion of the two accidents we are discussing on this thread, and have focused on the minutae rather than the big picture, using a (perhaps technically correct but ) totally unrecognised acronym just makes you seem like the classroom swot who is trying to sound oh so knowledgable to conceal his actual depth of understanding.
You are capable of sounding very convincing, but do you actually have any real understanding of the situation both crew found themselves in, and crucially, have you finally grasped the 1 very very vital difference in what happened ? Some of your recent posts lead me to believe that you have finally acknowledged the difference, 1 crew were trying to extricate themselves from deep sh1t not of their own making, the other dropped themselves in the merde with little excuse.
If you truly understood this, you could perhaps be taken more seriously.
I don't doubt you are well intentioned, and I regret having to take such a robust stand against some of your comments, but you really should listen to what we (often very patiently ) are trying to convey to you, rather than repeatedly pushing your pet theory. Crashing a pretty much perfectly serviceable aircraft is NOT the same as rendering an inevitable crash survivable for all on board, if you want to retain any credibility, please try to understand this very vital difference.