cairndow_123
I have yet to read speculation over the lack of
post impact fire, could it be they were flying on fumes, and had no option but to go for a landing ?
I might be alone in my way of thinking, but fuel starvation is normally not a cause I consider. Modern jets don't burn as often as you think - with or without fuel on board.
Except for that, there are so many checks and balances built in with airline operations, that (despite what you read about commercial pressures) airlines don't land "on fumes". Pilots will be very worried when projected landing fuel (which the a/c continually updates for you) gets close to minimum diversion fuel. You have to be seriously mentally challenged to let fuel levels get down to where you have no options. Airliners don't do too well landing deadstick on unprepared surfaces.......
With every accident I see the same questions on fuel levels when the wreckage did not burn. They are not necessarily related. Do a bit of homework on these two sites:
Aviation Safety Network >
and
The Aviation Herald
and get back to me on accidents with and without fuel where the wreckage burned or not.
Asking a question on PPRuNe does not constitute research!