Mea culpa
mm43
It was my mistake not to ask my question in a more straightforward manner.
When I read the Hudson event NTSB report I was taken aback by the manner of Airbus response to a (imho) 2+2=4 situation i.e. not preparing dual engine failure checklist under 20k feet. It looked like they turned a blind eye to the apparent problem at hand.( Pls see NTSB Final Report on US Airways 1549 thread )
When I read the blog which machinebird gave a link to -I'm indebted to him - ,again I was surprised by the handling of the problem. But in this case being not qualified to judge what has been brought forward under the paragraphs of Epistemic vulnerability and Context vulnerability I tried to seek expert view though in an inadept manner.
Are there fellow pruners around who can amplify what this blogger claiming and whether it is correct or not ?
Very best
wetbehindear