Thanks Rotor - I was all set to eat humble pie and edit my posts after ploughing through a thorough and comprehensive report. Sadly, I don't need to eat humble pie and I remain nonplussed by the lack of tenacity and rigour demonstrated by the NTSB in this case.
Just asking "why" a few times might have come up with some useful outcomes:
- Why did the aircraft crash? Because it hit a bird
- Why did hitting a bird cause a problem? Because the shock of the impact dislodged the ECLs
- Why did the ECLS move aft? Because the trigger release was worn
- Why was the trigger release worn? Because the design was inappropriate/the materials were too soft/ the pilots routinely move the ECLs without fully depressing the release causing excessive/unexpected wear etc etc
Then start a new line:
- Why did the ECLs moving aft cause the accident? Because the Nr decayed to an unrecoverable state
- Why did the Nr decay to an unrecoverable state? Because it's a low inertia head and the crew were disorientated by the wind noise
- Why was there wind noise? Because the windscreen shattered on the right-hand side
And so it goes on
A few lines of inquiry like that and you might have something resembling a useful report, I'd have thought, that would cover the whole gamut of causes and effects and produce useful advice and recommendations to operators, regulators and manufacturers.
This might have well have been a minivan crashing off a highway, as far as the NTSB seem to be concerned.