RR-NDB
It seems to me that a post in response to Lyman is relevant here. Sometimes it is necessary to look at things x1 not x10,000. This is the case here. Ruling out the options is a common process in an investigation. The issues here would revolve around certain individuals' wish states not an objective look at the actual circumstances and occurences of the accident. It is also possible to be too sceptical and too cynical - if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck chances are it is a duck. There is no need to invent other reasons for what is an accident based on pilot reactions, lack of adherence to SOPs, poor to non-existant CRM, no designated chain of command, training issues and possible cultural issues within Air France.
Last edited by Old Carthusian; 12th Apr 2012 at 09:45.