Thomas Coupling # 1068
TC, thanks for encouraging us newbies - although I have observed for a long time but posted very infrequently. I'm not sure I can agree with your "we should be all singing from the same hymn sheet." Alternate views and opinions are healthy. We know that eye-witnesses can be notoriously inaccurate due to the way the brain interprets what we see and hear - we fill in the gaps and interpret what we perceive based on our own experience and mental models. The witness outside seeing the event may well have been interpreting what he saw and heard in the dark. However, the TV footage of those witnesses inside was quite compelling and lucid. They all related an initial "event" and a minor roof issue (comment by the band "we brought the house/roof down") followed after a pause by the collapse and dust cloud. If the aircraft hit very very hard as you say [30g+] would not the impact and roof collapse have been instantaneous, the aircraft destroyed to a greater extent and the roof be damaged more substantially than it was? The TV footage did not seem to support that kind of catastrophic impact and the aircraft appeared erect but nose down in the building. Hence, my implied opinion that it might have been an EOL with some form of control until the cushion but ending up very heavy after which the roof gave way. Like you, I hope the AAIB get some definitive evidence to help solve this tragic event - at the moment we are all really just speculating - which after such a disaster is good as we all want to share our thoughts, ideas and feelings.