SJ
Quote:
the crew made not one but three illegal attempts to land.
and on the third attempt,
a mechanical fault produced the crash.
MJ
It is a handling factor but not the reason for the accident.
Even with the tech issue it should be within the ability's of a professional pilot to deal with it. In fact the crew had already dealt with it 2 times previously.
The key difference on this third approach as I read the report, is that
only on this third approach did the Commander split the primary control functions, and only on
this approach was Beta selected.
As far as the ATC factor in applying minima goes, in the UK since about 2010 (IIRC) the requirement to question crews instrument approach intentions when low visibility is occurring was changed. Many controllers won't know the variations between capability/fit of crew/avionics, for example a biz jet could have had a shed load of cash thrown at it to make it and its crew CatIII capable, whereas another similar aircraft may not. I'd be surprised to see a BE200/Jetstream for example, make a CatII approach (let alone CatIII), but only because of my background. I know others in ATC whom wouldn't get those alarm bells ringing, which is one of the reasons why ATC can't be policemen for crews/aircraft busting minima.