Konkordski, thanks for that.
They were assumptions, as I said, based on what was retrieved from statements by local officials and the consequent press releases.
(Pictures of smoking wreckage on misty hillside, came down in thick fog, third attempt to land in thick fog, pilot said unable to see runway, vis les than 10 meters etc. etc.)
So, if we go by the weather report you submitted than you have a point, where is the fog? And an approach on 29 could be made.
Why go missed twice? And if you go missed, then it is climbing right turn. Over the Water.
Allow me to take it one step further.
The crash site is about 30 miles south of the field, thats were the high terrain is. The MSA for that sector is 11500'. What were they doing there, sureley not the place to be for a new approach on 29. Could it be, (assumption), that they were not attempting a third approach but instead trying to get to the alternate, Yerevan?/ T'Blisi ? But then you need more than 11500' in the direction they were going. The "thick" fog then was inland on the hills and not at the airport.
But why go missed twice in the first place with that weather ?
And the transmission; "can not see the runway"?
So, what does not add up here?
Regards
A.V.