More Questions.
Distant Voice, I think we've heard from 'users' that the system isn't anything like as MM as people are making out. Perhaps not the best but certainly not unmanageable or unsafe when operated correctly as trained.
The issue of the time between 2 & 1 failing certainly needs to be looked at, perhaps it was the change of attitude that made the fuel move away from the pump. How long does it take a cell of fuel to move from the pump to the combustion chamber?
As mentioned previously, the NVG lighting was on, how much of a difference to the CAD reading did that make?
Totally agree with the disbelief that three people just sat there with all the cautions and warnings presented to them, which must raise the question, what was going on in that cockpit that evening, where there any CRM issues and what culture existed at the unit?
I can't think for a minute that a restart would have been attempted. That's purely my opinion as I know that I would rather have been looking at a landing site than a restart, especially given what the report says was being presented to me.
As far as the Rad Alt and Steerable LL are concerned. Ok, the ergonomics could be better, however there are ways that we have of making it a little easier to identify. The operators instructions say that the switch should be used, "if time is available once the auto has been established and Nr stable" (p.67) in this case perhaps time wasn't available. It has to be added though, over the city what accurate use would the Rad Alt have and how useful would the steerable landing light be? Some here have even said the lights of the city would be bright enough to make the Naster Caution not stand out!
Fundamentally though I agree with what you say.