Re comments about the CRS and pilot maintenance:
1) All known defects have to be reported/recorded
2) If recorded, the aircraft cannot depart until a CRS has been issued or the defect has been deferred. A pilot can defer a defect provided it is covered by the MEL and
no maintenance action is required.
3) If all this hype is true, the pilot should not have attempted any form of rectification or fault-finding. The fault, as described, seems to relate to prox sensors on the nose leg or an over-serviced/defective nose leg extended too far (I've seen that several times). This also manifests itself with the EICAS showing inflight start parameters with the engines shut down on the ground. I suspect the attempted fast-taxy may have been an effort to rectify this.
4) Unless he/she is a licenced engineer (there are a few) authorised on type the pilot should attempt nothing - a maintenance organisation should have been involved. If none were available, it's a wait for the pax pending the arrival of suitably qualified people.
5) Why is it that the only aviation experts the press contact are E. M. and D. L?
