And why not allow a small commercial drone to "fly" and video that night approach with similar aircraft on the taxiway, the last 3 miles or so? It could provide crucial evidence at minimal risk.
I suggested this, albeit not with a drone*, some posts back. The problem is, all the expenditure of
an exact simulation would be expensive and - in the minds of the funders - primarily for a defence argument**. Also, how does one achieve an exact simulation? Every aircraft would have to be very near to the same place and have precisely the same lights on. I gather one at least put on main landing lights. Could all the crews remember their light settings at any given moment?
I can't express how strongly I feel about the RT wording used. A clear,
addressed, and forceful message would have been a much better tool to warn that a major mistake was being made. But then, the issue of disbelief is as true for the crews in the firing line as it is for the landing pilots.
Tiredness. I can't count the times I've felt miserably tired during a flight - especially in the days before a quick shut-eye was allowed - but always the approach and landing were so stimulating, so much the absorbing part of why I was in the profession, that the tiredness was put on hold by brain chemistry.
*A camera aircraft with a couple of Fed guys on board is the only way.
**While it would seem primarily a flight for defence mitigation, the all-important learning issue is still valid and I feel this case is so important because it is so unexplainable.