Fatigue is a concern, in this case, lack of flying frequency might possibly be more the case.
As a professional pilot, on any day the following is a consideration.
RNAV, LNAV, VNAV, RNP, AR, GPS, GNSS, FLS, GLS, TRK/FPA, DES, NAV, V/S, LS ........confused yet?
+140 destinations, how can a pilot ever say that they are experienced in any particular destination, numerous local procedures, R/T, QNH, QFE, mmHg, M, Ft, transition altitudes 2,500 to 18,000ft, +50C, -30C, 9999, 75m, Oceanic, Himalaya Crossing, ETOPS, Polar, NAT, island holding fuel, continuation procedures.
Company rules, regulations, procedures, monitoring.......
I have no doubt in my mind, if any EK pilot was at the start of this procedure and was told to look out of the window, A/P OFF and land on 13L KJFK, the outcome would have been successful.
So, WHERE is the failure or WHY is it that the PROCEDURE didn’t go correctly if the pilots could have looked out of the window and made a safe approach. Something is telling me here that it is not only the pilots faults.
I would like to see a system implemented for now which allows a number of pilots who fly frequently to more challenging destinations, to be the only pilots rostered on those routes.
Experience breeds confidence and hopefully not complacency.
J