I did not mean ATC has to close airport for wind-shear. I have heard ATC telling pilots about previous aircraft GA for weather reason. It may not be mandatory. But might have helped a pilot to be prepared for a GA. Also if there was a tailwind issue won't that call for a runway end change for landing? Anything that avoids a tragedy.

ATC can close an airport for weather conditions.......any international pilot will know that......where's the ATC guys......the governing state can do what it wants..... Even if a NOTAM says open with 30 minutes prior notice.....does not mean it will be open etc......this thread is all speculation until the findings are published.......interesting to hear all the thoughts. though that's why I check in.......the final report will contain all you want to know and we will have to wait....EK is the biggest operator of the 777 both Boeing and them will want to know the cause and remedy and we will all learn from it....I fear automation complacency here as the 777 is flown all the way to flare with auto throttle in.....and maybe when you think it's there for you it's no longer working the way you expect it to......get pilots back to more hands on flying Mr Boeing and the operators?..........lets teach and train the gotch yas in the sim instead of overloading with dreamt up scenarios and prevent something like this and Asiana again

Emerates 777
 

Photos from the aftermath at Dubai

Well if the data is correct - it says it all really.
There but for the grace of god.....

In my 26 yrs of flying probably 100+ times, most of heavy jets in normal ldg config will have app speed at 2NM far less then 180kts including LHR, DXB etc

high alt places like Sanaa I agree with u :ok: , have landed many times with max tire speed of 190kts+

I think you'll find even at LHR most widebody Jets will be back at Vref + additives by 600' at the latest.
So somewhere around 140 to 150 kts or so.

LHR require 160 kts to 4 nm on the ILS which would be 1,340' AGL approx.

180 to 2 nm is not only stupid it's not possible.....

That would be ground speed right? 140IAS, adjust for TAS, add tailwind and it would be close.

ATC cannot "close" an airport due to weather. It's PIC call on whether to land or not.
If you have a cyclone coming in and the tower is evacuated, you are on your own but you can land if you want.
Same if you want to take off in a 50kt tailwind. ATC can advise against it but can't stop you.
Etc etc

Depends where you are Farrell. Seen it done in China. UAE has closed its airspace due weather a couple of times this year.

ATC and the controlling state can close an airport.....airspace...what ever they want......but I agree if using commanders authority in an emergency you can land where you want.......roads rivers sea..etc help yourself......if you need it use it.....but ATC can close an airport due weather or any other reason they want

possibly correct, 160 IAS at 600' 49 c TAS = 170, so with 10 kts tail it would be 180....

Indeed, correct.
But it's done by the airport operator.
And again, while being "closed" it's still "open" as a last resort. You know we'd all choose to go in NOTAM or not if necessary.
But I do understand your point. Can only go from my limited ATC experience in Oman during two cyclones. Closed but not closed as they say.

Agree.........but back to automation and how the operators are implementing it

The chart posted looks to be from the ADS-B data posted by FlightRadar24. You'll note that the last data recorded on the chart is 8:37:43; when the FR data resumes, 30 seconds later, the aircraft is stationary, and the altitude is still fluctuating between 525/550 (Q0994=530 feet, 0993=546).
The first time they get to Pressure altitude
2016-08-03 08:37:13Z.302,0x89609b,UAE521,25.26224,55.35482,525,4772,177 ,122,-448,A

Or 177 kts
The low point on the chart comes eleven seconds later:

2016-08-03 08:37:24Z.872,0x89609b,UAE521,25.25739,55.36341,475,4772,154 ,122,512,A

Or 50 feet below pressure altitude, 154 knots and climbing.
The bounce peak is:
2016-08-03 08:37:35Z.134,0x89609b,UAE521,25.25423,55.36921,625,4772,134 ,120,640,A
100 feet above pressure altitude, 134 knots. They don't get any higher, and the speed comes off.
This is probably when they hit:
2016-08-03 08:37:40Z.160,0x89609b,UAE521,25.25249,55.37249,525,4772,124 ,119,-1024,A
First, these data are obviously suspect. ADS-B is not an accident investigation tool, and that there's a reading 50 feet below pressure altitude doesn't help.
Second, if you believe the data, they came in, floated for eleven seconds, then pulled up, bled off their remaining airspeed and came down again when the thing stopped flying.
Third, don't believe everything you read on the internet.

Regarding the undercarriage down or up at any stage during landing has anyone seen any pictures of said undercarriage anywhere on the runway or aircraft? I haven't which suggests that the undercarriage is still in its relevant wheel wells. Yes there is a nose gear door visible but no wheels. I only mention this for those that are suggesting the undercarriage broke away, if it did where is it?

Is 49°C actually the OAT for the accident? Or is it just the officially reported temp, with the actual temp possibly being higher?

Don, you are 100% right, we need to take into account OAT, PA, IAS, TAS, tailwind, however regardless of all above, if u just look at the data given by flightaware, 10 min prior EK521, B777 a/c crossed 700ft at 140kts GS, we are talking 40kts diff my friend :confused:

Emerates B777 DBX
 

I am not entirely sure what you are suggesting....on approach flap alarms will be activated if no undercarriage is deployed infering the under carriage was deployed upon landing. A combination of computer or mechanical failure could have deceived the pilots on this.However I am not sure what degree of float would be experienced in these weather conditions. It could just be the pilots decided on a go around and was caught in a ground effect after raising the undercarriage at too lower altitude?

undercarriage
 

# 616 by BENDIX TIE BAR

The first two pics may answer your question(s)

And the third may give some clue to those who commented (a lot) about flaps and angles. Note the "sane wing" flaps seem to be in the position selected by the crew. The other wing flaps are evidently angle-changed by the crash.

For me, the first pic answers a question. You realize all, that the nosewheel gear dor is open !? The gear was extended then, right?