You're the one making the claim that the pilots acted inappropriately. Now you're saying you require evidence contradicting your claim before you retract it?
You're the one making the claim that the pilots acted inappropriately. Now you're saying you require evidence contradicting your claim before you retract it?
The aviation minister's comment today does not carry weight in excess of the photographic, factual evidence, IMO. There are too many "loopholes" that she could be exploiting without leaving her statement technically incorrect.
The good thing, such as it is, is that the facts are almost surely going to emerge here. The CVR transcript, FDR dump, and analysis of whether there's a mechanism for the electric trim to run even with the stab trim cutout switches in cutout and whether that can exceed the crew's ability to stop and reverse the trim setting manually will be telling. I do admit that the minister has greater access to that information than you or I do at this time. It is possible, but not decided, that she's had time to review all that information, knows with certainty the crew is blameless, and has chosen to not make a specific enough statement to support that for any number of valid reasons.
But the only way it would end at the total extreme is if they were within 2.5 degrees of max when they re-enabled electric trim and they crashed within 5 seconds. Otherwise, they should have been able to at least get some adjustment.
>Boeing’s anti-stall software on a doomed Ethiopian Airlines jet re-engaged up to four times after the crew initially turned it off due to suspect data from an airflow sensor, two people familiar with the matter have said.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/apr/03/ethiopian-a...
4 cycles should have gotten them to 7-10 degrees away from the extreme. So something else was going on.
That's an interesting possibility, which if they didn't know about it (I don't blame them), they may have felt they had no choice but to go "off checklist" and re-engage the electric trim system. I'd expect that would be in the context of "PF commands nose up pitch trim continuously while PNF engages the trim cutout to normal and monitors."
That's a tougher hand dealt the crew than I previously contemplated and if that's what they did, it's one for which I will owe them a retraction.