Thread

1. ryandrake · 1790993167 · focus · HN ↗

   For those of you who don't read NTSB reports as a hobby, know that Preliminary reports generally do not assign probable cause or list contributory findings. They're usually just full of basic, factual information like the date, time, location, weather, info about the aircraft and pilot, and so on. So don't go into the PDF thinking you're going to learn the cause of the crash.

   1. xyzzy_plugh · 1790993504 · focus · HN ↗

      While this is generally true and having read this report I do not believe it to contain any new material information related to the probable cause, it continues to paint the picture of the captain making a pretty big series of mistakes.

      It really sucks that the FO could not intervene further as he clearly identified the problem and articulated the solution.

      I certainly doubt there will be a satisfying ending to this one.

      1. jameshilliard · 1790993895 · focus · HN ↗

         > It really sucks that the FO could not intervene further as he clearly identified the problem and articulated the solution.

         First officer could have easily intervened, all they needed to do was call for a go-around. If the captain wouldn't initiate a go-around(AFAIU typical airline policy from my understanding is that if either pilot calls for a go-around then they must initiate a go-around) after being called for by the FO they should have initiated one themselves. The events from the CVR show only the captain ever called for a go-around after it was too late.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.