vfw614 wrote:osiris30 wrote:vfw614 wrote:
"Until the BEA (or NTSB) says it" - here you go:
I am waiting with bated breath with what argument this one will be discredited...
Without weighing in on your argument, they released that on behalf of the Ethiopian authorities, as I believe they are not part of the investigation team and the wording says 'the investigation team noticed...'
Be careful with wording on PR pieces. It is often intentionally vague.
From what exactly do you get the idea that it was released on behalf of the Ethiopian authorities? You mean BEA is releasing a statement in which they THANK the Ethiopians for their trust after being ordered to do that? Sure. Nothing in that press release indicates that it is not a BEA release, but an EIAB release published by BEA. All BEA says that it was released in coordination with (not: on behalf of) the Ethiopians - which is unsurprising as BEA would need some sort of approval to release preliminary information from those who own the data.
It should also be noted that bits and pieces from inside BEA have been leaked already (I am mentioning this now because REUTERS - which you apparently trust - has cited one such source: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethi ... SKCN1QZ1R9) and this leaked information appears to be rather consistent in hinting at similarities with JT610.
The BEA made several tweets "on behalf of the invesitgation team". Go check their Twitter. I do NOT believe the BEA is currently a party to the investigation