OldAeroGuy wrote:kalvado wrote:OldAeroGuy wrote:
I don't understand these constant "bias" comments. Please drop this recurrent innuendo. It's not in my line of argument.
No problem, once you drop prejudice against the crew - my impression disappears as well. Otherwise we can keep our opinions intact - both are justified to approximately same extent.
I've merely pointed out the facts of the crew actions that have been published to date versus the Boeing published procedures.
It's strange that you judge that as "prejudice". Since you have decided that I'm "prejudiced", please provide some examples.
Please note the definition: Prejudice - "preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience"
Again, you did convince me that unreliable airspeed procedure should apply. I do see reasons for not following, those may be not too good ones though. I suspect - and I don't see argument otherwise - that same operation in NG would, with the damage they had, allow to stabilize and troubleshoot; so I don't see this as totally unacceptable - and I understand you don't buy that anyway). I can totally accept your logic up to this point. And I see your conclusion of " crew actions that have been published to date versus the Boeing published procedures." as reasonable. Not necessarily fully correct for that particular situation - but it is based on facts and experience, no question about that. I wish we could listen to the other side first.
But your conclusion that those action indicates the intention to proceed to the destination is not based on facts or experience. That's where you totally lose me.