I'm sorry - I read "Tajer said the Ethiopian Airlines pilots did what they were instructed to do" - How is that not implying they followed all procedures?
That's not calling him a liar - it's just stating that he might not know all the facts.
He also calls it Anti-stall software which it is not.
How am I lying? Those were his words not the news organization.
Ray - you keep spouting personal opinions many times - which I give you proof are wrong and all we hear are crickets.
If you are implying that I am a liar - please provide an example of where I knowingly lied. Otherwise please stop with the personal attacks.
Twisting again. I did not call anyone a liar, nor would I stoop to such. I suggested you may lack credibility. My opinions are clearly stated as such, and if someone holds a different opinion I accept that is so. I will present considered evaluation of the data and interpretation, if that proves to be incorrect, or someone has a better solution then I accept it as such. I cant honestly remember anything that can be considered a 'proof'.
I think we were both guilty about not reading posts fully this morning. No - you did not call me a liar - just lacking in credibility.
I'm not making stuff up - it's all out there if you care to search for it. When I say I'm speculating (like below) I call it speculation.
For proof I can think of two things off the top of my head - You never replied many weeks ago when you asserted that the MAX dropped out of turns and that is why ET302 crashed and I gave you a possibly better explanation from the FDR traces in the preliminary report - nor when I sent you the PM on the Non-Normal airspeed procedure from another forum which I am not allowed to post here.
Then others were asserting that Pilots would never be able to handle stalls or approach to stall in an MAX as the light control forces or pitch instability as they called it would cause the pilot to pull into a stall so fast that it would be unrecoverable. I posted a video showing how much warning the pilots would have and all there were were crickets again.
I don't find the ET CEO credible at all as he continues to insist that there were no bird strikes and that all procedures were followed. Combine that with the AVHerald report that ET may never have supplied the proper procedure to its pilots - which if true - no wonder he is trying to deflect blame.
That is what they (ET) tried to do with ET409 as well - stating it was a lighting strike and not pilot error as the final report clearly shows.
I suspect we will never hear or be able to read the full CVR recording as the ET Civil Aviation Authority under pressure from ET will never release it. The FAA may not be able to release it publicly on their own.
I also find it curious how little we are hearing about the May 23 meeting. Presumably they all listened to the full CVR recordings and if there was a smoking gun further implicating Boeing I'm sure someone would have leaked something by now as there were representatives from 33 organizations there. Alternatively the recordings could have been very damning on both sets of pilots (or at least ET) but as that is against the public narrative of "It's all Boeing and the FAA's fault" we aren't hearing much at all.
All pure speculation though.
I accept you have a different opinion of ET302 dropping out of a high speed turn. No further comment would have been useful. My opinion is not changed. The post you sent did not include the documents suggested. No analysis was therefore possible, no further comment was necessary or useful. None of this is 'proofs' of anything.
I have never offered any opinion on stall characteristics or entry conditions of Cessna or 737 since it is clear there was no stall except perhaps in the final turns, and I have no knowledge or experience of same anyway.
As regards the CEO I have simply asked that you not call him a liar without evidence and have pointed out that your assertion/speculations regarding documentation available to the pilots is contrary to the Official Preliminary Report as are the relevant parts of the AvH article. Your response was to suggest the Official Preliminary Report was a 'fabrication'. I do not support that suggestion primarily because the NTSB would not allow it.
You brought up ET409 to support assertions/accusations regarding CEO and the Official Preliminary Report. The Ethiopians did not write the ET409 report only post an objection that is their right if they wish, even if this is possibly partially politically motivated. This does not support supposed or insinuated Lies and Fabrications in the case of ET302 in my view.
It is not required or common in my experience for CVR to be published and then mostly only tit-bits. I would not expect anything before the final reports, and maybe nothing at all.
Perhaps those involved in the closed May 23rd meeting just have some integrity.
I reserve my right to respond to perceived unjustified or derogatory comments particularly where those disparaged are not here to defend themselves, including dead pilots. I also reserve the right to offer alternatives or opinions to opinions, assertions or statements declared fact if I perceive it useful in the search for information and reality in whichever way they fall.
I also reserve the right to have a laugh and a giggle occasionally, providing no harm is done!