Agree with everything you point out.

The FDR indicated that the engines were fully functional and responding normally. Those huge engines take a while to spool up and provide adequate thrust. Too low, too slow, too late.

Word for word what I've been saying and thinking as well. Great synopsis. (Just be prepared for the assholes to come in and claim you know nothing - happened to me yesterday).

It's entirely possible he's spoken with the crew/pilot and knows something that the public does not.

Thanks for the support. This is the internet though, so everyone's a self-proclaimed expert with no way to prove it (myself included in others' eyes).

But based on what we've seen and heard via ATC (not only SFO tower but NORCAL Approach - something most people here would overlook), this looks and sounds like pilot…

And cue the trolls, haters, and assholes. I'm done for the day folks. Will be interesting to see how the investigation unfolds.

Come up with your own theories or explanations then. Cheers.

I'm not the NTSB or FAA closing the case; just having a logical discussion on the internet. Calm down.

Meanwhile, I have professional pilots in my immediate family with the same theories and explanations I've posted here. Believe what you want, makes no difference to me.

The fact that visual was the only option doesn't change anything though. Still looks like pilot error to me, in that he unsuccessfully judged the approach and ultimately botched the landing severely.

Made this post before that was known.

I never claimed to have access to any of those things. Obviously, we'll know for certain what happened once those records are uncovered. But given the initial evidence shown, it doesn't leave much doubt in my mind that this was simply pilot error.

Can't be completely ruled out, obviously. But if there were other malfunctions, the pilot would have made a distress call indicating an emergency landing (that's what any properly skilled/trained pilot would have done). There was no distress call and everything was completely routine until it hit the seawall.

But that's my point. He was hand-flying it. And sucked majorly at doing so.

Wow, crazy. If true, that changes a lot. Though the pilot should have noted that and opted to go around if he couldn't accurately judge things.

A family full of pilots that I've spent plenty of time with in proper sims on the ground, and in the air on both private and commercial flights.

I never claimed to be a professional pilot. That said, my analysis is based on the evidence shown and my general knowledge of flight mechanics etc. Not to mention my time spent with family members on flights, in proper simulators, and the like. Much more informed and logical than the crap from the major news…

Perfect link, thanks. Clearly confirms the visual (manual as opposed to autopilot) approach and shows that there were no issues on the approach. No distress call until after the incident. Pilot screwed up BAD.

The weather was flawless. No visibility issues, no wind shear, etc. No distress call on approach. Coming from a family full of pilots, I feel I'm slightly more qualified than most when observing/analyzing info like this.

Initial reports claim that everyone made it out. https://twitter.com/LHRDirector/st…