Easy to agree on this one. Some years ago, while attempting to become the youngest to fly around the world, a student and his instructor crashed when taking off in a 45 kn wind. Almost immediately a moron with an ABC affiliate on scene said the NTSB would investigate to see if the plane was going fast enough to keep the engine running. I understand that. I do it every day on the expressway.
I cringe when I see an “expert” CIA agent on a History Channel show about disasters mention the “tail wing,” or “not enough wind over the wing caused the engines to stall,” or show flaps pivoting UP in an animation. I wonder why they pay their editors. Spoils the whole show for me.
As an A&P I know what a jacked-up jackscrew does to the elevator and a hydraulics blowout systems can do, but I prefer to hear what the NTSB fat lady sings. Even if I am right, does that save 175 lives? No.
We see this here too. After a four-paragraph article, I can verify when someone emerges from Mom’s basement and uses the deadly “obviously” they are full of BS. If you can look at a video with a twisted pile of aluminum and say “I KNOW what caused this,” you need to work for NTSB. Both Lincoln and Mark Twain are credited with “It is better to remain silent and though of as a fool than open your mouth and prove them right.”
I enjoyed this essay, because it acknowledges that a lot goes through the average head when the handbasket to hell is picking up passengers. The 737 Max experience proves this. The movie “Sully” hammered home the point when the investigators knew everything about everything, correctly reacted instantly in simulations and judged he could have landed safely. Sully’s testimony showed what the crew had to analyze and do-- NOW – to make decisions around the realization that they have no power and are over one very densely populated area.