Clive Sinclair wrote:   
   > Eeyore wrote:   
   >> Explainer wrote:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>> Pretty obvious from the descriptions of witnesses and passengers that   
   >>> at least one of the engine thrust-reversers kicked in when   
   >>> the landing gear was lowered. Pilot error (like Air Canada 1970) or   
   >>> malfunction? That's the only question now.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Pretty obvious that you're a know-nothing IDIOT.   
   >>   
   >> My money's on bird strike until any better info comes along.   
   >>   
   >> Graham   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   > All the experts now say NOT a bird strike. Wrong time of year. Does   
   > Heathrow not have Systems to scare birds away.   
   >   
   > Sure bird strikes happen, but how ofter at MAJOR airports.   
   >   
   > Lot's of eyewitnesses on the ground say it sounded very loud - full   
   > power being applied. Also would passengers not notice the engines 'going   
   > quiet' - even with Air con and the APU running.   
   >   
   > My guess is windshear, causes a sudden loss of LIFT and the pilots would   
   > then apply full power (the very loud overhead aircraft). The pilot   
   > should have had warning of windshear and time to raise the flaps a   
   > notch, which he apparently did - to obtain best glide speed/path.   
   >   
   > But againg, just a guess. I don't buy the both engines failing.   
   >   
      
   Windshear would explain noise because the first thing you'do is   
   firewall the engines. I've had to, twice, it was instinctive on   
   one occasion and rational on the other. But apparently London   
   isn't all that suspect.   
      
   Physical fuel starvation doesn't look good either, engine rundown   
   would likely be staggered with one failing many minutes before   
   the other.   
      
   How about digital equipment failure (soft or hard)?   No, I'm not   
   777 qualified.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)