XPost: rec.aviation.piloting, alt.usenet.kooks   
   From: Sm@rt.1   
      
   Eeyore  wrote in   
   news:47927612.654350A0@hotmail.com:   
      
   >   
   >   
   > john bates wrote:   
   >   
   >> The fact that some experienced people all mentioned the nose high   
   >> attitude before a stall (Which was the case due to the very short   
   >> distance it travelled on the grass)   
   >   
   > If it had truly STALLED there would have been a far nastier mess. The   
   > pilot was just 'stetching' the glide.   
   >   
   >   
   >> why did it do this if under perfect control? This to   
   >> me implies that it was not just the engines.   
   >   
   > The engines didn't fail. There's clear evidence at least one was   
   > turning when it landed. They 'failed' to respond to a call for power.   
   > That's where the 'failure' is and it looks likely to be electronic to   
   > me (or some bizarre fuel quality related issue).   
   >   
      
   Nope   
      
      
   Bertie   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)