Sounds like something south Canada would say.

Huh, seems like a weird change to make.

For people scared of flying - it is actually shocking how redundant and safe air travel actually is.

The number of things that can fail, thinga they have thought about and have a perfectly flyable and landable aircraft is one of the great achievements in human history. They don’t even let pilots eat the same in-flight meal because of the possibility of food poisoning.

One of the few I can think of is asymmetrical gear - one side deployed but not the other. Will cause a plane to dig into runway and spin/disintegrate. Maybe gear up was the plan, but too fast and too heavy with wrong configuration.

Same touchdown zone regardless, but they could have floated while they waited for the non existent gear to touch down.

Also explains the lack of spoilers and why the wings are still generating lift - they are usually set to engage when there is pressure on the gear.

Yup.

Something you might be able to comment on that I haven’t seen discussed- are the reversers engaged? It looks like the cowling has come back, and if they tried but it didn’t engage (on account of being dragged along a runway at 140kt) the could still be proving thrust.

All good - I can’t remember if gear is pulled in a go around, but I presume it would only be after they have established a climb… you don’t raise gear if your still going down.

Something that wasn’t discussed- I think the reverses are engaged. The cowling looks like its been pulled back. You can’t go around once reversers are engaged.

Not pilot.

Go around is full power and still some flaps.

If they were on final, and followed procedures correctly, they were set to land something like 5k out. If they had another birdstrike it would be in landing configuration, not clean.

Once they unlock (mechanical) gravity can pull them down to lock. You just can’t get them up again and they create a lot of drag.

To the surprise of no one

Oh God, no!!!

In a knife fight the loser dies in the streets, the winner on the way to hospital.

I usually like those.

Not that one though

Heard a podcast episode from this girls mum. Fuckinf depressing reality.

Its a very weird line.

Back in ww2 when the allies ran the bombing campaign of German cities the “justification” was that civilians were being used to manufacture arms for the armed forces therefore a part of the military logistics network, and in fairness yes they were - like the British were at the start.

On the other hand it is a deliberate attack on civilians who are not in uniform, not part of the armed forces and not combatants. You could quite easily follow this path to everyone who pays tax or trades with that country as supporting the war effort.

Going at it from a different direction, terrorism is defined as non state actor, using violence against civilians, for a political objective. Therefore terrorism.

Is it justified - probably not but neither is much of warfare. Proportional but didn’t minimize civilian casualties.

Is it terrorism - leaning towards yes.

While yes, fuck Russia Putin, if the drones were still up they were still technically armed and a combatant.

If they had surrendered, different story. But then again, if I surrendered and still carried my assault rifle have I surrendered?

I think the LOAC and geneva conventions, along with UN charter need to be updated for a modern world.

I didn’t mention Gaza, why is that your point?

Its terrorism when its a non state actor using violence to achieve political objectives. Its war when its state v state.

Its it actually a war yet or we still pretending it’s not?

Yup. And yet some how rockets are still happily coming in both directions. Same two choices remain.