posted on Jun, 6 2008 @ 06:39 PM
Anyways to further the point of this thread and inform everyone of causes and other information. As far as I can tell it's possible that all the
pilots had to do to avert the accident was turn on the pitot heat prior to performing air data calibrations. But this technique while suggested was
not part of the physical cockpit checklist procedures.
The result of the moisture in the ports lead to the airspeed displayed to the pilots to be displayed as 150 knots while it actually was only 120 knots
and a computer perceived negative angle of attack upon takeoff. This lead to the stall that Harlequin miss-interpreted as cause by moisture. The
moistures roll was what lead to the take off at the incorrect airspeed and the over compensation of the aircraft control surfaces.
According to the report, this (the moisture) caused an, "uncommanded 30 degree nose-high pitch-up on takeoff, causing the aircraft to stall and
its subsequent crash."
The wording of "uncommanded" makes me think that the nose up and take-off rotation wasn't even the input of the pilot. This implies that the
aircraft flies by the computer more then the pilot and that there was no hope in recovering when the controls wouldn't respond correctly to the
"probably" correct inputs from the pilot to put it back down on the runway in one piece. Instead due to the mixed info flowing to the controls you
can see the right side air-brake fully deployed yet unable to right the aircraft due to the mix of other controls and movements due to the computers.