30 minutes ago, exchemist said:

According to the report, the error was recognised and both engines re-lit before impact, though neither was able to spool up and develop enough thrust in time.

It usually takes 2 to 5 minutes to restart the engine.

Google AI:

"Starting a Boeing aircraft engine typically takes about 2 to 5 minutes, but the time can vary depending on the specific engine type and conditions. Older models like the 737NG can start relatively quickly (around 45 seconds per engine), while newer models like the 737 MAX and A320neo can take longer, potentially 2 to 4 extra minutes per engine due to procedures like bowed rotor motoring (...)"

When your engines don't work the first thing you think about is a reboot. The problem is time. And the real structural problem is that people don't think where they create these airports. The entire strip behind (and before) each airport should be a highway on which you could make emergency landings..

Airports are made on the rump, then the land is sold and developed thickly, and then nothing can be done about it anymore after years of human folly..

..a few kilometers before/behind each lane should be a highway, after which, in case of problems, you would land..

8 minutes ago, exchemist said:

Who knows more about this subject: the people who wrote the report or you?

Seriously?

If they had managed to restart the engines and gain full power, there would not have been an accident, after all..

10 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Seriously?

You offered an opinion based on AI, without doing the homework of reading the background. And surprise surprise, what you posted was therefore wrong. You posted botshit, in fact.

Edited July 13Jul 13 by exchemist

17 minutes ago, exchemist said:

You offered an opinion based on AI, without doing the homework of reading the background. And surprise surprise, what you posted was therefore wrong. You posted botshit, in fact.

Why are you lying? Google AI is not AI. It is just hype-AI which a lie it is an AI. Why are you lying that it is AI?

“Google AI” is just such a summary of what can be found on the Internet on a given topic. It is not any AI.

It's like writing that google found you that water boils at 100 C.

Some decency in conversation must be maintained, and you already f**d off.

It had nothing and nothing to do with AI, but you decided, in your idiocy, to introduce into it.

The point was that they did not have time to reboot the engine. If they had, the accident wouldn't have happened.

In my post it was that to restart the engine you need to have 2 min = 120 seconds minimum. And the flight lasted 32 seconds. So since they had 88 seconds less, they naturally crashed.

28 minutes ago, exchemist said:

what you posted was therefore wrong. You posted botshit, in fact.

...with which what I posted you don't agree.. ? Please make an idiot of yourself again..

You should run for president of the USA, you would win in the primaries..

On 7/13/2025 at 2:44 PM, Sensei said:

Why are you lying? Google AI is not AI. It is just hype-AI which a lie it is an AI. Why are you lying that it is AI?

“Google AI” is just such a summary of what can be found on the Internet on a given topic. It is not any AI.

Oh, please. Google AI makes stuff up; I’ve seen it myself

At the bottom of the AI summary it says “AI responses may include mistakes”