This one is easy. An Ipod, Laptop or PED was left on during the landing 
They will pull the tapes, recorders, etc… and know what the pilots did wrong by noon tomorrow. (the NTSB & there forgein equals always list pilot error).
As I can’t seem to figure this one out, FOD, Fuel Exhaustion, Weather, some quirck in power???, so instead, I’d just like to say THANKYOU to all you Boeing workers out there, you sure make one tough bird.
I dunno no fire - gear ripped off = no fuel. Plenty of sparks for a fire. . .
That can hardly be described as an inadvertent deployment, i.e. the pilot caused it but he didn’t really mean to!
My thoughts as well.
This article
mirror.co.uk/news/topstories … -20289275/
quotes a pilot as saying the thrust reversers normally operate **before **touchdown.
This sounds like total rubbish! Experts here care to rebut or confirm?
On the BBC news last night 8pm GMT time, the reporter said an expert believed it was to do with birds flying nearby, though dont think there is much possibility that it could happen to two engines simutaniously,
according to one passenger given an interview by channel 4 news 7pm GMT time, the landing seemed hard and bumpy but most passengers around him and himself didnt hear (If they did) the engines lose power,
THEN a reporter said the plane lost power everywhere, the engines went out, and the pilots screens went black due to electrical failure about 200ft above ground level,
according to a taxi driver at heathrow it came in silent and was at a high attitude, and he said the plane just seemed to do a belly landing dont know what he means by that though people can exagerate
Since most of the reports so far make little sense…my quote of the day goes to the passenger that said the captain should be given “a medal the size of a frying pan”.
more pics.
heathrowpictures.com/pictures/pictures.html
are the thrust reversers activated here or is there too much damage to know?
Inadvertent deployment of the thrust reversers?
Aviation expert Philip Butterworth-Hayes actually said the engines were in reversed thrust state after the crash and this was what probably caused the crash.
Total rubbish it is (the domain name should be a BIG clue 
).
If he really IS an “expert” he wouldn’t have said that. Giving him the benefit of the doubt, I’d say he was misquoted.
If he did say that though … ***** 
Any thoughts about the difference in dirt uptake into the engines???
#1 was turning, #2 was not?
Inadvertant thrust reverser deployment is not the cause. If you look at this picture of the right engine the reverser cascade vanes, that are partially visible due to the broken away portion of the cowling, are not fully exposed. When the reverser deploys that portion of the cowling area translates backward and exposes the entire cascade vane ring. Further, had the reversers deployed in flight at the point where the aircraft “lost power” the aircraft would’ve pitched nose down, as the engines are below and forward of the lateral axis of the aircraft, and the outcome would’ve been far more disasterous.
Hmmmm!!!
No Fire, No #2 engine not running??? Not sounding good??
Sounds like the souls on board, where very, very, lucky…
Or as a passenger stated, “I feel like I won the lottery!”.
Link to Initial AAIB Investigation Report here.
with a relevant
Initial indications from the interviews and Flight Recorder analyses show the flight and
approach to have progressed normally until the aircraft was established on late finals for
Runway 27L. At approximately 600 ft and 2 miles from touch down, the Autothrottle
demanded an increase in thrust from the two engines but the engines did not respond.
Following further demands for increased thrust from the Autothrottle, and subsequently
the flight crew moving the throttle levers, the engines similarly failed to respond. The
aircraft speed reduced and the aircraft descended onto the grass short of the paved
runway surface.
When the final report comes out they may want to hit him over the head with it.
(The report) also noted that: “A significant amount of fuel leaked from the aircraft but there was no fire.”
At a press conference before the report was released Mr Burkill said Senior First Officer John Coward had done a “most remarkable job” in landing the aircraft.
He also praised all the crew for showing “the highest standards of skill and professionalism”.
“Flying is about teamwork and we had an outstanding team on board,” he said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7196962.stm
LiveLeak I like when you receive a standing ovation from fellow staff for crashing an aircraft!
Only in England, you say, Pity!!!