Accident at Halifax
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
i understand what you're saying... but my point was that the numbers they were using must have been based on how heavy they thought they were. the latest i've heard is that they did in fact use the whole runway... if that's the case and they were too heavy, it'd obviously be a huge factor.complexintentions wrote:Sure, but if that speed can't be reached because (for example) you tried to take off 1000 feet down a runway that may have been too short, it really won't matter in the slightest how accurately you measured the weight of your payload...
however... it'd have to be a pretty significant overweight condition, given all the built-in margins and whatnot. the stuff we've heard about engine difficulties seems more likely.
anyway... starting to venture into blatant speculation, so my comments are bordering on irrelevant! nothing we can do but wait to see what the experts deduce...

