On Jun 19, 4:24 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

What makes you so certain it was an aerodynamic stall? That type of stall
normally does not cause a crash. The stalling of an engine, however, which is
apparently what the passenger mentioned, could easily cause a crash or make
one more likely.

A) I made no comment on this particular accident, my comments were in
regard to blame being apportioned to reporters for inaccurate analysis
of accidents.
B) An engine stall (failure) is very likely to result in a forced
landing, but not necessarily a crash.
C) An aerodynamic stall is benign if you expect it, if on the other
hand it happens while you are in a high angle of attach mode of flight
due to attempting a far too hasty and high G 180 out of a boxed canyon
which you have suddenly found yourself in the wrong end of (as the
article posted implies), is quite likely to result in a spin at low
alititude followed by a very distinct crash. A forced landing you
usually walk away from, a crash you often get carried away in a bag.
Going by the very brief article, it seems much more likely that this
is a case of aerodynamic stall than engine failure as was reported.