Mxsmanic wrote in
:

James Sleeman writes:

B) An engine stall (failure) is very likely to result in a forced
landing, but not necessarily a crash.

An aerodynamic stall is unlikely to cause either, unless one is
already very close to the ground.

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.

In such a location, an engine failure is likely to cause the same
thing.

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.

There isn't enough information in the article to assume either way,
and the passenger said it was the engine. Why are the passenger's
words being unconditionally dismissed in the absence of any other
evidence?




You really have no clue whatsoever, do you?

Bertie