Yay! Common sense post!
I think you nailed it. Look at the descent rates just a minute or two before “touchdown” and he’s really bringing it. Descending 1500’ fpm at one point, far less at another point, etc. is not a stabilized approach. The very last tick on the Flight aware chart shows the airplane trying to climb and slowing to 85 knots, STALLED IT IN. Tail was low, and hit first.
This is pilot error. Non-stabilized approach requires a go-around and he didn’t. You might question whether the controllers didn’t allow him time to descend or reduce speed, but it doesn’t matter. STABILIZED APPROACH, OR GO AROUND.
Descent rate is about 50% higher than normal for the ground speeds in question; one thought crossed my mind was that they had the spoilers deployed and never stowed them. The post crash pics don’t support that though.
“This is pilot error. Non-stabilized approach requires a go-around and he didn’t. You might question whether the controllers didn’t allow him time to descend or reduce speed, but it doesn’t matter. STABILIZED APPROACH, OR GO AROUND.”
Absolutely correct! Pilot in Command still has ultimate responsibility and authority to conduct a successful operation. He didn’t correct a high sink rate on final and decided to try to loose airspeed and kill the sink at the threshold. I was nearby in Sonoma County when it happened. Winds were very gusty out of the West. This is where you carry more power so you don’t drop out if a gust.