On Thursday, February 8, 2018 at 7:37:52 PM UTC, John Cochrane wrote

Once again, the point of the hard deck is not to "prevent" anything. If the pilot in command thinks a climb out is a good idea, he/she should do it. If the pilot in command prefers to land, he/she should do it. The only point of the hard deck is to REMOVE an incentive given by the rules to do one or the other. The point of the hard deck is to leave the pilot in command alone to make a good decision. Often a climb-out is the right decision. Go for it!

John cochrane

The point of the hard deck surely is to try to prevent something; to try to prevent pilots from going lower than the hard deck. Once below it they are out of the game and how they then try to get home would be up to them. The question is how might the presence of the hard deck below affect the decision making of pilots flying above it - particularly those who find themselves close to dropping under it and so incurring a technical land out?