How could the crew possibly think it was ok to fly the aircraft after a 4.6G landing? Or, how could a first engineering inspection not spot obvious damage such as popped rivets?!
If it is subsequently found that the crew have been "economical with the truth" w.r.t tech log entries/tried to cover it up, I would imagine no biscuits - possibly no tea.
Reminds me of the Scandi (Finnair?) botched B757 go around (which when you read the report will give you goosebumps). That wasn't entered in the log and the aircraft flew for several days before being inspected. It was found to have been majorly overstressed. Don't know what happened to the crew.....
Think about your fellow aviators who are about to take the aircraft from you. Would you want something kept from you?
A4