Chinook - Still Hitting Back 3 (Merged)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tandemrotor,
"Simply an allegation which must be judged on the standard of proof required"
Well, we have seen the statement from PKPF68-77 (a forecaster with vast experience of the nuances of weather conditions in that part of the UK) having reviewed the TAF's for that evening:--- "I certainly would not have wanted to go VFR with anyone past the Mull that evening."
We have had people on this thread who appeared to be claiming that they were the "other crew" and were concerned about the risk of a FADEC runaway in the forecast conditions and that Tapper and Cook insisted that they would do the task because "they were the SF crew" - even though they had a distinct problem with crew duty limitations in view of their extended operations during the day and the late arrival of the passengers for the fatal flight.
The standard of proof in a UK Court is "beyond all reasonable doubt" decided by a Jury of "12 good men". At least, that is what it used to be - with a codicile that they had to be Ratepayers (ie they were property owners) which gave them a stake in the Country and could be depended on to deliver a conformable verdict. The verdict had to be unanimous.
The required standard of proof has remained although a majority verdict of 10:2 is now acceptable and women are also liable for jury service - so 83.33%certain is now "beyond all reasonable doubt".
The required standard of proof regarding negligence amongst deceased Aircrew is "Absolutely no doubt whatsoever" which is more akin to the 19th C
unanimous verdict than the 21st Century version.
The one thing they all have in common is that it is not you, me or the man in the village Pub who has to make that decision on the evidence available unless and until placed in a such position by Act of Parliament.
The decisions made under The Air Force Act are made by those persons placed in authority by virtue of their Rank and experience as laid down by that Act of Parliament.
"Simply an allegation which must be judged on the standard of proof required"
Well, we have seen the statement from PKPF68-77 (a forecaster with vast experience of the nuances of weather conditions in that part of the UK) having reviewed the TAF's for that evening:--- "I certainly would not have wanted to go VFR with anyone past the Mull that evening."
We have had people on this thread who appeared to be claiming that they were the "other crew" and were concerned about the risk of a FADEC runaway in the forecast conditions and that Tapper and Cook insisted that they would do the task because "they were the SF crew" - even though they had a distinct problem with crew duty limitations in view of their extended operations during the day and the late arrival of the passengers for the fatal flight.
The standard of proof in a UK Court is "beyond all reasonable doubt" decided by a Jury of "12 good men". At least, that is what it used to be - with a codicile that they had to be Ratepayers (ie they were property owners) which gave them a stake in the Country and could be depended on to deliver a conformable verdict. The verdict had to be unanimous.
The required standard of proof has remained although a majority verdict of 10:2 is now acceptable and women are also liable for jury service - so 83.33%certain is now "beyond all reasonable doubt".
The required standard of proof regarding negligence amongst deceased Aircrew is "Absolutely no doubt whatsoever" which is more akin to the 19th C
unanimous verdict than the 21st Century version.
The one thing they all have in common is that it is not you, me or the man in the village Pub who has to make that decision on the evidence available unless and until placed in a such position by Act of Parliament.
The decisions made under The Air Force Act are made by those persons placed in authority by virtue of their Rank and experience as laid down by that Act of Parliament.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 432 Likes
on
228 Posts
The decisions made under The Air Force Act are made by those persons placed in authority by virtue of their Rank and experience as laid down by that Act of Parliament.
Whichever way this verdict goes, there are surely issues about negligence higher up the chain of command.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Caz,
As I said
"Now back to what I previously said are you seriously telling us that JP was JUSTIFIED in inadvertently entering IMC just because of historical weather conditions and a language barrier, simple enough question I think
"
Thoughts old chap?
As I said
"Now back to what I previously said are you seriously telling us that JP was JUSTIFIED in inadvertently entering IMC just because of historical weather conditions and a language barrier, simple enough question I think
"Thoughts old chap?
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Bedfordshire
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cazatou
Same quote as above, but ......... it's true these 2 had the task to review the BoI and were the 'Johnnies-on-the-spot'. However, just like a judge they are also capable of mistakes, which must be open to some sort of appeal process so that other persons placed in authority over them might see fit to overturn their findings. In this case it is, in effect, the HoL SC that has questioned their judgement and the MoD that should respect the findings of that committee.
And as for your defence of JP, I don't really follow your arguments. I was prepared to make allowances for his clouded memory, but you seem to imply that you were up to the same sort of thing as well. Does this mean that Messrs Wratten & day were too? An assumption on their part that every Tom, Dick & Harry flies around IMC at low level would certainly have clouded their judgement (IMHO).
Should get a response from the Sec of State any day soon.
The decisions made under The Air Force Act are made by those persons placed in authority by virtue of their Rank and experience as laid down by that Act of Parliament.
And as for your defence of JP, I don't really follow your arguments. I was prepared to make allowances for his clouded memory, but you seem to imply that you were up to the same sort of thing as well. Does this mean that Messrs Wratten & day were too? An assumption on their part that every Tom, Dick & Harry flies around IMC at low level would certainly have clouded their judgement (IMHO).
Should get a response from the Sec of State any day soon.
Just a numbered other
Well, we have seen the statement from PKPF68-77 (a forecaster with vast experience of the nuances of weather conditions in that part of the UK) having reviewed the TAF's for that evening:--- "I certainly would not have wanted to go VFR with anyone past the Mull that evening."
The BOI agreed that the conditions were ok to plan a vfr transit. There was no intention to go past the Mull, but rather to route northwards on the seaward side of it.
Why the aircraft did not turn along the coast is the crux of the problem, and no-one knows beyond any doubt whatsoever why it didn't.
Interestingly, you defend JP with such excuses as navigation being a more visual art in those days. It still is in Support Helicopters.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect Caz has looked back on his post defending JP's actions and realised that to professional aviators it looks pretty ludicrous and is now at a loss as to how to justify his thoughts.............. just a wild stab in the dark of course 
A really irritating PPRuNer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Just popping my head back up above the parapet
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi folks.
Just an update to say that there's nothing coming out of the MoD at the moment. That's fine, because there was quite a bit of information for them to get through. I hope, though, that the Cook and Tapper families don't have to wait too much longer.
(Interesting) updates as soon as any are available.
Regards, as always.
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Just an update to say that there's nothing coming out of the MoD at the moment. That's fine, because there was quite a bit of information for them to get through. I hope, though, that the Cook and Tapper families don't have to wait too much longer.
(Interesting) updates as soon as any are available.
Regards, as always.
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Thanks for the 'NTR' Brian, it's appreciated. Time drags on, though as you say, not as painfully as it must do not just for the pilots' families but the relatives of all those who perished in this terrible accident. If for no other reason this ordeal must be brought to a conclusion as soon as possible.
"Let Right Be Done"
"Let Right Be Done"
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps it’s time to remind ourselves what happened politically that day.
For an example of what was in the public domain, here are some quotes from an International Express article published shortly after the crash:
“… the intelligence experts … were to have drawn up a list of options …The proposals were expected to include:
* A “surgical” round-up of key IRA personnel north and south of the border …
* Security operations to continue with stepped up “harassment” of terrorist suspects.
* Major expansion of covert operations to identify the Provos’ planned main targets.
* Extra forces – possibly an army battalion – for Ulster.”
.
(I have no doubt there would have been other rigorous activities started up again that had been a bit sensitive to the public since the Gibraltar incident.)
.
Further, in the same article:
“The most senior officer to die in the crash, Ulster’s Special Branch chief Brian Fitzsimons, was to be one of the key strategists at Fort George.
“The RUC Assistant Chief Constable, who played a crucial role in the capture of Brighton bomber Patrick Magee, was “extremely pessimistic” about the peace plan.
“A senior intelligence colleague said: “He would have been going to the meeting with the intention of formulating a major offensive against the terrorists …””.
.
So how does any of the above suit the secret (illegal) negotiations that had been going on between MI6 and the IRA?
Bring into the equation that senior politicians had publically expressed that they would like to wash their hands of the Ulster problem and that there was a terrorist threat to the sacred financial districts – how does it feel?
.
For a while I thought you’d have to go back as far as Joan of Arc for a betrayal of comparable magnitude – but then I revisited that incident back in the 1920’s when 20+ British agents had their movements and locations leaked to the IRA and they were killed in one operation. Together with the subsequent murder of Michael Collins, this put paid to any chance of a mutually respectable solution to the troubles way back then.
.
Airey Neaves thought there was something wrong with the intelligence services regarding their performance in NI – he had replacements ready (with Thatcher’s blessing) for heads of both MI5 & MI6 – got blown up days before he could push it through.
It is a pity we do not have anyone else of the calibre of Brian Fitzsimons or Airey Neave to look at this Chinook crash – perhaps we could hope for something more in the way of justice than just clearing the names of two who were in fact victims themselves.
For an example of what was in the public domain, here are some quotes from an International Express article published shortly after the crash:
“… the intelligence experts … were to have drawn up a list of options …The proposals were expected to include:
* A “surgical” round-up of key IRA personnel north and south of the border …
* Security operations to continue with stepped up “harassment” of terrorist suspects.
* Major expansion of covert operations to identify the Provos’ planned main targets.
* Extra forces – possibly an army battalion – for Ulster.”
.
(I have no doubt there would have been other rigorous activities started up again that had been a bit sensitive to the public since the Gibraltar incident.)
.
Further, in the same article:
“The most senior officer to die in the crash, Ulster’s Special Branch chief Brian Fitzsimons, was to be one of the key strategists at Fort George.
“The RUC Assistant Chief Constable, who played a crucial role in the capture of Brighton bomber Patrick Magee, was “extremely pessimistic” about the peace plan.
“A senior intelligence colleague said: “He would have been going to the meeting with the intention of formulating a major offensive against the terrorists …””.
.
So how does any of the above suit the secret (illegal) negotiations that had been going on between MI6 and the IRA?
Bring into the equation that senior politicians had publically expressed that they would like to wash their hands of the Ulster problem and that there was a terrorist threat to the sacred financial districts – how does it feel?
.
For a while I thought you’d have to go back as far as Joan of Arc for a betrayal of comparable magnitude – but then I revisited that incident back in the 1920’s when 20+ British agents had their movements and locations leaked to the IRA and they were killed in one operation. Together with the subsequent murder of Michael Collins, this put paid to any chance of a mutually respectable solution to the troubles way back then.
.
Airey Neaves thought there was something wrong with the intelligence services regarding their performance in NI – he had replacements ready (with Thatcher’s blessing) for heads of both MI5 & MI6 – got blown up days before he could push it through.
It is a pity we do not have anyone else of the calibre of Brian Fitzsimons or Airey Neave to look at this Chinook crash – perhaps we could hope for something more in the way of justice than just clearing the names of two who were in fact victims themselves.
A really irritating PPRuNer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Just popping my head back up above the parapet
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are a lot of people of the calibre of Mr Fitzsimons and Airey Neave who have played a very active part in this Campaign. Regrettably, they do not have the benefit of moving in the same circles as the aforementioned gentlemen. Therefore, their contribution should not be underestimated or understated.
Regards,
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Regards,
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Walter,
I can't believe I am doing this again...........
If what you suggest happened do you think the conclusion reached in this case would not have been overturned many many years ago to simply make things go away, just a thought of course ?
To my mind if you have done wrong you will do anything to make it disappear as opposed to the Gov't stance being taken here which is therefore keeping this event firmly in the public eye.
I can't believe I am doing this again...........
If what you suggest happened do you think the conclusion reached in this case would not have been overturned many many years ago to simply make things go away, just a thought of course ?
To my mind if you have done wrong you will do anything to make it disappear as opposed to the Gov't stance being taken here which is therefore keeping this event firmly in the public eye.
Last edited by Seldomfitforpurpose; 13th Mar 2008 at 19:39.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFFP
I rather think it has worked out perfectly for them:
The harsh verdict prevented possible public unrest in the years following the crash as it implied that there was “absolutely no doubt whatsoever” that it was just pilot error;
The unjust verdict then tied the interested parties up with the prime motive of clearing the pilots’ names – such that there was a culture (probably encouraged IMHO) of not digging too deep in case of coming up with the “wrong” evidence – very effectively limiting debate.
With the passage of time, the peace process has done its job sufficiently in the dissolution of the national culture in NI such that fears of unrest should be minimal – and so the pilots’ names will be cleared shortly, all involved will get a warm feeling, the Campaign For Justice will have achieved closure, and that will be the end of the case.
Some of us will continue to believe that millions of Brits have been shafted but without the interested parties pushing for a full inquiry nothing more can be done.
As Brian Dixon put it so well recently (in so many words), unless they are in the right circles (having power and influence) the best of people cannot do much – only a large group centred on interested parties with a clear consensus can apply any kind of pressure against the system.
I rather think it has worked out perfectly for them:
The harsh verdict prevented possible public unrest in the years following the crash as it implied that there was “absolutely no doubt whatsoever” that it was just pilot error;
The unjust verdict then tied the interested parties up with the prime motive of clearing the pilots’ names – such that there was a culture (probably encouraged IMHO) of not digging too deep in case of coming up with the “wrong” evidence – very effectively limiting debate.
With the passage of time, the peace process has done its job sufficiently in the dissolution of the national culture in NI such that fears of unrest should be minimal – and so the pilots’ names will be cleared shortly, all involved will get a warm feeling, the Campaign For Justice will have achieved closure, and that will be the end of the case.
Some of us will continue to believe that millions of Brits have been shafted but without the interested parties pushing for a full inquiry nothing more can be done.
As Brian Dixon put it so well recently (in so many words), unless they are in the right circles (having power and influence) the best of people cannot do much – only a large group centred on interested parties with a clear consensus can apply any kind of pressure against the system.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: canada
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Walter
I know that when we met at Paisley and discussed briefly, among other things, your background, there was no doubting your sincerity and intense belief that the Chinook was taken into the hillside through some form of landbased nav. device - similar to claims made about the death of one of Clinton's aides in Bosnia. The MoD was concerned with what you said informally outside the FAI and sought clarification personally from you. They rejected what you had to say. You didn't provide the evidence, just gut instinct and just as John Day and Bill Wratten have done, that is not enough. It wasn't then and it isn't now. I know you use this thread to appeal for more information and hope someone will give it to you. But I worry a little that your commitment to this aspect muddies waters.
Those who perished belonged to a more or less common mindset, based on a belief no IRA ceasefire was imminent in the spring of 1994. Because they were wrong and the IRA declared a ceasefire in August 1994, three months after the accident, the curiosity of timing of both the accident and the ceasefire grew.
Was it government mass murder of 29 people on the Chinook? That's about as hard to prove, and as offensive, as the suggestion the pilots were grossly negligent.
Certainly losing Col. Biles and Brian Fitzsimons and John Deverill hurt the intelligence establishment. Biles, destined for the top, was the head of the Joint Support Group (JSG), which runs agents under the control of the Intelligence Corps inside the Army. Fitzsimons was deputy head of RUC Special Branch and Deverill, deputy head of MI5, (both shortly to retire) provided all intelligence briefings to the Ulster Secretary of State as and when needed.
Two men, both RUC Special Branch, were included on the pax manifest but didn't travel. One has since died of natural causes. The survivor does not talk publicly. But his friends have worried since day one that the crash may have been a Northern Ireland Office "black ops". They offer nothing but a viewpoint but are egged on by a determination so contrary to the certainty of the MoD finding of gross negligence.
Amid officialdom's certainty, a cottage industry of theories grows about what could or could not be possible. That is as damaging to my mind as anything this tragedy has thrown up. So much time and commitment spent on other areas that cannot today be shown because they are either untrue or unsupportable on the available evidence.
This thread and campaign has an intentionally limited purpose - to clear the boys' names.
The evidence does not satisfy the no doubt test and the finding of gross negligence must be set aside. The motive for why gross negligence has been adhered to for so long is secondary.
I know that when we met at Paisley and discussed briefly, among other things, your background, there was no doubting your sincerity and intense belief that the Chinook was taken into the hillside through some form of landbased nav. device - similar to claims made about the death of one of Clinton's aides in Bosnia. The MoD was concerned with what you said informally outside the FAI and sought clarification personally from you. They rejected what you had to say. You didn't provide the evidence, just gut instinct and just as John Day and Bill Wratten have done, that is not enough. It wasn't then and it isn't now. I know you use this thread to appeal for more information and hope someone will give it to you. But I worry a little that your commitment to this aspect muddies waters.
Those who perished belonged to a more or less common mindset, based on a belief no IRA ceasefire was imminent in the spring of 1994. Because they were wrong and the IRA declared a ceasefire in August 1994, three months after the accident, the curiosity of timing of both the accident and the ceasefire grew.
Was it government mass murder of 29 people on the Chinook? That's about as hard to prove, and as offensive, as the suggestion the pilots were grossly negligent.
Certainly losing Col. Biles and Brian Fitzsimons and John Deverill hurt the intelligence establishment. Biles, destined for the top, was the head of the Joint Support Group (JSG), which runs agents under the control of the Intelligence Corps inside the Army. Fitzsimons was deputy head of RUC Special Branch and Deverill, deputy head of MI5, (both shortly to retire) provided all intelligence briefings to the Ulster Secretary of State as and when needed.
Two men, both RUC Special Branch, were included on the pax manifest but didn't travel. One has since died of natural causes. The survivor does not talk publicly. But his friends have worried since day one that the crash may have been a Northern Ireland Office "black ops". They offer nothing but a viewpoint but are egged on by a determination so contrary to the certainty of the MoD finding of gross negligence.
Amid officialdom's certainty, a cottage industry of theories grows about what could or could not be possible. That is as damaging to my mind as anything this tragedy has thrown up. So much time and commitment spent on other areas that cannot today be shown because they are either untrue or unsupportable on the available evidence.
This thread and campaign has an intentionally limited purpose - to clear the boys' names.
The evidence does not satisfy the no doubt test and the finding of gross negligence must be set aside. The motive for why gross negligence has been adhered to for so long is secondary.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Antenna
The evidence is there for anyone who can be bothered to do the analysis that the a/c was doing something extra in the vicinity of the Mull.
Your suggestion that the MOD gave concern and consideration to my views back then (1996) is hardly the way it was - with the backing of a senior politician who had to push quite hard, I managed to get an interview at the MOD - they had promised the poli that someone on the technical side would be there to discuss the tech side of things - all I got was a PR man (Air Cdr McRobbie).
Regarding the timing of the crash - read the posts again re the start of the secret talks and the start of the ceasefire - the previous examples should have correlated with this one - very convenient each on its own and all pointing the same way.
As regards this forum being distracted from its main aim, if you ask elsewhere this forum is the one recommended, that everything and anything to do with ZD576 is dealt with here - sort of catch 22?
It should have been enough that the weather was misrepresented - that's up there every summer for you to check yourself - if you can be bothered.
As I have said before, pulling this one off in front of your noses must have been like taking candy from a baby.
Pity you were not so collectively sceptical about the evidence for Iraq - have to be told what to think don't you?
The evidence is there for anyone who can be bothered to do the analysis that the a/c was doing something extra in the vicinity of the Mull.
Your suggestion that the MOD gave concern and consideration to my views back then (1996) is hardly the way it was - with the backing of a senior politician who had to push quite hard, I managed to get an interview at the MOD - they had promised the poli that someone on the technical side would be there to discuss the tech side of things - all I got was a PR man (Air Cdr McRobbie).
Regarding the timing of the crash - read the posts again re the start of the secret talks and the start of the ceasefire - the previous examples should have correlated with this one - very convenient each on its own and all pointing the same way.
As regards this forum being distracted from its main aim, if you ask elsewhere this forum is the one recommended, that everything and anything to do with ZD576 is dealt with here - sort of catch 22?
It should have been enough that the weather was misrepresented - that's up there every summer for you to check yourself - if you can be bothered.
As I have said before, pulling this one off in front of your noses must have been like taking candy from a baby.
Pity you were not so collectively sceptical about the evidence for Iraq - have to be told what to think don't you?
A really irritating PPRuNer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Just popping my head back up above the parapet
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
have to be told what to think don't you?
I have said from day 1 that it was my aim to clear the pilots' names, and that is what I (and others) will do. I knew them, I worked with them, I respected them and I owe it to them. Once their names have been cleared, I intend to retire from campaigning. At that time, I will be more than happy to hand the baton to you.
Please be patient, you will get a go soon (I hope).
Kind regards,
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Last edited by Brian Dixon; 14th Mar 2008 at 22:58.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Liverpool based Geordie, so calm down, calm down kidda!!
Age: 60
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
6 Posts
Walter, you really are an idiot, you can look at all of your evidence for ever, with my own eyes, it did not have your kit fitted. Every helicopter chap on this site knows who I am and that I was there that day. I am not an establishment 'red herring'. Quite simply, you are WRONG 100%. Insulting me and others with your last line can only escalate the insults, so here goes...... **** off you fecking idiot!!
Brian, sorry to you and all others (including disbelievers) for stooping low and giving insults, I assure you that I have held back my real amount of contempt for this 'thing'. JP and others could actually be right, they give reasoned arguments. Walt?? God knows what planet he is on.....
Brian, sorry to you and all others (including disbelievers) for stooping low and giving insults, I assure you that I have held back my real amount of contempt for this 'thing'. JP and others could actually be right, they give reasoned arguments. Walt?? God knows what planet he is on.....