The shroud was an awful idea, previously used on earlier seat designs before being modded out as it made the seat handle difficult to grasp - a massive safety issue.
This highlights the compromises needed in such a design. And it is not a normal iterative design. You hope not to have repeat cycles to analyse. The fact is their basic design evolved to a point, 28 years ago, when the risk that materialised in November 2011 was eliminated altogether. M-B changed their base design for new seats, but could not do this retrospectively. MoD needed to adopt it, but didn't. There may have been good reason, but MoD tried to hide it, actively concealing evidence. The HSE admitted they had not seen it.
What few seem willing to accept is that if the seat is needed, it means all the other layered defences have failed. The only difference here is it was an uncommanded ejection. The parachute should still have deployed. If the assembly instructions, trade training and good old common sense had been followed, it would have. That doesn't make it a bad design. The other defences broke down. All were MoD liabilities. MoD admitted this.
As DV says, those wider issues need to be exposed. As matters stand, the root causes have been swept under the carpet, again.
Mrs Justice Carr says she has a problem determining what to do. I suggest she speak to Charles Haddon-Cave.