I was always the sort of pilot that was likely, at any one time, to earn an “E” for Aircraft Knowledge. Reading the latest Special, I can see what the author is saying, but I lost track early on and am happy to take his word for it. That perhaps explains my immediate and intense admiration of the inspection team as I read the first paragraph of “Findings from the technical investigation”. The aircraft is presumably one they were not familiar with. By definition, what they get from speed-reading the appropriate manuals is not what has actually happened. Add to that the muck-and-corruption in which the wreckage has settled. Just a few of the many components in front of them went wrong before the crash, while almost everything else was ruined after it. This work is not as brave as bomb-disposal work, but by heavens these experts have to be very intelligent, alert and cool. The hangar and laboratory work that follows is as impressive in its own way.
I have read many NTSB, several USAF and a couple of BEA reports (including the Orly Concorde). All of these tend to lose concentration or to have a clear angle. One or two of the USAF reports are clearly politically driven and miss the point they should be driving for. Year by year, the AAIB reports get to the point with diligence and logic whether the object of the investigation is a dinged gyrocopter or something very much more significant. How long shall we be provided with such a service ?