From an XX177 perspective, the relevant issue regarding Moray Firth is that (as DV says, at the same time) the Tornado Board (and hence the MAA) was aware of the Gas Shackle mod to the Mk10A seat in Tornado, which eliminated the risk of shackle jamming. This was designed in 1984, but rejected by MoD until adopted in Tornado in 2007.
But during the later XX177 court cases the Prosecution, acting with MoD, denied all knowledge of this. This evidence was presented to the HSE before the trial last year, but it maintained its position that MoD didn't have it. One of two prominent examples where it was denied MoD had the content of reports which it had signed off. On the other, the Judge actually named the MoD official who signed it; effectively pronouncing M-B innocent. (Something she did no fewer than eight times).
Had the XX177 Service Inquiry seen the same papers their Tornado counterparts cited, their report would have had to say: While the 1990-92 warning cannot be found (the warning M-B were accused of not providing), there is direct evidence of MoD’s prior and subsequent knowledge of the risk, and its elimination by Martin-Baker.
The MAA, having oversight, knew the XX177 report and the case against M-B was flawed, lacking this vital evidence.
That would have presumably stopped the HSE in its tracks.