The RAF Board of Enquiry found that there was not enough evidence to explain why the Chinook flew into the Mull.
In the face of this, the RAF reviewing officers decided that the accident was due to gross negligence of the two pilots.
The RAF rules in force at the time said that deceased aircrew should not be found negligent unless there was “absolutely no doubt whatsoever”
Since then the Sheriff’s Coroners Court (as the accident happened in Scotland) and an extensive enquiry by a select committee from the House of Lords have challenged the conclusion of the reviewing officers.
If you are a helicopter pilot I would urge you to read the Chinook thread for three reasons (you will have to skip through a lot of rubbish):
1.Reading many of the arguments for and against might teach you something about airmanship,
2.Like VageRot (please read the last page at least), who did take the trouble to wade through it, you may come to agree that everything should be done to correct the kind of injustice when anyone can be condemned without the due diligence of the proper legal process. In this case one might argue that they have been condemned in the face of the proper legal process.
3.You will “meet” some very impressive people who are closely involved in the campaign. They include friends of the family, a widow of a deceased passenger and some very experienced helicopter pilots.
Like you, I am not a military flyer and have a fixed wing PPL. I do have a son who is in the early stages of becoming a military pilot and I never want to find myself in the position of the Cook and Tapper families. Having read ALL the posts (easy as I read them as they happened) I am determined to do whatever I can to make sure that I never do.
If you want to join in the debate I suggest that you do it on the main thread and perhaps close this one.