Walter
Sorry to be so long getting back
1 I disagreed that they were known to be in control
past the waypoint. I agree that at waypoint change on TANS they were in control
2 Having done the route myself, I'd agree with your method of flying it. That's why I'm sure they were VMC in sight of the mull at waypoint change. My point is that what happened subsequently will never be established.
3
Your closing remark “…..
The point is, the evidence required to find negligence simply does not exist, in the same way that there is no evidence to prove the opposite.
No evidence = No Known Cause = cleared pilots. …..”
Misses the point that there is a lot more to this tragic event than the loss of those on board if there was any foul play – there was an opportunity for foul play if a local navaid was used – and this must be addressed.
Not quite sure of your thrust. There is no navaid which would have allowed flight to continue without visual contact. Had the crew been using one then they would indeed have been negligent. The conspiracy theory regarding foul play with a local navaid is spurious, and I stand by my comment as
exactly the point which needs to be driven home in order to reverse this finding. Going down the route of fanciful theories will only muddy the water.