CHINOOK
Brian Dixon.
Many thanks for the very interesting technical details of this aircraft's history, which are indeed sobering. And of course I have seen Blakely's report. How come, then, that this aircraft was allowed to continue operating? In my experience as the CO of several squadrons (though not helos) it would have been absolutely and utterly inconceivable for me to have allowed such a state of affairs to continue, except perhaps under the most urgent operational conditions which, as I understand matters, did not apply in this case. Is, then, the Sqn Cdr culpable? What does he have to say about it all?
I greatly admire your loyalty to your former colleagues, and I also admire your tenacity in arguing the case for them; but like very many others to whom I have spoken, I cannot avoid the obvious conclusion, which is that the crew sadly made a very serious misjudgement
I think the reason why so few experienced military aviators like myself have been reluctant to put their heads above the parapet in this case, is that they did not wish to be seen to be heaping further ashes upon the heads of the sadly deceased crew. Do you understand that?
Please see para 1 of my post on 18 July.
With all good wishes, John Purdey.