jindabyne
I say again, I am waiting for that straightforward answer - every available piece of information should have been presented and in this case where a navigation problem was an obvious possibility any possible nav practice they may have been undertaking should have been explored to closure - the code may have been a direct clue as explained in detail in previous posts.
Why not use your energy to push for that simple answer?
To remind you all, an SSR code was found set which was dismissed as meaningless - however, had they been trying out a system that was adapted in Chinooks only a year later, that code could have been entirely appropriate - as I have explained previously, what was actually set earlier in the flight (before possibly being disturbed by impact, etc) can be established - so why not? At the very least, if the code turned out to have been as set earlier - and not disturbed - there is a case for a fresh inquiry as the previous inquiries would have been misled on this issue.
And don't get personal - next time I'm in the UK I will be most happy to let you know where we can meet so you can appologise to my face.