Allow me to express an opinion.
What Pulse has said is exactly right. I believe that it is impossible to determine what was occurring in, or with ZD576 in the moments leading up to waypoint change.
There is simply NO RECORD.
The best available evidence, from a yachtsman, suggests they were operating in total compliance with the Visual Flight Rules.
I am then, at a loss to understand, how anyone on board that aircraft can be deemed negligent at that time.
I am however aware that, this concept of 'shifting' the moment of negligence to a point prior to waypoint change, was a later development in the position of the two AMs, and MOD. It most definitely was never mentioned at any time during the BOI process, nor I strongly suspect, at the subsequent FAI.
Perhaps the AMs felt that the debate was swinging against them, and they needed to 'tweak' their argument?
I am also aware that this 'shift', though utterly devoid of any factual evidence, is a very useful 'device' for avoiding further inconvenient questions regarding ANY subsequent event affecting ZD576 or it's crew.
If the precise timing of the crew's negligence is so obvious, I ask only this:
1) Why was it not mentioned at any time in the BOI?
2) Why was it never referred to in the subsequent FAI?
I think the answer to those two questions is obvious. Don't you? (see line 8 of this post!)
Last edited by Tandemrotor; 29th Jun 2006 at 11:51.