Chug, when referring to the trainer questions, tuc said:
In isolation, the questions and answers mean little. When
compared with other similar programmes however, they reveal unpalatable and embarrassing truths.
I interpreted this as "when you compare the Nimrod training procurement arrangements with other programmes, it isn't very good".
I don't see any evidence at all for this conclusion, however on reflection I don't think this is what Tuc meant. Infact all I think he means is he didn't agree with other decisions the 1/2*s in the same area made on other projects, hence the way they're managing the trainer is probably pants too. Not really a fair or justifiable slur if he's honest, though I understand reason for the sentiment. This is a bit surprising however as I would have thought as a safety guru he would have treated such issues on a case-by-case basis underpinned by facts, rather than assuming all decisions or approaches were flawed.