Well Headstone, you start off talking about me, but then list subjects which I have not commented or opined about. I have offered advice and, for the benefit of those who have not experienced the MoD’s deceit at close range, I have offered relevant examples. And they are relevant, as they illustrate parallels with other incidents which, clearly, few are interested in. I’m afraid I don’t offer rumour, just simple, verifiable fact based on my collating open source information. You are free to ignore these facts – much higher people than I have. Some here take great delight in reminding me of my admission I know little about the Nimrod airframe and extrapolate this to assume universal ignorance. Yet you don’t comment on my assertion that unqualified staffs routinely make engineering decisions on aircraft and equipment support. What do you prefer; someone who is honest about their background or someone who acts under false pretences?
Tapper’s Dad has sought answers from various sources, including MoD. He has expressed concern about the veracity and relevance of some of those he has received. I seek to help. I read the other similar threads and always think the same thing – dig deeper, look wider.
I’m afraid some of the comments here have a familiar ring. The MoD is fond of saying they have nothing further to add when an awkward question is asked. Or hiding behind the notion that, because incidents/accidents are relatively rare, that must mean they do everything right. Well, they don’t. Their processes and procedures are robust, but implementation is not. God knows it is difficult enough to change this without criticism from the very people we seek to equip, support and keep safe.
If we spoke I think you would find we have more common ground than you think.