This is like watching a train smash in slow motion.
There will be, inevitably, enormous damage. Not just to the Royal Air Force, already irrevocably disgraced, but to the Ministry of Defence and even to the constitution of the United Kingdom. Why so? Because the MoD and these Air Marshals are openly in defiance of the House of Lords and, consequently, the people of this nation.
And some of us people are getting really very angry about this!. . . .In my opinion, the cases of the two Chinook pilots are settled. They are in the opinions of the original Board of Inquiry, the House of Commons, the House of Lords, most contributors to the PPRuNe Military Aviation Bulletin Board and, most importantly (I believe) their professional colleagues, completely free of blame. On the contrary, they are admired as exceptional aircrew who displayed moral and physical courage of a high order that ordinary humans merely aspire to emulate.
There are still, however, unresolved issues to be addressed. There is great restraint in the reactions of contributors to this BB - possibly deference of serving and retired aviators to men of high rank. However, they are not above the law and they are not above the people. They have shown contempt for both - the time for pussy footing is over - let us 'cry havoc and let loose...'
It is notable that those who seek to defend Wratten and Day's irrational and unintelligent arguments invariably attempt to introduce new 'facts' into the argument. It can be observed that officers and officials who seek to advance themselves beyond their ability frequently complicate matters by introducing more and more issues of diminishing relevance to illustrate their grasp of 'the bigger picture'. In my day in the crew room we called it bull****.
The mark of intelligent and educated people is that they can make simplicity out of complexity and construct taxonomy of relevance. The MoD is notable in its frequent failure to do these things. In my day in the crew room we expressed it as 'a sound grip of the non-essentials'.
Contributors to the forum have mentioned analogies to bus crashes and, most recently, a pathetically weak attempt to focus on crew duty times. Please spare us these feeble minded ruses - it is like arguing with a 9 year old child who is just in a very bad mood.
Wratten and Day’s conduct portrays them as imbeciles and intellectually unfit for the posts they have held and that they aspire to. If Day becomes CAS, hundreds of retired aviator Dads will advise their kids to 'go civvy'. Retention problem?
They could have just 'let it lie' and all would have carried on as before with the ratio of Air Marshals to squadrons growing steadily greater. They would have enjoyed long retirements with remunerative 'consultancies' paying for their elegant homes and 'civilised' lifestyles. This is all part of the corrupt system of deferred reward that so many senior officers enjoy after being helpful to defence contractors.
Instead of preserving the status quo, Wratten has chosen to defame two officers who showed 'Above the Average' skills and exemplary moral and physical courage. What a low down betrayal of two fine young men! How consistent with the thug and bully many of us who served with or under him perceived him to be.
This is symptomatic of the one way loyalty flow that creates a coterie of self seeking, networking, falsely charming senior officers who look over your shoulder at a cocktail party in order not to miss the chance to engage with someone more useful. It is clear to some of us that Johnnie produced the result that Curly Bill would approve of and that that result encouraged the latter to produce a finding that was as illogical as it was spiteful. The continued defence of this act of stupidity compounds the men's perfidy and raises questions about their psychology.
On reading the HoL report, it stands out like a dogs bollocks that this was not a complex tragedy at all. In order to do what Wratten and Day allege, those brave young fellows would have had to be very daft, suicidally determined to flout the rules or out of their heads on mind altering substances - both pilots and one crewman at the same time! If any one of these was the case, the Royal Air Force is very much more seriously deficient of responsible adults than even some of us old geezers think.
Some of us who know Wratten for what he is do not share his high self regard. He is an extremely arrogant ex-fighter pilot who cannot stand to be disagreed with and who was frequently vicious in his treatment of those who crossed him. His most vile contempt and retribution is reserved for those who are proven to be right. He has been unfair and harsh with subordinates in the past and has got away with it - he, no doubt, would cite ‘high standards’. Some of us have seen him perform with not quite such high standards. No man is a paragon and no doubt he is a better airman than I ever was. But he is not as perfect as he seems to believe and he has no excuse for his disloyal treatment of our fallen comrades. He is a disgrace who should surrender his knighthoods and apologise to the Royal Air Force; the Red Arrows will re-equip with pigs before he does, I would wager.
It might even be suggested that his conduct has been prejudicial to the good order of the service; a Summary of Evidence might be made. Which part of Retention Problem might be directly attributable to the widespread distaste for this odious conduct of these martinets? This is the nadir in the history of a service which has grown heroes and inspired admiration in millions. A Royal Air Force that I wanted to join since early childhood, that allowed me to join in ecstasy as a callow boy and that I was so sad to leave that I wept.
The intransigent arrogance of Wratten and Day has also exposed the perfidious nature of the MoD - an organisation that consistently manages to create chaos out of order and makes technical blunders in the great majority of its equipment acquisition programmes. This is not my opinion - it is documented in decades of reports by the Public Accounts Committee and the National Audit Office stretching back to the First World War and before. Using the threadbare cloak of 'Official Secrets', it covers up gross mismanagement. It promotes its 'players' into positions to make biased judgements on their own previous stupidities. It re-invents itself in cycles that always end in failure. It wastes millions of pounds of our money and produces little of use other than wryly amusing acronyms. Its officials make decisions on technical matters for which they have no knowledge or training but who are trusted because of their history and classics Firsts from ancient colleges. Scientists and engineers are little more plentiful in Whitehall than is rocking horse **** .
The MoD will continue to obfuscate, dither and hold ‘briefings’ whilst Mr Hoon makes up his mind (i.e. asks Mr Blair) how to spin it. When all that is needed is for honourable adults to stand up, hold up their hands and say ‘We do not know and we are unlikely to ever know’. Just as our noble Lords have found but which findings have been held in contempt by MoD and these two officers.
There are also the issues that they have been attempting to divert attention from. How could the Royal Air Force contrive to such numb skull, amateurish, stupidity as to endanger such important passengers when so many safer alternatives were available? The British Army has a term for the serendipitous events that sometimes hand them advantage over the Irish terrorists - the Paddy Factor. I bet Adams' henchmen have an Air Marshal Factor!
Serious questions should also be asked about the management of the acquisition of a helicopter without proper documentation and serious engineering deficiencies. Answers will be given to such questions on completion of the first Red Arrows porcine display!
In abolishing the rank of Marshal of the Royal Air Force, the service has lost the steadying guidance of old men of great experience and integrity whose prime objective was the good of the service. They would have seen ambitious men striving for office at the expense of good order and quietly advised against such promotions.
In this era of moral shock, is it not time that we weed out the self centred oafs and clowns who infest the 'upper' echelons of our society with their sleight of hand corruption? We, the people, know that conspiracies can be built without recorded words. The whole tawdry machine works by the 'skills' of cunning people who anticipate the wishes of their masters and 'make it so'. Passports are issued to those who might not otherwise receive them not because ministers order it but because they make clear that they would be pleased to see such a thing. For their officials to do otherwise would be 'a career limiting move'. To 'go with the flow' establishes a reputation as 'a safe pair of hands'. Ambition for personal advancement is a cancer that eats our society voraciously but is perceived as a virtue in so many quarters. Our nation should be run by honest and plain people who are competent at their job, work a decent day for a decent pay and knock off in time to deal with the real stuff of life - to enjoy it with the ones we love.
Finally, I am moved to a comment from a television programme of such vulgarity that I am rarely able to endure it. However, it just seems the perfect phrase - moral courage, my arse!