If it is debated in the Commons not all MP's will argue strongly against the MoD. One in particular we know is John Wilkinson, MP for Ruislip & Northwood, who argued for the MoD in the recent Defence debate.. I have recently received a letter from him in which he states his view:
".. the crew in attempting to continue the sortie VFR in bad weather did not have enough margin to allow for any navigational error, deterioration of weather or technical malfunction, especially as they could not climb above safety altitude to go IFR because the Chinook Mk 2 was not cleared for flight higher than the 4 deg isotherm.
It is my belief that they ought to have aborted the flight or diverted away from high ground. It is for this reason that I support the Air Marshalls' findings. However bad the briefing and however inappropriate the mission....captains of aircraft are in the last analysis responsible for the safety of their aeroplane regardless of the VIP status of their passengers... (unfortunately I cannot read his writing after that bit)"
I have asked him at what point they should have aborted, based on known facts. If anyone cares to take up the battle to change his mind before any further debate it would be a great help to the cause. As he is an experienced ex RAF pilot so is potentially a powerful voice.
Edited by pulse1 because it didn't make sense!
[ 27 February 2002: Message edited by: pulse1 ]</p>