As always, Rockhound, thank you for your responses. I still believe, however, that the evidence is already there and just needs worked through objectively and logically.
Millerscourt, thank you too. I agree with you that there is no feasible alternative to the captain having pulled the CBs - as it was a billion to one that it was a double mechanical failure. This gives us another line in the sand.
So we know:
- the disaster was not due to mechanical failure;
- the captain switched off the cockpit recorders; and
- the aircraft descended with maximum power on.
However,
1) the captain was no more in debt than the average pilot - and pilots are not automatically grounded for normal debt;
2) demotions do happen - and again pilots are not automatically grounded as part of every demotion; and
3) every disaster has a 10th anniversary, including MI 185 - and the survivors again are not automatically grounded as part of having survived.
If these aspects, individually, or combined, or in the character of this particular captain, were not important enough before the accident, then why are they argued to be so crucial after it.
It was, however, useful to be reminded that MI 185 was not just suicide, but also mass murder - and my understanding is that unresolved murder cases are never closed.