PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Chinook - Still Hitting Back
View Single Post
Old 9th Nov 2001, 15:14
  #136 (permalink)  
meadowbank
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Bedfordshire
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

Regarding timescale, Lord Chalfont suggested (immediately following the latest hearing) that the report of the Select Committee is liable to be delivered to the House of Lords "in about a month".

Tony Cable and Ken Smart (both AAIB) said several things to indicate to their lordships (beyond any doubt whatsoever(!)), that the AAIB's conclusions cannot be considered gospel:
"it is not an exact science" TC
"without a Flight Data Recorder ..... you cannot be sure" KS
"[the wreckage] presents evidence in a scrambled form" KS

TC also stated that analysis of the wreckage was complicated by the fact that there were 3 or 4 separate impacts "over a few seconds" and that "the evidence was remarkably thin".

Perhaps most vitally, he went on to say, "it's not possible to prove serviceability".

When the AM's stood by their finding of negligence, I particularly liked Lord Brennan's question: "If the negligence was so obvious, why did the other [Board of Inquiry] investigators miss it".

I suppose it's not surprising that the 2 old RAF men stuck to their guns. What would they have said otherwise ..."Do you know my Lord, you may have a point there, perhaps they weren't negligent after all"?

I strongly believe that the negligence ticket will be dropped. Let's hope that their lordships find a suitable put-down for their airships. I think that Day only went for negligence because he was aware of Wratten's views and wanted to score points with his boss. For the record, Wratten's letter to his senior commanders includes the following words:

".... I will not tolerate shortcomings of concentration or personal discipline in aircrew. It follows that I wish to put this policy into practical effect by ensuring that formal disciplinary action is taken whenever....clear evidence emerges of unmitigated indiscipline or negligence. The increasing evidence of such cases suggests that past practice, which has been to shun the disciplinary approach ... is no longer appropriate....Formal disciplinary action has always been an option open to us and we should not steer away from it"

These words were written in February 1995 (ie following the crash, but before Day & Wratten added their comments to the BoI).

These two AM's are a disgrace and should be disgraced. Let's hope that the Lords can find a good way to do this.
meadowbank is offline