The nature of the error that the crew was alleged to have made is very basic.
But these guys were not rookies.
Had these pilots offered me and my family a joy ride on that day, in those conditions, on that route, in that aircraft but without the security team onboard I would unhesitatingly have accepted the opportunity.
I have the unshakeable belief that the crash happened in that location not because of pilot error nor the aircraft but because of who was onboard.
There are plenty of experienced people who have been looking into other aspects but I feel obliged, in the absence of anyone else leading this line of investigation, to explore the possibility fully, so dire are the consequences for us all if this was the case.
Hence, I am confident that nothing that can be revealed concerning the details of their tasking and the planning for this flight could possibly harm national security more than not considering them fully from this perspective and furthermore do not believe that any such further details would reveal anything that would make the pilots appear in a worse light – indeed, it could be the only way of fully clearing them as opposed to achieving this by a legal technicality.
It does a disservice to them to fear that full disclosure of any such activities would do otherwise.
Regarding the reliance upon demonstrating the unreliability of this particular aircraft, the post by Boslandew << … The criteria say the reviewing officer's decision was based (and required to be based) on his own experience, judgement and opinion. The final sentence of Para 25 says, "It would be wrong to avoid such a finding (of negligence) on the basis of hypotheses for which there was no evidence and which were wholly implausible when tested against the known facts". >> does put what many would still think.
I hope you all enjoy the coming festive season and spare a thought for how many these guys have missed because of this crash.