First off, I really cannot understand why Bill Wratten has put his head above the parapet. I his position Iwould certainly have kept out of it on the basis that little or no good could come of joining the fray. However, that's history. An area which I think you could usefully include in whatever you write is the Tench report. In the late eighties William Tench, then Chief Inspector of Civil Aircraft Accidents (eg head of AAIB)was appointed by Lord Trefgarne, then Minister of State for the Armed Forces, to review Service Board of Inquiry procedures. This report - allegedly damning - was never published. I have always myself thought that BofIs were inherantly flawed, and there are numerous examples of AOCs and CinCs overruling findings. I strongly suspect that Tench found the same flaws. You could try contacting Ron MacDonald, Richard Hadlow or Ralph Kohn at RAes; they were the joint authors of the unofficial report which so upset BW, and they quoted a paragraph from Tench, so they presumably saw the report. On the basics of the Chinook case, I have yet to be persuaded one way or the other, but there are very many things which I don't know, but I do find flying in those conditions at that height and speed a bit hard to blame on a possible FADEC problem; on the other hand, gross negligence against victims of the crash is very hard to swallow.