Brian Dixon
A bit late I know for this one, but I’ll just put in my two pennorth.
Seems to me that we are all running around in circles trying to find fault with the aircraft (difficult with no FDR), with the Certification of the Mk 2 (fairly obvious), or with the Authorisation of the flight (looks OK)
Whatever the Cause, the crux of the problem I have with the BOI findings is the enormous difference between ERROR and GROSS NEGLIGENCE. Now I’m not saying that the guys screwed up, but if they did, it was an error, with many factors contributing, and not negligence, gross or otherwise.
So why would the MOD find Gross Negligence?
MONEY
I remember from my days in the Junglies, when the MOD lost its immunity from being pursued in the courts for damages. It was said at the time that from then on we pilots would now be personally responsible for any accident and any claims from pax.
The squadron response was ‘f*** that then, we ain’t carryin’ them.’
The reply was that ‘Of course chaps we only mean that in the case of Gross Negligence, and you won’t be doing any of that will you?’
Very next major fatal and guess what.........
A friend’s relative was one of the hapless pax on this trip, and MOD is trying to limit their liability for damages, suggesting the family sue the pilots’ estates.
Apologies as a late scanner of the Military forum if this has been said before.
Remember.................
Only two things fly at night:
Bats and T*ats
