courtney,
A few years ago, I made this contribution ----
" In 1986 I was President of a BoI concerning a Tornado fatal accident off Spurn Head. The crew was attempting, at night, to join up with another aircraft at around 2000ft, and during that procedure the aircraft impacted the sea. We had no clues for a couple of weeks, until a tape from London Radar revealed the aircraft's last two minute flight track, and that of the aircraft on which it was trying to approach. From the relative flight paths of the two aircraft, we (myself and the other Board members) 'concluded' that the crew had most likely become disorientated in the join-up manoeuvre, and that the pilot pointed the aircraft into the sea.
Without any tangible evidence from either the ADR (which was recovered, damaged to the extent of being of no use) or technical findings from the recovered wreckage, we all remained somewhat 'convinced' that the the crew 'probably' screwed up. BUT, we had nothing to show that this 'assumption' could be proved beyond doubt.
IAW the rules of the day, we could not apportion blame or negligence and our submission to the AOC was therefore, and rightly, an open verdict; both he and the CinC accepted the Board's finding.
Most people at the time, including most of the squadron aircrew, agreed with my Board's private view. However, there was also a 'universal' view that there could be no apportion of blame or negligence. There were lots of other conspirancy theories that could have been concocted (by conspiritors), but none could be substantiated. Ever."
With no doubt whatsoever, justice was done. I, and I believe most others, would have been very aggrieved had the reviewing officers disagreed. Along with the many others on this thread, I have difficulty comprehending your argument.
Last edited by jindabyne; 6th Jan 2008 at 11:05.