Erebus 25 years on

[prospector]

Desert Dingo,

" Why should it “be taken with a shovel full of salt”?
Would you care to tell us exactly where Macfarlane and Allinson are in error when they say “…the very basis of the Law Lord’s ruling is a blatant contradiction.”

Well they cannot both be correct. We have either the Law Lords got it wrong or the Senior Law Lecturer has it wrong. Either way it is not a good look for the legal system.

Could you explain what is your interpretation of what what Mahon means when he states in his book "Verdict on Erebus",

" But the official view, as represented by Civil Aviation, was that the aircrew had no authority to descend below 16000ft. On this point the evidence was very clearly to the contrary. The officer in charge of the Route Clearance Unit of the company was plainly authorised on behalf of the company to brief the aircrews, as he had in fact done, by indicating that the aircraft could approach McMurdo at any altitude authorised or directed by the air traffic controllers at the American base."

As has plainly been shown many times the descent was requested VMC, and as stated many times VMC descent involves own responsibility for terrain clearance and avoidance of other traffic. The crew were never "authorised or directed" by the controllers for any descent, they obviously would have had to been identified on radar before such authorisation or direction could be given. They were never seen on the radar let alone identified.

Beaufort Island.
This was obviously sighted, in clear conditions as shown by the photographs salvaged from the wreckage, how could someone who had, as Mahon spent so much time pointing out, spent hours pooring over a "map" not realized, if they were on the track they thought they were on, was on the wrong side???