cazatou, and, by
accord cordial,
John Purdey, you say
Airmanship, Experience and a strong sense of Self Preservation would force that decision.
Well, let’s exclude the last of those from the relevant arguments - I assume you’re not imputing any suicidal intent to the crew, are you?
And certainly, this was a highly experienced crew.
Which leaves us with airmanship. I have seen no evidence to the standard of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’, let alone ‘absolutely no doubt whatsoever’, to suggest that this crew was guilty of any lack of airmanship. Plenty of supposition, even extrapolation from the lack of any other believable cause - but no evidence to the standard required of this BoI. And as we know, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Seems fairly simple to me. Not guilty of gross negligence.
airsound