Bealzebub
I kept wondering why Panorama chose to present a programme with a fictitious stage managed prop in the background. It didn't really send the right message?
I agree that to those taking an interest in A/c it was anomalous but my guess to it being used were, i) It was cheap, being at an airfield already used by the BBC with all camera equipment available on site. ii) It could not be identified with any airline.
However, what irritated me about the prog was that it wasted lots of time with sweeping shots of said a/c - which were repeated several times - and spent no money on some simple animated graphics that would have demonstrated how the problem occurs. Further, when talking about the 787 and Boeing's claim that it would not have this problem - there was no explanation as to how the system had been designed - and if they had learnt from current problems. All they did was show a computer generated promotional film that would have been free of cost.
Another point they should have clarified is the one explained in this thread about the difference between start-up fumes and fumes blown back during push. I think that some folks will now smell exhaust fumes and think that it is TCP fumes. The samples taken and analysed were good.
So, I thought the prog tackled a serious subject and succeeded in raising the profile of the problem but, for many, I think that it would not have explained the problem. In other words, a typical modern TV documentary. Had they been allowed to spend a bit more money - or better used the amount they had - they might have fully explained the problem. However, I think the reporter was good (not Jeremy Vine who is just the figurehead and not involved).