DV:
Ed Sett 100; You said,
Quote:
I do not care one jot what the politicians, air officers and IPTL's say to the media or the Coroner, I care only about what my colleagues and I know to be the facts
Up until now I have always respected your views. I have not always agreed with them, but I have respected them. However, this statement takes your credibility rating to zero.
You can't tell me that you believe politicians. Air Officers read from prepared briefs and don't take supplementary questions because they do not have the depth of specialist knowledge. I don't have any problems with that. Someone has to talk to the media. Its a shame that those who have the depth of knowledge required to answer the questions at the core of the matter are not trusted to stand up and speak for the organisation. Its not so much that I don't care what our air officers say. Its simply that they do not go to the depth that interests me or the media. Consequently, the media digs elsewhere and, regrettably, sometimes they come up with the wrong answers or use a dodgy source.
Regarding the Coroner's questions: I'm led to believe that the more coherent and relevant evidence from the RAF relating to the system failures came from the operators and the maintainers. Inconsistencies and prevarication from the IPT leadership in the witness box led to the mess in which we now find ourselves. I was wrong to say that I do not care about their words and terminology, because what they said has led us to this point.
All the facts were examined,
Oh, no they were not. The only facts that were examined, and they were all available, were the ones that the Coroner wanted to examine.
and the end game was "ground the aircrart". Now if you, or any other member of MOD can present sound evidence supporting your "gut feeling" claim, then do so.
I refer you to my previous post about fuel fire risks. No gut feelings are used and I don't think I have ever indicated that I, or my colleagues, have any such feelings in this subject.