In my view, the key aspect of this tragic incident was addressed by the recommendation at the end of the AAIB report which read:
Safety Recommendation 2007-037
The Civil Aviation Authority should amend MATS Part 1 so that, with the exception of issuing instructions to go‑around, controllers shall not issue instructions that would require an aircraft in the final stages of approaching to land to deviate from its expected flight path unless exceptional overriding safety considerations apply.
This resulted in an addition to
MATS Part 1, Section 2, Chapter 1 as follows:
15.3 Instructions to aircraft in the final stages of approaching to land
15.3.1 The final approach represents an increased period of flight deck workload. Unusual situations and emergencies during this period can be particularly demanding for the pilot. Therefore, with the exception of instructions to go-around, instructions shall not be issued to aircraft in the final stages of approaching to land that would require it to deviate from its expected flight path unless exceptional and overriding safety considerations apply.
Two other secondary (in my view) recommendations read as follows:
Safety Recommendation 2007-050
The Civil Aviation Authority should instigate the use of a suitable prefix, for use in civil radiotelephony, to signify a student pilot, flying solo.
Safety Recommendation 2007-051
The Civil Aviation Authority should amend the Manual of Air Traffic Services Part 1 and the Radio Telephony Manual (CAP413) to emphasise to controllers that pilots identifying themselves as students have limited ability, which must be taken into consideration when issuing instructions.
These were also implemented by the introduction of a callsign prefix "Student" by
AIC 83/2007 (Pink 123) and also appropriate changes to MATS Part 1, Appendix E, Para 4.4, soon after the publication of the report.
CAP 413 has yet to be amended.
JD
