Walter,
with the greatest of respect, it doesn't matter what 'reasoned concensus' is reached it will not fulfil the requirement of absolutely no doubt whatsoever.
Please believe me when I say that we have discussed many a scenareo, including one of negligence, but there is no hard evidence to support any one option. The Board of Inquiry concluded that the most likely cause was an inappropriate rate of climb and the reviewing officers used a degree of speculation, but no one is in a position to say that they know exctly what happened on that terrible day.
I am not actually dismissing your theory, but if the MoD say that the equipment you suggest was not in use, there is no available documentation relating to this equipment being used on this flight, there is no documentation available about an alternative landing site and there is no one speaking out about this scenareo, where do you suggest we look?
The only right conclusion, taking into account the rules in place at the time, and the limited amount of evidence available, should be 'cause not positively determined'. If there is evidence proving negligence with absolutely no doubt whatsoever, let the MoD produce it and we can all get on with something else.
My best, as always.
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook