With all due respect to the many people who have contributed so far, this thread troubles me.
If I have read all 3830 posts correctly, the main thrust is about clearing the pilots of the charge of gross negligence. This hinges upon the rules for findings of negligence, in the RAF, at that time. I say 'in the RAF' deliberately, for this ruling did not apply to all the Services. Indeed, in the Puma/Gazelle mid-air accident in NI, not long before the Mull accident, the Army member of this joint Board of Inquiry wanted to level the charge of negligence against a deceased aircrew, as was the norm in his Service, but the RAF president over-ruled him. I understand that the Army member would not sign off the joint findings because of that. I mention this because I believe that the RAF was unusual in having this restriction in apportioning negligence.
It may be that this had come about as the mainstay of the RAF, its core business, was single seat fighters. This ethos permeated the heirarchy in the RAF for many years. Perhaps, in their eyes, if a pilot had killed himself, why drag his name through the mire unless it was blindingly obvious. After all, no one else was affected.
But, gentlemen, in this case, 27 other individuals were affected. They lost their lives in circumstances totally beyond their control. And that is what troubles me.
As I have said in a previous post, I am intimately familiar with the BOI evidence. In my mind, I believe that this was in all probability a CFIT accident. Even if there had been a FADEC problem (and there is no evidence of this) and even if they might have been distracted by an unknown other technical issue, it was the pilots' responsibility to keep the aircraft, its pax and themselves, safe.
My views above may prove unpopular, but they are honestly held. This is a public forum and, as has been argued many times already, we should not stifle debate. So this thread has to continue. But, should it be a stickie? It is almost always the first thread in the Miltary Aircrew forum and, in my humble opinion, I am not sure that the stickie status is appropriate.