Interesting comparative case LL, particularly as I flew the 737 3/400 at the time. The difference of course is that once the shadow of suspicion fell on the type, rather than human or environmental causes, intense investigation was initiated to determine the defective component and its rectification whilst revising recommended crew drills to deal with such excursions. Here the Airworthiness Authority is content with simply confirming W&D's findings; that the "Grossly Negligent" pilots were solely to blame. God forbid that the same pattern of accidents should yet occur as in your example. I endorse meadowbank's point that though we don't know the cause of this accident, there is a damn sight more circumstantial evidence stacked up against the aircraft type's airworthiness than there is against the pilots. The lack of crash evidence is as inconclusive as the lack of later accidents. Having said that, this thread is not the place to speculate as to what technical malfunctions might have caused this accident, for it remains just that, speculation. What
is the job of this thread,
AFAIK, is to continue to fight for W&D's findings to be quashed. There are two reasons why this is imperative. The first is to put right a gross injustice. The second is far more important, to acknowledge that this type, in common with many other UK Military Aircraft types, lacked airworthiness. That is the elephant in the room that must be addressed before UK Military Airworthiness can begin to be regained.