John Purdey
Whilst you're about it (see above entry) and are so keen to repeat your question, you still haven't answered mine:
several possible explanations have been made, but you (and others, including Air Marshals Wratten & Day) disagree that they are credible. Yet, to use my favourite example quoted several times on this thread, and alluded to above, another case exists of a similar Chinook that flew in a different direction to that intended by the pilots, which was out of control for a significant period of time and which subsequently landed. Despite exhaustive engineering examination, no fault could be found in the intact airframe. It happened, (is therefore de facto credible, so why do you dismiss it even as a 'possibility'? Please discuss.
I will comment on the question you ask, though I don't know the answer:
I think you're trying to suggest that nothing has changed on the Chinook Mk2 since the accident involving ZD576 and that, as no more have crashed in mysterious circumstances, there must have been nothing wrong with ZD576. Sorry old fruit, but that logic doesn't work. To use an analagy, a Ford Cortina could crash because the man at the factory forgot to attach the brake master cylinder correctly. The fact that no similar accidents have occurred doesn't rule out the possibility that the relevant part design/attachment instructions are faulty and that the same could happen again.
SeldomFit
I agree that there were ample opportunities to eat, not forgetting any food that the crew may have bought separately, and the absence of a record showing the crew to have had breakfast in the Mess is not proof that they had not eaten. Plenty of folks regularly get through the day on a sandwich, a chocolate bar and coffee.