Sorry if I'm about to upset anyone, but the chap in question is perfectly entitled to his view on this subject. His freedom of self expression is what I used to, and many of you folks do for a living to uphold.
BUT, I did note that he made several points, but did not back them up with any reasoning. If we take the Tucano training issue for example, how did he come to the conclusion that the current level of training should be reduced. What level it should be reduced to, he did not say, or how he came to that conclusion (yes, I know he didn't say, because is just talking out of his a*s, but at least he is being honest)
My favorite part of his letter is that he STUDIED (i.e. practiced) environmental law to be able to come to his conclusion about the RAF's level of accountability.
What an odd concept: To have to study or practice something in order to be competent. Dare I say that if he had studied much more, say five days a week for hours on end, then he would be much more knowledgeable and ready to get his facts right first time
