Jayteeto
You wrote: <<The Rad Alt settings were similar to any other helicopter in NI at the time. >>
As Caz posted above:
<< From the findings of the BOI as forwarded to the Stn Cdrs at Aldergrove and Odiham for their comments prior to submission to AOC 1Gp.
… para 45b
"the Rad Alt setting procedures used by the crew were a contributory factor in the accident." ...
para 56
" The positioning of the Rad Alt bugs would have limited the crew to either a visual or a visual and audio warning at 69ft, depending on selection of the audio selector switch would could not be determined. This warning would have been too late, in the circumstances, to prevent impact with the ground." >>
Common sense, never mind specific procedures, would suggest that the settings were inappropriate for their flight if it was just flying a route past the Mull. Are you saying that they may just not have bothered to set them appropriately? Would this not amount to negligence in view of the findings of the BOI as above?
And of course, no admission that the settings just happened to be right for an imminent landing – a more plausible reason for such an experienced crew to have set them so?
I have said it many times before – none of you have to buy the whole “conspiracy” theory – but at least honestly address those parameters that I have pointed out and we may at least advance our understanding of what may have happened.
At the very least, their change of heading consistent with an approach to a known LZ, slowing down (in terms of air speed), having the HP's baro alt set as QFE for the elevation of that LZ, and the RADALT alarm setting could show to yourselves an intent to land there for whatever reason (planned beforehand or due to some problem) – this would surely nullify the basis for the finding of negligence, which seems to be that they just blundered into the Mull somehow. The aforementioned factors should be recognised by yourselves as evidence of such an attempt to approach that LZ – this is surely a better tactic than “nothing can be proven” which has not yet achieved your limited objective or the airworthiness angle when there is no evidence of control or engine problems – it is surely worth consideration in parallel to your other tacks.