The way I read TD’s posts, he is emphasising the fact that MoD continually maintained that the previous rate of leaks on the aircraft was acceptable, and did little or nothing about it; a position that is now seen to be untenable following the Coroner’s damning verdict.
This is supported by the ongoing modification / amelioration programme which, as he says, has reduced this rate.
If I were in his position, I’d be consumed by anger that it took a non-MoD civilian (himself) and a Coroner to force MoD to implement their own regulations – which they had criminally and steadfastly refused to do for many years. I maintain that any ire should be directed toward those who failed in this duty of care. They are well known, although I concede the main perpetrators are now retired. (Thankfully). But it is important to understand this background and who they are, because they wilfully ignored direct warnings that Airworthiness was being compromised across all fleets. The common factors between Nimrod, C130, Chinook, Sea King and the rest demonstrate that beyond all doubt, and their legacy still lives on. That is why it is important that Mr Haddon-Cave’s review addresses these wider problems; not just Nimrod.
TD doesn’t benefit. Current and future aircrew do, aircrew I have never once seen or heard him denigrate. I think he will be remembered for the good he did (but I concede the anti-airworthiness brigade will hate him with a vengeance while they play their tennis). Time will pass and the detail will be forgotten. But perhaps at least the Nimrod community will always recall their world was made a safer place by one mans actions.