Cazatou,
1. I am not a conspiracy theorist. I accept that the crash may have been caused by:
a. Negligence.
b. Error of judgment.
c. Technical failure.
d. A combination of all three or something completely different.
What I know is that from the time of the last radio call until the point of impact all reconstruction of events are works of pure fiction. No reconstruction using Supertans can be relied on because unlike an ADR the equipment was never authorised to do the job.
2. If you read my earlier posts, I have always accepted that Sir John Day
(unlike Wratten and probably Craig) has some right to talk as an helicopter expert. However, if by using his past operational experience to equate his (then current) level of expertise on Chinook operations to that of Sqn Ldr Burke you are as stated by a previous entry, "having a larf."
3. I have never stated that Sir John has done anything improper, but face the facts.The decision to reverse the negligence verdict on the pilots would reflect badly on the RAF chain of command, including Wratten and Day. Allowing them to dictate the outcome of the BOI is no different than allowing an accused to sit on the jury.
4. Before you protest, I accept that not all accused are guilty. But airwothiness questions are valid and need answering in front of a truly independent and impartial judge.