Dalek - the effort in trying to sort out the waypoint confusion is to try and find out if there is any merit in WK's theory. So far no luck. Cazatou has retired hurt and is now resorting to insults. (OOPs - I see he's back!) I see you are reasonably qualified to tell me whether it would be feasible and normal practice for a SH crew to make an IMC approach (at fairly high speed) to a STANS waypoint on a hilly headland? Seems unlikely to me, but both Caz and WK seem to think they were 'in fog' and hurtling willy-nilly towards this waypoint (and my question on WPT change remains unanswered until WK awakes). That I would consider not only gross negligence but totally improbable! Have we seen, by the way, any substantive agreement from SH crews about 'frequent' use of this LDZ?
The 'SA' red herring is exactly that, as we both know, since 2400' would not have got them far on the way to INS having 'pulled up', and neither would 3500', so an 'abort' to SA would be endex for the task. (No sick humour intended).
Caz - the whole argument on this thread is about the findings of the BoI. My comment you quote relates to what normal, sane people would think. Have you ever flown IMC towards a WPT on a hilly outcrop? Tell me how you would plan to let down?
The Investigating Board thought that the aircraft WAS in cloud and NOT flying VFR when they made the waypoint change.
- this to me discredits the whole finding. Why would they make a WPT change if IMC? Which WPT was then selected? Can you confirm WK's waypoint was in fact wrong? Can you elaborate on your 'RAF Pilot' experience? AH! So many questions.