JP,
My question to caz is related purely to the belief, by some, that the aircraft was "in cloud" at waypoint change. Statements like that need to be challenged or we will never move on.
My main concern with your well stated arguments is that, whenever you mention any other possibilies such as control jamming, you tend to use expressions which suggest ridicule. For me, this reduces the objectivity of your argument.
No objective assessment has been able to rule out control jamming. Now, I have no idea at all how the controls of a Chinook work, nor how the detachment of a control pallet would initially manifest itself. But, just suppose that, as they started their left turn, the only logical action after the changed to Waypoint B, they started to lose some control as the pallet started to detach. Bearing in mind the previous occurrences, which the crew would presumably know about, would not their minds be instantly focussed on getting the aircraft and passengers onto the ground ASAP? Is it not possible that the oft mentioned landing ground was their best option?
You might say that, in this case, they should have slowed down quickly. But, if they were losing control but still flying at this stage, would there not be a temptation not to change anything until they were assured of making the landing area? This might also explain why the copilot's HSI and radalt were set to head for the LZ.
Well, as we are getting nowhere with other arguments, perhaps it's time for a new angle.