basTon. There is no way of dealing with them, because, like the Mull Lobby Group, they are not interested in logical discussion, nor in trying to sift the truth from all the mass of material to hand, but, as the Lobby has itself publically made clear, their aim is simply to exonerate the crew of the Chinook. You are dealing with closed minds.
See, there you go again, Mr Purdey. Trying to misrepresent the facts. The Campaign group has
never approached this with a closed mind. As has been posted throughout this, and every other associated thread is the point that we have not said that the pilots were not negligent. What we have said is that the rules in place at the time of the accident state that in order to find deceased aircrew guilty of negligence, there has to be absolutely no doubt whatsoever. As far as the group are concerned, the burden of proof has not been met. What has come out of all this over the years is the poor introduction into service of the Chinook HC2, the incorrect initial Boeing simulation which was used by the BoI and ROs when reaching their conclusion and the fact that the MoD can operate outside of their own rules, but to name a few.
I have actually been 'sifting for the truth' for the past fifteen years. The only closed minds I have come across are those from within the MoD. It is a bit rich that you accuse me of not being interested in logical discussion. I have lost count of the number of direct questions put to you that you simply choose to ignore, yet you always respond with questions yourself.
I will not give you the satisfation of being the first on my 'ignore' list as, contrary to your claim, I am more than willing to openly debate this issue. Let us, however, stick to the available facts and not rely on speculation and best-guess scenarios.
Now, as you appear to know everything please try to offer answers to the following:
1. What could be seen from the cockpit?
2. How far down the side of the Mull did the cloud extend?
3. How far out from the Mull did the cloud extend?
4. Was the waypoint change made in cloud or with the landmass visible?
5. Was the control pallet attached prior to impact?
6. Were both pilots in agreement with the course of action being taken?
7. The BoI reported that spatial disorientation could not be discounted. Air Marshal Day said he spoke to the Board President who stated that spatial disorientation was not a factor. Who is correct - the BoI or AM Day?
I challenge you to actually answer these questions as opposed to:
1. Claim 'smoke and mirrors'.
2. Stating we have done all this before. (I can't remember the answers, so please remind me).
3. Answering the questions with more questions.
4. Resorting to personal abuse.
My best, as always.
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook