BastOn
You said:
I'm on the side of "on the balance of probability". I don't think there were any signs of UFCM,s and Power Interrupts
If you were the one required to pass judgement, you could not, therefore, pass a verdict of Gross Negligence by Tapper & Cook because you cannot say that "beyond any doubt whatsoever" neither UFCM nor power interrupt (nor anything else) occurred. Please be kind enough, therefore, to sign the petition.
To answer several inquiries within this thread:
For the years 1994-1999 (inclusive), a total of 35 UFCMs were reported on the Chinook, none of them resulting in an accident. In (I believe) 1998, a US Army Chinook completed an unintentional 360 deg roll, losing 850 ft in the process. No fault could be found in the (intact) aircraft, though US investigators decided the most likely cause was contamination of hydraulic fluid. Similar contamination was found in the wreckage of ZD576.
For general discussion:
In his contraversial letter to AOCs (which he authorised to be copied to Station Commanders), dated Feb 95, AVM Wratten wrote that....
I wish you .... to convey, once again, the clear message through the command chain that unmitigated carelessness or indiscipline will not be tolerated and will be met with formal proceedings. This will of course in no way undermine the certainty for those affected of a fair and unbiased hearing with all the safeguards entailed in the legal process.
I don't feel that Tapper & Cook received the fair and unbiased hearing that the Air Marshal promised. Do you?