Tony Collins, good post.
I agree with you that there are some useful similarities between what appears to be two completely unrelated accidents. The first is that to date there is no CVR or ADR evidence. There never will be of course from the Mull, the Airworthiness authority was content that they need not be fitted! The Air France A330 was so equipped of course, but the chances of location and recovery recede with each passing day. Both aircraft had "previous" regarding suspected airworthiness problems, the Chinook Mk2 with flight and engine control shortcomings , the A330 with ice prone pitots. The difference is of course that only one Accident Investigation is under a separate and independent authority; the BEA. The parallel with Mull would be an investigation into the accident by Air France; their Mulhouse A320 pilot received much the same "finding" as Rick and Jon did from the RAF, in the days when Airbus and "la Gloire" were synonymous. They've moved on hopefully, time the RAF did so as well!