Cazatou
You said:
I am flattered that you believe that I, as a Specialist Aircrew Flt Lt, was capable of influencing the viewpoints of so many Air Officers past and present.
Don't feel flattered. It is likely that you and the rest of the Flt Safety chain through HQ 1 Gp and HQ STC unwittingly provided a suitable 'explanation' for the crash that enabled their Airships to pass a verdict that conveniently distracted from the hurried decision to bring the HC2 into service on a Service Deviation - a decision with which CAS was very likely to have been involved.
I, and many others who have expressed opinion on this thread, agree that it is
possible that this was a case of CFIT, some (though not I) would even agree that it was
probably a case of CFIT. However, due to a lack of CVR or ADR, it is ludicrous to state that this
was CFIT and that the two pilots were negligent.
The Flight Safety organisation, of which you were (by your own admission) but a small cog, did not (as far as I am aware) include any lawyers. Perhaps you would care to offer an explanation as to how the HoL Select Committee, which included an appeal court judge, and which had the advantage of evidence to which the BoI, HQ 1Gp and HQ STC Flight Safety staffs were not party at the time, came to the conclusion that there was no evidence of negligence, yet you, "
as a Specialist Aircrew Flt Lt" know otherwise "
beyond any doubt whatsoever"?
Perhaps you could also offer an opinion as to why the MoD, having studied this ruling by what amounts to the highest appeal court in the Land, refused to alter its position, particularly in light of the Glen Ogle Tornado verdict mentioned above by John Blakely?