Bast0n,
I don't want to drag this out - we'll probably go around in circles
Coming back to a previous question
Originally Posted by
bast0n
I realise that the Hine suggestion on deceased aircrew is relevant, but does it rule out a verdict of "pilot error"?
Flipster suggested the alternative findings would be: Pilot Error, Engineering Error, Normal Operating Hazard, Cause Not Positively Determined.
I would still expect that for Pilot Error to be an applicable verdict, you'd have to know what they did. I.e. taking a clue from the verdicts, you would have to Positively Determine that they made an error.
Surely, you either have to take the view that either
A) There was nothing wrong with the aircraft and they just carelessly flew it into the Mull - therefore Gross Negligence
or
B) There is not enough evidence to positively determine why they crashed - therefore CNPD.
You're to a certain degree correct in saying we shouldn't mix up the cause of the crash with the Airworthiness issues. The aircraft was there, and they did fly it.
However, it is clear to me now (and apologies for being so slow on the uptake), that the Airworthiness issues should be investigated fully, and the appropriate changes made.
TN