I find the way you argue similar to the BoI, You ignore any inconvenient evidence that contradicts what you say. Your approach seems to be to challenge me for my opinion of the BoI rather than present any evidence to support what you say, you indulge in further hand waving.
You admit your Seaton error and insist that you did draw the flight path on a map, shouldn't you then in light of your error redraw your map?
Here is what the web site says.
....the purpose is not to prove that XD864's centre plane spar fractured and caused the crash, the purpose is to show that the creation of such a narrative is possible, plausible, believable and evidence based, therefore the BoI should have contemplated the possibility that there was a structural failure prior to impact and investigated the fractured spar. Instead the BoI form their conclusions of pilot error and a stalled turn 3 days into the investigation and chose to ignore the fractured spar.
It's obvious from your response that you don't understand this.
Where in the BoI do they say they investigated the spar?
A fatigue failure and and impact break are both 'brittle fractures' they look the same to a cursory inspection, a full lab inspection would be required to ascertain when the fracture occurred, no such inspection took place.
Page 100 BoI pdf
23. distribution of wreckage
Describes where some major parts ended up
'
starboard U/c 150 yds down the line of flight ... front fuselage ... 100 yds from point of first impact on the same magnetic heading.'
The A/c clearly impacted at 144º and not 44º the AIB man was probably working from notes writing his report and made the same error twice in his report i.e. he left off the one and got 44º magnetic not 144º, its a simple error, but shows a lack of appreciation of spacial awareness.
Here's a picture you won't have seen it's from the BoI. I've added the flight paths in question it's clear where the large bits of the A/c ended up and the paths they followed from the point of first impact.
I've manipulated the above image in a 3D package so we can see it from above and super imposed it on the image of Spanhoe from Wikipedia. The location of Witness 1 is based on what he told the BoI and what he told me he was doing. He was having a fag break from making piles of manure sitting on his tractor.
There are no bits of wreckage on the 44ºM flight path from the point of impact.
And also Corporal Spence's drawing in the BoI page 72
Quite frankly I don't really care what your opinion is. All you offer in lieu of evidence is hand waving and name calling you
are a waste of time and I find your attitude disrespectful and an insult to the crew of XD864.