S4G
Thoughts? Yes plenty of them, thanks and none of them confirm for certain whether CPLS was fitted or not. I think that someone mentioned there'd be loads of STF paperwork - well, knowing what we know about the airworthiness paper-trail, I'm not so sure about that! Also, if the BoI never mentioned or discussed CPLS, it certainly wasn't going to mention its STF paperwork either. There is enough wriggle-room there for a whale!
But like so much in this affair, we just don't know. All I do know is that, if fitting of CPLS was possible as a STF (which it could have been), then Walt is entitled to ask the question; that is his right - one which we should all uphold - but we don't have to believe him.
For record (again), you will also note, that I do NOT susbscribe to his theory for many reasons - nicely illustrated by ShyTorque's eloquent words...
If a trial of a new portable DME equipment was being run, (I'm certain it wasn't) it would not have been run in this way, in marginal weather, towards high terrain, with high value passengers, who could neither contribute to the trial, nor gain anything from it by being on board. I say this from my own personal experience of being involved in RAF trials of other new equipments during my time.
and
WHY did JT ask for a completely different airframe for the flight, if only this Mk2 airframe had the DME equipment on board and this trial was the real reason for the flight?
at 5836
Walt, will you now consider my suggestion and leave it at that for a while?