I’m just calling things as I see them treacle, although I note that you amended your last post to remove the direct accusations.
I see no particular need to reveal my identity to you, partly because I’m still serving, partly because 90% of the people that matter know who I am anyway but mainly because I find your holier-than-thou attitude so tremendously amusing.
What exactly do you hope to achieve by your continued harping on about the involvement or otherwise of the Flt Cdr in a tragic incident 5 years ago? There have been funerals, inquests and aircraft modifications as a direct result of the loss of 179 yet still you go on. I don’t understand what it is you’re
still looking for? I find it hard to believe you’re naïve enough to think that a single, solitary Sqn Ldr could be responsible (or not) for so much while Sqn Cdrs, Stn Cdrs, Group, the AWC, the IPT, Boscombe, the AOC and the NAAFI manager could bear no responsibility or have no influence? I know for a fact that Flt Cdrs have difficulty influencing where the desks in ops should go let alone influencing AWC thinking, aircraft mods and general RAF policy. Face it, the fast jet led RAF had (and still has) absolutely no interest in fixed wing support to SF – indeed it struggles to even be that interested in the great work 7 do. He could’ve screamed until he was blue in the face about foam, DAS etc etc but without the support of the hierarchy he would get nowhere; sadly it would always take something like the loss of 179 to convince the hierarchy to make things happen (indeed, I’m still waiting for our very own
Desert One to prompt a proper AFSOC type set up in the RAF
but that’s another subject altogether). Through your comments on the Flt Cdr you also infer that all the captains and crews were just sheep, doing what they were told unquestioningly? My experience suggest those weren't or aren’t the sort of people 47 recruit.
The loss of 179 has been thrashed out on here ad infinitum. There is
nothing more to be gained from constantly raking it over apart from upsetting the relatives yet further. The captain was a good mate of mine with whom I’d been through training and had served at Lyneham with so I'm not just some casual observer. Would ESF have saved 179? Who knows. No one, not even you Nige. It might have helped but then so might a myriad of other things. As it was, XV179 and its highly trained and experienced crew were lost to enemy action whilst conducting military tasking in an operational theatre against a resourceful and well equipped enemy force. A
direct result of the loss means that I now fly one of the best protected TacAT aircraft in the world - that is the legacy of Steady and the rest of the Hilton crew. Those that campaigned (including you obviously) should be applauded for their tenacity but it’s time to move on.
You say
My interest has only ever been in preventing a recurrence of a totally avoidable tragedy
– well that’s very laudable and us modern day sheep are terribly grateful, however you’ve been an airline pilot for many years now and your earlier comments on the state of the Sqn nowadays reveal just how out of touch you are. Like I said in my last post, if you truly believe JG to be responsible for so much then pursue it elsewhere; constantly turning it over on here serves absolutely no purpose and certainly has nothing to do with your stated aim above.
PS.
but if you would like to continue your accusation you should drop the mask of anonymity and explain very clearly your interest.
This must rank as one of my favourite ever pompous internet postings! Is it a step away from a challenge to cyber-duel?? Get over yourself
PPS. As an aside and for what it's worth, JG's just what the stn needed as a Stn Cdr and has had the balls to make the big decisions the place has been crying out for for years.