As a non-pilot, may I ask why there is such a huge discrepancy between the various Safety Altitude theories we read here. Vec says 5900; another poster PM'd me today adamant it was 2400 feet. Both clearly believe they are correct. Are the rules for such things not well articulated?
I'm a mere engineer. The rules in my world are hammered into you from Day 1. For example, when Boscombe Down say "positively dangerous", "not airworthy", "not cleared to any level" and " should not be released for Service Use" we're taught to pin back lugholes and pay attention - it means you don't have a draft Release to Service and a pen in the same vicinity. (ACAS was obviously AWOL on his Day 1).
So;
(a) Why did he sign, and,
(b) In doing so, why did he withhold Boscombe's statements from Users?
That he did both is irrefutable. Is that negligence? Maladministration? Failure of Duty of Care? Or just rank Incompetence? Or, perhaps he was ordered to. Would that order be illegal?
I think we should be told.