Caz:
My 6995 reads:-
Well Caz... You've successfully proven that this witness is utterly unreliable... You said:-
Just to remind you of the evidence of Mr Ellacott that the Chinook had passed over him - "I then heard the sound of a propeller going around for about 4 or 5 seconds and then I heard an explosion .... Visibility at this time was only about nine or ten feet maximum". "It was difficult to say how far I was from the point of the explosion, but I don't think I could have been any more than 100 yards."
The speed assessed by AAIB at impact equated to slightly more than 250 ft per second - which equates to more than 80 yards a second.
Let's give the chap the benefit of the doubt and say it was 4 seconds before he heard the explosion. That, per the speed assessment, equates to 320 yards... Yet he claims to have been no more than 100 yards. How far could he see?
It seems quite straightforward to me. You state that the speed of the Chinook at the time was around 80m/sec. Mr. Ellacott claims he heard the aircraft fly for a further 4-5 seconds after it passed him putting the aircraft between 320 and 400m from him at impact. Yet Mr. Ellacott thinks he was less than 100m from the point of impact. He further states that the visibility at the time was 9-10 feet. One can't really trust that now can one? Were this gentleman in a court of law his testimony would be considered unreliable at best and would probably be, quite rightly, passed over altogether.