Ladies and Gentlemen,
A couple of years ago it was I who persuaded David Cameron and Liam Fox that the former could not do as he promised the supporters of the crew of ZD576 and simply exonerate the crew when he came to power. I pointed out several reasons why this ‘forgiveness on a whim’ would not work and I explained in detail how the findings of the reviewing officers were reached. Following a very long conversation with Gerald Howarth MP, it was agreed that the only honourable course of action was a review of the findings/evidence.
When Lord Philip’s review was announced, I wrote to the Daily Telegraph stating that, unless the review came up with a plausible answer to the cause of the accident, the deep schisms which had split the ‘military aviation community’ would remain. So it has proved to be. Lord Philip has produced what amounts to a legal rebuttal of the reviewing officers’ findings but it gets us no nearer to finding out the cause of this accident. Therein lies its weakness.
I congratulate those who have been so steadfast in their support for the crew of ZD576 and by extension, their families. It has been a display of persistence similar to that shown following the F15 crashes in Scotland. I have always maintained that, if ever I was in such a situation, I could not wish for firmer resolve from my friends than has been shown in this case.
There is, however, one aspect of which I have been – to put it mildly – disappointed. This has been the persistent attempts to pillory and denigrate the Reviewing Officers in the posts on this Thread. I do not believe that Air Marshals Day and Wratten have acted in any way that deserves such opprobrium. Furthermore, it should be remembered that both these officers have been retired for 8 and 14 years respectively and in that time there has been no evidence presented which would lead them to re enter the Lists or to reconsider their own findings or to believe them to have been flawed originally.
So we are still left with the question as to what did happen on that evening in June 1994. One of the best reviews I have read is the book: “Chinook Crash” by Steuart Campbell and I commend it to all, regardless of which side they stand on this unhappy incident.
From a personal viewpoint, I am left with many questions. A few are as follows:
First, why route the aircraft towards the Mull when there was a poor weather forecast? As shown earlier on this Thread, steering a course north westwards after leaving Aldergrove and then turning right onto the heading originally chosen, would have carried the aircraft clear of the Mull.
Second, what was the crew intending to do, if they encountered poor weather? They could not go IMC and climb to safety height because of the icing layer and so their only option was to turn away from the Mull.
Third, the aircraft was being flown throughout at close to the ‘vibration limits’ for a Chinook with passengers on board, was this because the crew was obsessed with needing to complete the task and get back to Aldergrove? How did the crew duty time equation impact on their thinking?
Fourth, did the crew think that the signal tower was actually the lighthouse and hence believe they were ‘in the clear’ as it passed down the right hand side of the aircraft.
Five, were the actions of the crew in entering a waypoint change shortly before the collision, those of a crew wrestling with a major emergency?
Since VE-Day, the RAF has lost nearly 9500 aircraft to accident and there have been over 6000 fatal casualties. There have been two other peacetime, single aircraft losses more deadly than this one but there has been none more divisive and with a cause more hotly disputed, than ZD576.
Regardless of where you stand, I hope you will agree with me that perhaps today’s announcement will bring some comfort to the families who have agonised these past years.
Old Duffer