jcjeant, I agree that it
seems to be an accurate chronology.
However, as a once-trained historian, I learned that knowing the author is at last as important as understanding what is written.
In this case, I don't know:
- if the presented facts are true
- if all the relevant facts are reported, or only those "in favour" of some theory
- (having not done the research work, I confess) if the facts are public and verifiable
I
do know however:
- what HMC's battle is
- that HMC's report of the accident is biased/partisan
As said above, I didn't take the time to do the "research work". I have then no definite answers. Just a "be cautious" advice, as I know the source for:
- not being impartial/non-partisan
- not having really something to loose if proven wrong (unless, for exemple, an aircraft manufacturer)
-----
I read french better than english, translation issues were for other readers.
