EAP86
If I may, what is reprehensible is;
1. AAIB being invited to investigate, but their findings ignored (e.g. Chinook crash, Falklands 1987) or misrepresented (e.g. Chinook MoK 1994). Demonstrably, had their 1987 concerns been addressed, either the Mk2 would have been airworthy or it would not have been flying on 2.6.94. That they were NOT addressed was one of the key reasons why Boscombe and MoD(PE) refused to provide a CA Release for Operational use. So, demonstrably, two key organisations wanted the regs implemented, but they were thwarted by the RAF.
2. The actions of the senior staffs who perpetrate, condone then lie about the above.
Equally criminal is MoD's habit of presenting the facts, usually revealed by others after MoD have hidden them (e.g. Chinook, Nimrod, Hercules, Sea King, Tornado/Patriot), as revelations; with the accompanying claim they will learn lessons.
In all cases the lesson is this. The underlying causes were predictable, predicted and ignored; and all would have been avoided by simple implementation of mandated regulations.