I didn't think anyone was getting too personal here. I'm sure JP has suggested this trial with all good intent and with no other motives or agendas.
What many here mis-assume is that those 'in the business' don't think he should be doing this because he is 'an amateur'.
Wrong, the concerns are purely of safety, attitude and the likelyhood of pushing things too far, rather than lose face. We don't want him to end up in one of the many situations talked about in CRM classes.
I think we could even put up with a few bending of the rules, as they can be sorted out later, what we can't put up with is too many of the cheese slices lining up without anything being said.
Perhaps it can be put even more simply by saying that some of us can see situations arise before they become an incident without the use of google and rose tinted glasses, thrown in amongst the culture here of defending 'one of your own'. Mistakes are made regardless of where we trained, what our background is, what particular stream of aviation we follow and wether or not we are required to be current CRM etc.
The Dame Shirley episode highlights that even with a very simple A-B mission (Glastonbury to Battersea) JP has shown the temptation of pushonitiss and a denial regarding the seriousness of a situation, which surely must raise alarm bells.
If that flight had a dying child trapped in a car at point B (the hotel), just how much further do we think he would have pushed on...maybe that extra 200m towards the diversion destination at Pennyhill Park Hotel ...straight into the wires inbetween the sixth form college and the hotel?
We don't really care if the trial is a success or not, those in the Fire & Rescue world will decide if it goes further, what we here care about is losing a fellow aviator for a silly avoidable reason that has probably been covered in the last 15 pages.