IFR Piggy, that was a quality rant!!
DB
Thanks, all compliments are welcome! If you re-read my post I was asking for an AAIB definition to "non-technical" with a particular interest in aircraft serviceability state, and not as you inferred; demanding an end to all speculation on this accident. Do I get to keep the wooden spoon?
Al-bert
I believe you touched very briefly on the same point but then spun off in a direction of self praise aboard the band wagon of "pilots these days don't have adequate handling skills".....no doubt, I'm still wrong about that and the willy waving and await further correction. By the way I might be a pig but Dad's a horse!
Monitoring an aircraft flown by the other or "third" pilot and handling skills are two distinctly different elements to our daily routine and I don't believe handling skills are the most pertinent factor with this accident......bugger I've said it again.
I agree with all that have made the points that will aid effective monitoring; Reducing checklist items, amending SOPs to time the use of checks during less critical phases or "holding the checks" when necessary, strict adherence to sterile cockpit procedures, etc But also the aircraft we fly could be modified to help improve
monitoring by alerting the pilots to an undesired flight configuration.