Not exactly arguing . . . more like an informed discussion between two with
specialist knowledge of the time and the circumstances. A difference of opinion might be resolved by referring to the accident report and other relevant files. That is exactly what Mac Job has made his long suit for years. Across a broad canvas. To the great benefit of those who want to know as factually and accurately as possible what went wrong.
"I would prefer NOT to argue over such a sad and tragic loss of life, thank you."
Nobody is arguing over that. The personal tragedies attending the loss of life is not the issue at all.
Just harking back a little A.S. , when you say that you had
"doubts then as did many others working there that it was the cabin blower that caused the loss of RMI, just they could not find anything else. Very poor design really, there was no fire protection in that area at all", then of course if the fire did not originate in the Rootes blower, you would have to go on to conclude that the absence of fire warning or a fire bottle to activate in that section would be immaterial, in terms of a thorough investigation. That much should be patently obvious. The matter of design inadequacies is another subject, even if co-related.
Last edited by Fantome; 9th Feb 2014 at 08:26.