Bronx:-
Since the family and the coroner had copies of the report, what's the problem?
The coroner heard evidence from some witnesses and would have seen witness statements made by others. He could also require anyone else to attend if he thought they might be able to help his inquiry.
Whose 'version of events' do you say should have been available to the coroner and wasn't?
The MOD allowed the Coroner - who is independent - to complete his investigation and publish his findings before publishing the MAA report which you claim is biased anyway.
Why is that disgraceful?
Let's dot the i's and cross the t's here. In previous fatal accidents the BoI was published ahead of a coroner's inquest. This enabled the family and the coroner to get input from other than the MOD alone. It was then often the family that became the focus of a campaign to right an injustice, insist that aircraft receive the protection that their brother's hadn't, or to simply reveal MOD lies for what they were. The mandarins have obviously decided that this is unacceptable from their point of view, and so have limited publication to non aviation professionals only, ie the family, its lawyers, and the coroner.
As usual this SI points the finger at the first person on the scene of the accident, whereas the genesis of this accident began in 1988 when RAF VSOs began deliberately to destroy the system that had assured UK Military Airworthiness Provision. That system remains broken and will go on being broken until the MAA faces up to cause and effect, and breaks away from the MOD so that it is free to publish and be damned. Ditto all that, especially in regard to this accident, with the MAAIB.
Rather than stemming the canker of unairworthiness that infects UK Military Aviation, the MAA is presiding over the spread of it from fleet to fleet. The MAA is part of the problem and not the cure. It needs to take urgent action as above, or the 63 deaths noted in this forum will simply go on growing inexorably.