There is much comment on this thread of worthy debate. In a previous life, I was President of a highly publicised Tornado GR1 BoI, a member of two others of different aircraft, and staffed many more as a Group staff officer. I was also the SFSO at RAF Muharraq. In all of that, I was always master of my own words, written or spoken. And at times my superiors weren't best pleased with my views - one in particular. But I always stood my ground, and came through unscathed, to a degree.
I was also required to carry out AOC's administrative inspections, on an annual basis, of several squadrons: ensuring, on the AOC's behalf, that each unit was adhering to the laid down requirements of IF/Sim /SCT/Ann Cx etc etc. I emphasise that this was a demand of my AOC, as a means of discipline. It ensured that all of his flying units conformed to laid down procedures, which helped to ensure safe operation. Safe and Operation being key words. It was a necessary pain, for all of us. But it was also a 'measure' of a unit's psyche.
That was many years ago. So some may say that I'm no longer in tune. I would disagree.
My view is that the SI is correct in its findings. The cause of the accident is straightforward (the pin et al), the cause of death is straightforward (the shackle et al). There was also a finding of some routine malpractice within the RAFAT organisation that fell below professional requirements; which, whilst not contributing directly to either cause, engendered a systemic lapse in behaviour.
I'm sure all things will now be in order.
As a Hawk pilot of old, I was aware of the 'pin placement problem' many years ago. As many were. I leave it to others elsewhere to carry on with that issue.
Meanwhile, good luck to all in the Team this year.
Last edited by cuefaye; 12th Feb 2014 at 09:04.