Some posters accepted and praised this SI as thorough and entirely credible when it was first published. The real airworthiness experts on this forum have subsequently highlighted serious and indefensible shortcomings in the conduct and conclusions of this SI and in the way the MAA, who are responsible for it, continues to carry out its business. The very thorough and scientific investigation into the seat aspects by 1710 NAS is one of the few positive elements of what is, in my opinion, a sloppy, misleading and incomplete piece of work.
On a more human level, please do not overlook the SI's deliberate targeting of the RAFAT's culture and ethos in their report. Based loosely on psychometric theory, stereotype preconceptions, unsubstantiated assertions presented as fact and some dubious interpretation of training records, most of which have subsequently been challenged and disproved, the integrity and professionalism of the pilots was publicly questioned and declared a contributory factor in this tragic accident. This unprofessional, disgraceful and indefensible personal blame game must have caused considerable anguish and anger within the team, who were themselves victims in the tragedy.
As an outsider but with some knowledge of the true facts of this case, I find the MAA's endorsement of this aspect of the SI absolutely outrageous.
Last edited by Genstabler; 28th Feb 2014 at 11:07.