I don't want to seem awkward in any way but.......
This thread is a sticky and we've got to assume that "Wg Cdr Spry" has satisfied the moderators he is a bonafide representative of MoD Flight Safety.
We've also got to assume, not unreasonably, that "Wg Cdr Spry" has permission to use a largely anonymous forum to gather opinion and seek assistance. It pretty much follows that you'd expect him to heed good advice and opinion, otherwise what is the point?
The last two posts relate to a well known accident. They, and others, contradict to a greater or lesser extent what has been said in evidence and published by the SI.
So, my question is, has "Wg Cdr Spry" met his obligation and reported these contradictions and conflicts to the SI president(s) and Coroner(s) / Procurator(s) Fiscal? (As the same question could be applied to other similar cases). Most here would agree that pprune is the de facto centre of excellence for flight safety and, demonstrably, the place where MoD's Corporate Knowledge now resides.
Perhaps more seriously, many examples of offences committed by serving and retired MoD staffs have been proven beyond any doubt whatsoever. Have the Wg Cdr's leaders reported these to the proper Authority? The example that always sticks in my craw is CAS's letter to Marshall of the RAF Sir John Grandy stating, categorically, that Chinook ZD576 was "off course by some miles". We await Graydon's evidence as to what the true course was; east of the Mull between it and Arran (or even further over in the Clyde approaches), or to the west up the coast of Islay; but the immediate problem is a willingness to deceive his seniors with a clear aim of denigrating the deceased pilots. So many laws have been broken there is is hard to know where to start.
Perhaps the Wg Cdr could offer comment on just how much attention his organisation pays to the facts revealed here on pprune, and to what extent he is encouraged (or otherwise) to meet his legal obligation to report such offences.