John Purdey
As to the comment by TheAeroCo, many thanks, but what makes you think that they turned right?
You are quite correct that this discussion can become clouded by whether one is talking about the outcome of the HOL Select Committee inquiry (the legal side) or what occurred during the flight and/or why it happened. I am now not so sure from your recent post whether or not you agree that the Select Committee opinion is correct i.e. that a gross negligence verdict is inappropriate.
Whatever, you have advanced a theory of what happened and why, and you maintain this is fact; I disagree with this, as do others, and therefore feel it necessary to challenge the basis of your argument. (I don’t disagree it might be correct, although I think it highly unlikely, but I can’t agree it is fact).
Stay with me while I review some history. The HOL Select Committee reported their findings. In response to the report, the Government commissioned a detailed report from Boeing to follow up the various points raised and to rerun a number of simulations. This report was the basis of the MOD/Government official response which was subsequently debated in the Lords. As part of that report (Enclosure 4 of the Boeing documents) a detailed analysis of the probable flight profile was produced using the best evidence available (note the word probable - much of the so-called evidence is best-guess). Part of that analysis showed a flight path deviation to the right of track following waypoint change; this was interpreted by Boeing in para 4.3 of the document as a deliberate heading change to the right. Now this analysis is based on the best estimates from the various position data and assumes, like you have, that the aircraft was under full control of the crew at the time. I agree that this is not fact either, but is probably a more likely flightpath scenario than one with no track deviation from before waypoint change to impact. It is no worse a theory than a straight track profile.
So, if you maintain the crew deliberately planned to fly over the lighthouse in IMC at low level on track, knowing the terrain clearance, why did they knowingly turn right towards higher ground? Doesn’t make sense to me.
[A qualifier - I have not had a chance to check the position calculations made by Boeing since I am not privy to the various reports by the nav equipment manufacturers. I know that there are errors in other parts of the report and these have led to incorrect statements and conclusions in the MOD response.]
Regards, TAC