But, if he did not get the Nandi info, or if what was received was not entirely readable and understandable, it is not so conclusive, it might not be so easy to shaft him on that. It might leave him some wiggle room on appeal, so we have to do him on the fuel.
Let me fix that for you, to make a valid point more strongly:
But if:
(a) the crew did not receive all of the Nandi info; or
(b) some of the info that Nandi transmitted had errors in it that gave a misleading view of the prevailing and likely future weather conditions; or
(c) Nandi refrained from transmitting information that would have given the crew of NGA a better understanding of the prevailing and likely future weather conditions; or
(d) some of the information that was received by the crew was misunderstood due to a combination of fatigue and the usual HF propagation issues; or
(e) a combination of some or all of the above resulted in the crew being misled into believing the prevailing and likely future weather conditions supported the decision to continue to Norfolk,
it is not so conclusive and it is not so easy to shaft him on that.
I have an idea: There should be recorders fitted to these kinds of aircraft, to record what was heard in the crew’s headsets and what the crew discussed and decided to do about what was heard. That way the investigation of an accident or incident could be informed by facts.