Lawyers and the so called "media" are going to do what they are going to do regardless of the date of a report - timely or otherwise.
Nobody is pushing for inaccuracies, nobody is suggesting a grand conspiracy and I'm surprised there is push back over better communication and faster reporting given the intended purpose of accident reporting. Timely reporting and good communication would seem front and centre to me.
In fact given the recent "head of communications" appointment at the AAIB I don't think they are oblivious to that need.
The helicopter reports were referenced in this Shoreham thread as an example of why time and communication matters.
G-WIWI was subject to an AAIB investigation over an incident that occurred in May 2012.
Some 18 months later there is an AAIB report and one safety recommendation is 2014-035 that relates to helicopter operation in IMC.
Sadly before the AAIB publish that report both G-CRST had crashed in London and G-LBAL in Norfolk.
When the G-LBAL AAIB report gets published the prior safety recommendation 2014-035 is once again referenced and the CAA have a 1st October 2015 target for response. (which was already knowingly been missed by the AAIB because the G-LBAL report was published October 8th!) But regardless, guess what we are still waiting for that Oct 1 response.
The police helicopter accident in Glasgow highlighted a difference of minutes between reality and published data in fuel starvation between engines. So time does matter.
The inquest currently ongoing over G-CRST has witnessed differing emphasis on the pressures the pilot faced but of course it's almost 3 years since events - perhaps things can be blurred over that time? I guess it doesn't help the families affected, doesn't change events but again I think it shows time matters.
The proof of the continued failings here will be if (and read that word if) the Shoreham report comes it follows that trend set by those previously referenced helicopter reports, which is this. It becomes apparent quite early on that the failures point toward human not mechanical failures. A great deal of time passes before that is confirmed and in the meantime we see a paralysis whilst everyone contemplates their navel hiding behind a narrative which is " let's wait for the final report" which whilst absolutely appropriate they seem to have no incentive / desire to resource that process to ensure its publication is sooner rather than later.
Recent posts from others here give a better illustration
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/547...ml#post9198727