Widger - which report? The airshow review?
I'm not arguing against a review. I'm asking about the process that gets us to this point so that one might see how that fits within the framework and we then might have some greater confidence that its been done in the right way by the right people.
when you say:
It is also worth saying that whilst Shoreham was the first fatality of uninvolved third parties, you could say the UK has been very lucky in the last 63 years. Shoreham was not the only accident in the last few years. i.e CarFest Gnat in the very same month as Shoreham.
Why lucky? It has had these reviews in the last 30 years, which is why CAP403 is onto revision 13 and more detailed CAP403 revision history is available on a page within CAP403.
So what - if anything - has changed in the thinking that will create version 14 to that which created v.12 or 13 etc? You pointed out the Gnat accident but nothing changed at that point. They weren't alive to change then? What about the other incident that is linked to Shoreham - did that have any outcomes? Or maybe there was? I don't know. Do you know? Could you know? What data is captured and by whom and who and when can you learn? Do we only use an AAIB report to learn? We only learn after we get a smoking hole? You don't think there have been 63 years worth of "wow that was fukking close... better not do that again...." And now we are right back to timescales and communication........ that old chestnut.