Some good colour from SND post, although again it highlights another case where the fundamental problem was an error of judgement at the AAIB.
Recently the Gnat/CarFest accident has been reported upon by the AAIB and the report seems readily accepted. Now a fuller debate is unable to be had yet because the accident which is in a similar arena has yet to be reported upon, however it will be interesting to see if that report is as readily accepted.
Further the Gnat accident highlights issues of currency and recency, yet I'm interested in the element that created that issue. i.e. during the accident investigation process had the aircraft suffered an obvious structural failure would the AAIB highlighted the pilots currency / recency as a potential issue? Would we in the peanut gallery have taken issue with the same? Others are focused upon him being a PPL, but of course that isn't the case in the yet to be reported accident.
Then what of the timing of that information release? After all if the AAIB were always going to be concerned with pilot experience and type of aircraft being flown (regardless of the cause of the accident) that would have been known in the Gnat accident within days/weeks of the accident. Why not flag that earlier and by May 2016 authority / interested parties would be giving solid answers not taking away the question.