Hi
Engines, I disagree with your analysis at #26
1. The MAA found that the CAUSE of the accident was the inadvertent ejection due to displacement of the seat pan handle. Various CONTRIBUTORY factors were identified around the SPH design and use in service, also strap positions.
I honestly don't buy the MAA's analysis. Here's my stab:
1. If the shackle had worked, this would have (very probably) been an incident, with the pilot surviving. It became an accident because he died. He died because his parachute didn't deploy. It failed to do so because the drogue shackle had been disassembled and on reassembly overtightened to such a degree that it jammed. The jammed shackle was, in my view, the CAUSE. The inadvertent operation of the SPH was a CONTRIBUTORY factor.
I mentioned this on the original thread.
The Service Inquiry is into the "Accident involving Hawk XX177 on 8 Nov 11"
that led to the death of Flt Lt Cunningham
The CAUSE
must be the "inadvertent ejection due to displacement of the seat pan handle"
Why? Because the same event could have happened to a member of the ground crew earlier in the timeline. He would not have been strapped in
so the shackle would have had no bearing on his death or injury. Forgive my flippancy but Flt Lt Cunningham could have landed on the Families Day bouncy castle.
I'm on your side, and all the other who agreed with your analysis, but I believe the MAA got it right.