Hi everyone.
Raedweld,
I give an absolute assurance that I will continue to campaign for as long as it takes.
I understand your point with regard the contempt and arrogance. However, times, they are a changin', although it will be interesting to see how they change (and how quickly).
Your point on the actions of two pilots seen as a whole, is also one that has been discussed many times, yet completely discounted by those who make (and stick) to their decision of negligence. I feel that I should point out that Air Marshal Day was an experienced helicopter pilot. I would have thought that he would have at least had an understanding of dual pilot operations.
F Adec,
as Chocks says, a good point. However I'm not sure I would place FADEC as a 'heavyweight player'. It is, without doubt, a factor that should be considered, and the evidence presented by Mr Burke taken a little more seriously by some, perhaps. What the FADEC thing is, in fact, is an element of (significant) doubt that should negate the Absolutely No Doubt verdict of the Air Marshals. There are, of course many other areas of dobt too.
With regard CVR and ADR, I do know that they have been fitted to the current fleet of Chinooks. To those aircrew who don't particularly like them, I would respectfully say that this particular tragedy should serve as a reminder of the protection such equipment affords.
Keep checking the web site. I'm sure Chocks will fix the problem as soon as is possible.
My regards, as always
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook