Courtney, thank you.
You are quite correct I used words and phrases deliberately couched to make it clear that I do not consider myself an expert in aerobatics or (certainly not) in fast jet operations. I feel from the details within the report there is scope for debate about what went on in the cockpit, what was observed and how it was judged, or not. I agree that the clarity of the experts' neutral language was helpful.
My background in this has been more as a team leader endeavouring to develop good safety thinking habits amongst strong minded young professional engineers, who all start out believing themselves to be invulnerable, infallible and (all but) immortal - much like young pilots, whom I have also had fun training. Occasionally I have found more 'hedged' phrases get through better when discussing Human Factors, which this accident involves, through and through. Perhaps I was being too careful, part of which may be due to recollection of the challenge of having to face a bunch of QCs once, to justify a technical position. Needed great care...
I don't see any evidence at all of deliberate act by the pilot towards the accident, rather errors of omission, accumulating. What constitutes negligence becomes a matter for thorny legal debate in my experience. I'd rather not go into that one, since it involves experience, judgment, presumed professional capability etc. Let's just say that can be 'challenging'.
Twos' In - totally agree. The real frustration is that accidents like this have cropped up again and again.
It seems as though (sorry CM!) we can learn and change habits for a while, then the lessons get forgotten, perhaps because other things become more immediately of concern. 'Safety drift'?
An old pilot and engineer many years ago said to me he reckoned incidents and accidents tend to have around a twenty year 'cycle time', by which point the folk originally involved have moved on, retired or forgotten the problem. Depressing if even marginally correct !