Hi H Peacock
Originally Posted by
H Peacock
Lemain, I'm not sure where you are trying to go with your concern about the radar data accuracy. There is plenty of video evidence of the manoeuvre, and the exact ground track flown bears no bearing on the cause of the accident. Do you want the AAIB to go into minute detail on every piece of evidence they have used, state it in the report and explore the almost infinite variation of every tolerance? How many more pages did you want??
I was simply using one example to show that there was lack of due diligence in the report. The AAIB has not been as critical of their report as they should have been. For example just one sentence addressing the accuracy of the radar data might have sufficed. They considered the accuracy of the ASI and altimeters in some detail. Yet they introduce radar evidence without explaining what the tolerances are. How difficult could that have been?
If the argument is that the radar track is irrelevant why put it into the report? They could have said that they considered it irrelevant and left it there. All evidence must be subject to scrutiny and criticism particularly since lives were lost.