Hi Blacksheep
How does that make it any less speculative? All investigations - science, engineering, accident - start out at time=0 as speculation. Writing down a checklist for convenience doesn't change that. However I was really trying to make the point that as you speculate and gather facts you must challenge the facts you've gathered. Following from that, when 'facts' are introduced without critical evaluation something is going wrong.
There are a number areas where the data (information) gathered seems not to have been self-criticised by the AAIB team. e.g. the accuracy of the radar track which was introduced by the AAIB without (as far as I can see) any accuracy challenge.
Why didn't the report explain why they didn't consider the accuracy? Radars do 'lie' - well there is always some potential inaccuracy. Another poster has commented that the radar track isn't relevant and another says it is. It's EDIT:[i.e. the relevance to the accident investigation] outside my competence but I do understand radar technology quite well.
Last edited by Lemain; 21st Mar 2017 at 15:10.
Reason: Added a clarification in final paragraph