Jackonicko,
Try and read what is written.
For the observence of doubt, I am entirely satisfied that the Jaguar crew were acting professionally.
However professionalism is not a guarantee of spotting another aircraft in a situation such as that of the accident. A situation where
BOTH crews have an equal responsibility to see and avoid. You really need to grasp this last point if you are a pilot as you claim. Because if you and I are flying in the same piece of airspace, then I am depending on you as much as you are on me.
The core point is nothing to do with where the collision took place. It could have been a collision with a microlight taking off from a farm strip (which the RAF crew would not necessarily have known about). It could have been a glider landing out. A helicopter off to a hotel for lunch. A pipeline survey. One of a myriad of different kinds of flights. Why the pilot was there is beside the point, because aircraft are entitled to fly in UK airspace within the constraints of the airspace system. In Class G airspace those constraints are very limited. You don't have to have a good reason to fly in it, as you seem to think, you just can. It's one of the freedoms our military pilots help defend.
The core point is that the geometry of the crash ensured that neither pilot was able to see the other in sufficient time to prevent a collision, both due to terrain shielding and the physical characteristics of their aircraft (speed, cockpit structures, etc). It's all in the AAIB report.
You also seem to misunderstand the 500' rule. I can quite legally fly at 10' or less in the vicinity of any person, vehicle or structure. The 500' is nothing to do with height, it's a minimum separation distance. With the reported height of the collision being 350' to 400' then you can use a little Pythagoras to work out how far horizontally you would need to be from something on the ground to give you your 500' minimum distance. It's not very far. The RAF pilots on the site will understand exactly what I mean, they are cleared to operate on MSDs all the time.
I say again, for your benefit, the airmanship of the Cessna pilot was extremely poor. It was a bad advert for civilian GA pilots. And it caused a tightening up of the rules which was long overdue. Some good came out of the tragic events which cost the lives of two brother aviators. The price was still too high though.
You seem to think the entire accident was caused solely by the Cessna pilots poor airmanship and lack of common sense. Do you have a different AAIB report from the one I have read ?? It does not give them as the sole cause. So do I take your expert accident investigation skills and opinions as the gospel, or theirs ?? No, don't answer, it was rhetorical. You see, accidents never ever have a single cause. We can't take the poor airmanship of the Cessna pilot in isolation, any more than we can take into account solely the poor visibility from both cockpits, or the fact that an overtaking aircraft is supposed to give way in accordance with the rules of the air.
Finally, and I am happy for you to quote me from my posts ... where did I say the Jaguar crew did did nothing right ? My position has always been one that both crews had equal responsibility in the 'see and be seen' environment. I sincerely hope that the same thing was drummed in to you when you were trained for your PPL. I also reiterate that the physical factors in this collision prevented either crew from having a chance to spot the other aircraft in sufficient time. And that would have been the case if they were fully aware of each other before hand and searching diligently for contact, or sitting in the cockpit reading the Sun.
Quite happy to continue this with you via other channels. I think we have both made our points.
PS as for your peurile comments about resentment. I work with the RAF every day of my professional life. We work in an environment where it is a team game, where common sense and 'can do' attitude is to the fore. Professionalism you could call it. Sure, I come across some of them who make mistakes and do stupid things from time to time (like our Cessna pilot ?), but then I have the same from civil pilots as well. And remember we are talking about professionals here. Even they screw up now and then. Sometimes, I even have to formally report them (shock, horror), though for most cases a chat and pointing out the error of their ways is usually all that is needed. No harm done and the working relationship remains cordial.
I was actually fortunate to be accepted by OASC (now I bet that really really really grips you Jacko !!), however I was also offered a civil career at the same time. The civil side offered (to my values) more benefits and opportunities so I actually turned the RAF down. Maybe they resent me for it ??
PPS I still think that for John Marden to do what he did was inspirational and is a shining example to people every where that, with courage and determination, you can fight back and overcome what life throws at you. That he has the respect and admiration of his peers as witnessed by some posts on this thread is testimony to how great a man he was.