LIGHTNING BOYS
Thread Starter
LIGHTNING BOYS
A couple of weeks ago I was given a book for my birthday: "the Lightning Boys - true tales from pilots of the English Electric Lightning".
I sat down to read it last night and Chapter 2 is a recount of a certain Bill Wratten's (followers of the Mull Chinook thread will remember that name) experiences as a Lightning aerobatic pilot in RAF Germany in the late 1960s. It was all very interesting, but the concluding four paragraphs, concerning his time as C-in-C RAF Strike Command, really caught my attention.
In particular he relates the story of a Jaguar pilot, who died when flying as number four of a four ship. He omitted to select reheat on take off, failed to clear the upwind crash barrier, and perished as a result. The subsequent BOI concluded that, by his failure to select reheat, the pilot had been negligent.
Now the interesting bit. Wratten goes on to state "I seldom found the need to disagree with any of my station commanders or air-officers-commanding, but on this occasion I did. I amended the BOI's findings to one of "error of judgement", which meant in effect that the young pilot had done his best but that all of the concurrent demands of the moment had, for him, simply become too many".
Perhaps I am becoming too cynical in my old age, but I see a huge dichotomy betwen Wratten's benign ruling above and his total intransigence concerning his disgraceful "gross negligence" finding concerning the Mull aircrew. I wonder why ..........?
I sat down to read it last night and Chapter 2 is a recount of a certain Bill Wratten's (followers of the Mull Chinook thread will remember that name) experiences as a Lightning aerobatic pilot in RAF Germany in the late 1960s. It was all very interesting, but the concluding four paragraphs, concerning his time as C-in-C RAF Strike Command, really caught my attention.
In particular he relates the story of a Jaguar pilot, who died when flying as number four of a four ship. He omitted to select reheat on take off, failed to clear the upwind crash barrier, and perished as a result. The subsequent BOI concluded that, by his failure to select reheat, the pilot had been negligent.
Now the interesting bit. Wratten goes on to state "I seldom found the need to disagree with any of my station commanders or air-officers-commanding, but on this occasion I did. I amended the BOI's findings to one of "error of judgement", which meant in effect that the young pilot had done his best but that all of the concurrent demands of the moment had, for him, simply become too many".
Perhaps I am becoming too cynical in my old age, but I see a huge dichotomy betwen Wratten's benign ruling above and his total intransigence concerning his disgraceful "gross negligence" finding concerning the Mull aircrew. I wonder why ..........?
I agree with Jindabyne, let's leave the tragic loss of the Chinook crew to rest in peace.
Regards
Air pig
Regards
Air pig
