Flt. Lt. Sean Cunningham inquest
 

The inquest started this morning.

Report here.

There's a live synopsis of the proceedings here.

[QUOTE
and hope the inquest will provide much-needed answers about what happened that day[/QUOTE]

Not to mention access to a big wad of tax-payers cash ! That's why Irwin Mitchell are representing on a conditional fee arrangement.

Daily Telegraph link
 

Already making reading that will provoke many to adopt a "I told you so" response. It isn't making comfortable reading but sounds familiar. "Presonitis" is a word we used to use.


Red Arrows 'lacked experienced engineers' ejection seat inquest hears - Telegraph


Maybe this thread should be deleted as its an on-going court procedure?

And this is a rumour board.

Sub judice?
 

I think the onus is on participants in the ongoing legal process - the coroner, all protagonists, witnesses, and jurors - not to reveal private information from the court to a rumour website, rather than on rumour websites not to discuss matters involved.

If such confidential material should find itself here, then I reckon the moderators and operators of the site would be well advised to remove it, just as a newspaper wouldn't print it, both out of respect for the process and out of fear of being held in contempt.

If there's anyone who has valuable information that should be going to the inquest, but posts it here instead, then that would be another concern.

However, overall, this would seem to be a very natural place to find gossip and speculation about the inquest.

The Lincolnshire Echo is publishing a live commentary of the proceedings, so I hardly think there is scope for anxiety about what rumours and comments in connection with it appear here.

If you want to maximise the chances of the truth emerging, then pprune must continue to discuss court proceedings.

MoD will lie in court. That is a simple, proven fact. The direction of the Nimrod and C130 cases changed completely when these lies were exposed on pprune, and the truth presented in court the following day.

There may be an innocent explanation for Ft Lt Cunningham's death, but history should make everyone here suspicious.

Winding my neck in then.
 

Alright then I will wind it in and get on with it. Sqn Ldr Higgins is ( the way I read it as a layman) basically saying that the Red Arrows were doing too much flying over a certain period, had too few (experienced) engineers - they were over-extended but kept on with their programme anyway.
Someone should have stepped in......I read it as an insinuation that one of the engineers has made a mistake or error with the seat due to these factors.


Hey Genstabler there will be "scope for anxiety" for some poor sod in the court proceedings shortly wont there, but smugly no doubt not yourself?

Given that an inquest is public and that anyone can attend it, I think the point about not discussing things on here is, well, pointless. However, I would ask that people use common sense, respect and basic human decency when commenting to avoid distress to any involved directly. Thanks.

The words spoken at the inquest are public, and can be freely twittered by the press, but there might be submitted material that could add substantially to the coroner's insight that is not mentioned. A fuller picture of the purpose of a line of questioning, especially live, may require an awareness of the material that the coroner has reviewed before questioning the witnesses.

It's also possible that an expert in the material could more quickly piece together more insight into the events here than the coroner, who is an expert at running inquests but not likely familiar with the engineering details.

ARRSE
 

ARRSE entirely banned any discussion or debate from their website of the recent RM trial for murder until verdict was announced.

I should bite my lip, but reading the tweets

40 personnel understaffed, yet the flying programme hadn't reduced accordingly
Reliance on inexperienced first tour staff
Not enough time to look at jets with manpower available
Leave deferred because of lack of manpower

You can push and push, but sooner or later it will come back to haunt you... Whatever the outcome of this tragic accident event and the inquest, the die had been cast long before it took place.

I feel for all of those involved and feel they have been truly let down by those that should know better..

Not 'should know better',
but 'do know better, but aren't prepared to act',
which I think is a lot worse.

We just have to remember the Chinook crash and how long that took for the truth to come out !!

Hangarshuffle,

This is not a trial and there are no reporting restrictions in force. This is very different from criminal proceedings and blame is not apportioned. We should be free to discuss it but within the bounds of decency, as always.

It reminds me of Bader when he declared 242 Sqn none operational due to a spare shortage, it needed someone to do the same manning wise.. I can understand one or two down staff wise, but 40!

According to the website there are 85 staff

RAF Red Arrows - The Support Team

Now that doesn't say actual staffing or manning requirement, so they are either undermanned by nigh on 50% or 33% depending on which one.

That's sadly is or was an accident waiting to happen. :sad:

I hope they have addressed the issue.


.

Fox3,

Many do know better, but choose the coward's route to a cosy life.

Is this staffing level shortage indicative of the RAF squadron strength as a whole?

From what I know of the accident, both via the tweets from the inquest and info already in the public domain, I do not see the manpower shortage as directly related / as the principal cause?

There are 2 direct (technical) questions to be answered in the accident sequence, one of which is more likely maintenance related than the other - and already discussed at the inquest. This latter point I think will not be repeated / has now been addressed. The other / initiating factor seems to be where the inquest is targeted?

NoD

Flt. Lt. Sean Cunningham inquest
 

2 points which haven't been mentioned on here yet.
Firstly the self medication issue. Was it significant that the Flt Lt Cunningham was self medicating? Is this OK in the UK Armed Forces.

Secondly, I understand from a friend in the AAC that mobile telephones are not allowed in the cockpit and should be left at the line. But it seems as though every aviator I talk to always, always flies with their mobile phones with them.

Any significance to those 2 points ?