Kitty Hawk No pressure there then KH.

As it happens, I may not be able to help, since I'm en route to Malta for the European Air Show Council annual wingding. But I gather that the CM panel are still deliberating this evening, Tuesday.

I sympathise with you being on 10 - I was on 53 (Belfasts) when we shared a building with you guys. We always reckoned four good screws were better than a blow job any day....

I'll let you know if I hear anything - but don't hold breath.

Genuine question, what if he is guilty of lying initially to the SI and trying to cover up his actions as alleged.

Would posters on here accept that? It seems as though they wouldn't, are we saying the verdict of the CM is unsound regardless now?

Hopefully everyone will accept the verdict as the CM process is sound and subject to normal legal scrutiny.

That's my opinion as well, I don't think some will though, regardless of the outcome.

Good question. What I'd like to know is why MoD has pursued this officer, but condoned far worse. This selectivity and singling out is unacceptable. Senior officers, serving and retired, lied through their back teeth on Chinook ZD576, Hercules XV179 and others. On Sea King ASaC, the MoD investigations were lied to, and the Coroner's Court grossly misled (and some would say perjury committed). As was the ZD576 Fatal Accident Inquiry. On ASaC, MoD denied pertinent facts to families, despite photographic evidence proving MoD wrong. It made claims before the Inquest that it was not prepared to repeat in court, and then made them again after the Inquest despite knowing them to be lies. Some would say lying to families of deceased is heinous, especially when the aim was to (a) blame someone who was innocent, and (b) deflect attention from the guilty. A recurring theme in many investigations. Why do these cases not draw comment? When you look at the facts, it can only be because of the rank of those involved.

Nearly 200 servicemen came within a hair's-breadth of being killed by the actions of this officer. What 'far worse' incidents have there been?

About 70 actual fatalities at the last count (give or take a score) for the references immediately above. ....... LFH

......

melmoth:-
You used the word "incidents", not tuc! The MOD has consistently lied about the systemic problems that beset UK Military Air Safety and still do. They have even lied to a widow, telling her that a Release to Service had not been issued to the aircraft type that her husband died in, claiming that none at all then were, let alone an illegal one that obscured the fact that the aircraft was Grossly Unairworthy from its aircrew! If the subject of this thread was indeed an isolated incident, then whatever caused it can indeed also be isolated, and future repetition avoided. You cannot avoid future airworthiness related fatal air accidents if the system that is supposed to prevent them is systemically broken. That is what has happened to UK Military Air Safety. I would say that is potentially far worse than any isolated "incident", no matter what or who caused it.

One big concern for me is the accusation that the pilot and Co pilot were threatened by a member of the SI during the investigation. This accusation has been made by both the defendant and the co pilot while he was a prosecution witness.

If this is true, it puts the SI at risk and therefore any evidence from it used during the SI at risk.

This could potentially mean the outcome of the CM be an injustice and/or be open to an appeal process from either side depending on outcome.

Something that is probably worth adding to Tuc's list of events, concerning senior officers covering their own arses, is the one which spawned from the inquiry into a low-flying RAF C130 which hit and killed a soldier who was standing atop a vehicle at South Cerney, in August 1994.

I seem to recall that this inquiry then uncovered a tradition whereby some C130 aircrew, written down in the authorisation sheets as members of C130 crews, were then not landing with the aircraft they took off in! That is, some of the crew were making unauthorised para-jumps at the end of sorties and so not completing the sorties with the aircraft they were supposed to be crewing!

It raised a stink at the time, and as the investigation started uncovering more and more evidence of this 'tradition' having been going on for many, many years, more and more people up the chain of command were being implicated! Is it not true that the investigation into uncovering these unauthorsed jumpers was pressured in to stopping when culprits at Wing Commander level started to show up on the radar? It seems that the really senior officers didn't want that particular trail of slowly burning gunpowder to reach the stacked kegs in RAF Ivory Towers ......... or can anyone here say otherwise?

In any event, Tuc is quite right. The Chinook accident alone and the disgraceful aftermath that it occasioned is reason enough to hold the MoD and certain very senior RAF officers in complete and utter contempt. The lies, obfuscation and cover-up were, and still are, a stain on the the otherwise magnificent history and tradition of the RAF. It sickens me to the core that certain very senior officers have not faced the legal processes they should have been forced to face, for their self-seeking actions in connection with this particular accident. A disgrace beyond explanation ...........

Forces News reporting a verdict of not guilty on the 3 charges of perjury and false records.

Blackadder: I remember Massingbird's most famous case: the Case of the Falling Aeroplane. An aeroplane was found by the co-pilot 4,400' away from where he had left it. The Captain had the sidestick in his hand, 198 witnesses had seen him on the flight deck alone and, when the co-pilot arrived back on the flight deck, whistling a famous Lionel Richie number, the CVR captured the Captain saying "Damn, I couldn't get a photo of the VSI, my camera was stuck between my seat armrest and the stick, but trust me it was a record breaker!" Massingbird not only got him off; he got him promoted to Sqn Ldr and knighted in the Birthday Honours List. And the passengers had to pay to replace the damaged ceiling panels.

This is satire. The story, all names, characters, and incidents portrayed in this production are fictitious. No identification with actual persons (living or deceased), places, buildings, and products is intended or should be inferred.

Interesting news!

BFBS news report here.

I find this verdict incredulous.

Nice one old friend. Check PMs.

What happens next , a return to flying duties ?

Depends what he gets (if anything) for his reported formal admission of - "negligently performing a duty in relation to the camera colliding with the aircraft's control stick."

What would happen if a A330 of a civilian airline had the similar incident. I suspect the captain would be lucky if he ever flew an aircraft again or even a desk. If the airline did not sort it out then the regulator may step in, and also imagine the passengers response to the captain's brief once they recognised his name. Not many would fly with that airline again.

You'll generally find (decent UK airlines) that if the culprit put his hands up straight away, the outcome will be proportionate. Depending on the type of incident, it can range from a quiet word post ASR through an interview (hat on variety) to retraining and possible loss of command.

The front door generally only appears in the process if anyone has tried to cover anything up or for extreme stupidity. Even then, there is generally an invitation to open the front door for yourself first.

A just verdict
 

As those who know the Captain will no doubt agree, the verdict was never in any doubt.

I've known and flown with him since 1994, including on operational detachments. His integrity is totally unimpeachable and his professionalism is of the very highest order.

The reason why I have refused to sate the slavering trolls who have attempted to goad me for a response during the course of this Courts Martial, is that I did not wish to disclose the contents of messages exchanged with the Captain and others some 3 years ago - which I'd taken the precaution of printing off. When I first asked him what had happened, the Captain told me that the event had been terrifying to him; he had no idea what had caused it and was "looking forward to an answer as to what happened". As an example of the way he acts towards others, he went on "Have to say that my young cabin crew were amazing! I am very proud of them!".

Another PPRuNer, a senior officer, who knows the Captain well also told me "I spoke to him about what happened, shortly after the incident, and I am pretty certain that he did not know that his camera was the cause. He mentioned that his camera had been damaged but he thought that had been caused by it flying around the cockpit."

Another told me that when the cause was eventually established, the Captain was totally devastated by the event.

The Voyager variant of the A330 has a considerable number of modifications over the baseline 'green' aircraft and it was hardly a state secret that early Voyagers had experienced a number of issues following modification to the wiring looms. Hence it wasn't beyond the bounds of possibility that some gremlin lurking deep within the system could have made its unwelcome appearance over the Black Sea that night and that a possible AFS event might have been the cause, despite the reliability of the A330 system.

Hearing that the Captain had been charged with perjury was, to anyone who knows him, astonishing. But as the Courts Martial has revealed, some of the alleged manner of the MAA inquiry was even more astonishing.

Although I offered to send copies of the messages to his defence team and to appear as a character witness if that would help, the Captain told me that the prosecution witnesses had been better defence witnesses than he could ever have hoped for. Which was very heartening.

The excellent post made by Just This Once (27th Feb at 12:36) reinforces my own feelings. The startle involved when a boring night trudge across the airways turned into chaos cannot be underestimated; indeed the airlines are now beginning to realise the effect which startle plays during abnormal events.

The MoD statement reported on Forces News makes interesting reading:


Lawyers acting for the injured passengers might well choose to pick up on the last sentence - specifically which'training and procedures' have been amended and in what way? For the statement reads like an admission of training inadequacy.

Anyway, I'm very glad this whole thing is over and that the Captain has been cleared of the iniquitous charges levelled against him.

I will be raising a glass to you, Andy - as I hope will all others who know you and knew very well that you were telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth throughout this whole sad business.

As for that Sqn Ldr who threatened the pilots with physical harm - check the third drawer down!