2 signatures from this household... |
I was one of the first five to sign and was a little alarmed when it went offline. Good to see it back again.
|
I have signed.
|
Me too, now that it is available again
|
Originally Posted by tucumseh
(Post 10376001)
Donkey
Good first post! Unfortunately, MoD confirms it doesn't hold the 1992-3 (un)airworthiness documents I mention. Luckily, we have two letters signed a few weeks after the accident confirming the Air Staff knew beforehand it wasn't airworthy. MoD and Ministers (esp Adam Ingram) denied their existence, but Lord Philip chose to believe the physical evidence. As you've worked in an aircraft IPT (as have I) can you ever recall the concept of a time-limited Release to Service? The Chinook HC Mk2 one ran out two weeks after the accident. It was for ground training and familiarisation only, and this was to be extended because Controller Aircraft had stated it was not airworthy. To me, the very notion is barking but someone else might say it was common practice. I wasn't implying that the aircraft were fit to fly, only that all documentation should, by MoDs own rules, be retained and not destroyed. I don't see how any other organisation can claim that their rules are different, as I recall it is a flow down from CAA/EASA regulations. I was actually on HEIPT but the same rules apply to airframe as engines. |
Signed .. 142 now.
|
Signed (154) |
196 Signatures now!
|
Signed and forwareded to others |
I've signed.
|
signed, posted on facebook
|
Signed, DCO
FZ |
Petition
Signed. 316 now! |
Checked daily and signed as soon as it I found it live again, at number 38 or so. Also written to my MP, although I suspect he has currently more urgent issues on his agenda.
|
Signed. 425 now.
|
Originally Posted by kintyred
(Post 10371920)
May I again recommend David Hill's excellent book 'Their Greatest Disgrace'? Not the source documents we are petitioning to retain but an outstanding précis of the while sorry tale. Thanks kintyred (😂love it) for the recommendation. I missed it earlier somehow. A great read I’m about a third through. David Hill writes a very compelling account somewhat in the style of one of our contributors here! 🤔 The appearance of the name of my ex-MP Andrew Robathan in the narrative explains a lot. He refused to see any of my points during the campaign, against my reasoned arguments.* Now I know he was being shmoosed in Philadelphia by Boeing as the crash happened goes some way to explain his intransigence.* His initial answer to me to me that he ‘doesn’t sign EDM’s’ was just one of his obfuscations. (I’m too polite to use the word ‘lies’) He was less than pleased when I sent him a list of those he had signed.* Politicians eh? His toeing of the party line served him well. Now known as Lord Robathan of Poultney.* |
Signed.
I never had anything to do with the accident, or the investigation. But I did occupy a post at MoD at the time where I saw the iterating draft reports - which told me more than enough to believe firmly that these documents should be archived and ultimately in the public domain. G |
Over 650 now. shared on Social Media channels |
Number 803
|
Signed now 947. mmitch.
|
979 now. Cheers! |
Have signed 976.
The chances are that the Crown Office of Scotland will have destroyed all the records associated with the Fatal Accident Inquiry. I believe they keep them for 10 years DV |
Signed. Went through Cranwell with Rick Cook - was at Odiham when this happened. |
Signed. Now over a thousand
|
Signed. Keep the faith.
|
Signed. Nil Carborundum etc....
|
Of course they are now likely to destroy all the records associated with the Glen Ogle accident (Sept 1994)
DV |
Guilty B******s
Hi Brian, Tecumseh and all. Only surprise is that incriminating evidence has survived this long. Ben Wallace, a former Army Officer, seems tonshow genuine interest. |
Signed of course!
|
MODS, is it worth getting attentiom to this in the wider reaches of Pprune? Not being Military, I only happen to be here as I’ve got a head cold and have been flying my sofa today instead of an aircraft and getting bored of Top Gear repeats on Dave. I have, of course, signed. |
It's gratifying to see the universal support here. Also, that MoD's apologists and the wilder conspiracy theorists have chosen to stay away.
May I just say to those new to this, it is important to understand that, after the findings were set aside in 2011, MoD admitted that the Chinook Mk2 fleet had no lawful clearance to fly, but this was withheld from aircrew and passengers. The evidence that Lord Philip accepted is feely available, and a summary has been published. https://sites.google.com/site/milita...-disgrace-2016 Regarding the records the current petition seeks to retain, MoD has only provided assurance (to Lady Hermon) that 'Ministry of Defence records relating to the crash of the RAF helicopter Chinook that were closed between the date of the accident on 2 June 1994 and 1995 have been preserved'. Those familiar with MoD-speak will know this is bollox. What files were closed when there was a 17-year campaign, during which MoD employed a dedicated 4-man team just to reply to (but seldom answer) questions? And, given the above admission, what of the crucial files from October/November 1993? Before 2 June 1994, they were held in 'Chinook Mid-Life-Update' (sic) files, primarily at Boscombe Down and the Directorate of Helicopter Projects in St Giles Court, London. The Air Staff and ACM Wratten's outfit would have selected extracts, primarily those affecting the yet to be issued Release to Service; telling them it wasn't allowed to be issued and why. (We know the latter knew this, because a few weeks after the accident it replied to a letter from Boscombe spelling it out). To paraphrase: You know that aircraft that crashed the other week? Can you please hurry up and declare it airworthy. That fact it wasn't rather places us in the **** if it ever gets out. It did get out, eventually. Very soon after the accident, it was recognised these files constituted direct evidence. Either they would be heavily referenced in the accident files or, likely, copied and inserted. That MoD later denied their existence suggests files have indeed been destroyed. That does not mean it was a deliberate act of concealment. I was in DHP when we moved to Abbey Wood in July 1996. The vast majority of our files went missing, despite telling security and movers that they should be retained. But a simple phone call to Bristol confirmed that the promised army of staff scanning files to achieve a 'paper-free environment' simply didn't exist. The floor plate allocated to them in 1995 was re-assigned to the video conferencing suite. In my case I was lucky. I parked myself at my contractors and spent weeks copying their archives. Not sure about Chinook; but believe me, their rooms full of cabinets in St Giles were, like mine, replaced with a 4-drawer cabinet shared between numerous projects. And the vital HQ Mods Committees records (a primary part of the airworthiness audit trail) had already been ditched in June 1991. Quite important, when the Mk2 programme had kicked off in the 80s. This is why the most relevant evidence to Lord Philip was from Boscombe files, not MoD(PE) or Air Staff. |
On the basis that a simple '1603' is too short a message, apparently..... I signed as 1603 |
From yesterday's Hansards https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans...nce#g217489.q0
|
Originally Posted by Mil-26Man
(Post 10387619)
From yesterday's Hansards https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans...nce#g217489.q0
All important records relating to the 1994 Chinook helicopter crash at the Mull of Kintyre will be selected for permanent preservation. Records selected for permanent preservation are ultimately transferred to The National Archives. |
Originally Posted by ShyTorque
(Post 10387650)
Let's hope that the those responsible with preservation put the correct emphasis on the term "all important records". Some relevant but embarrassing documents could still go in "File 13", despite what is hoped for here.
Did the Minister's reply answer the question put to him to your satisfaction? Not for me it didn't, and Mil-26's link allowed me to say so (in company with a mere 8 others!). The only way we can express our dissatisfaction with this affair (for now) is to sign the OP petition and to answer NO to Mil-26's link :- https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans...nce#g217489.q0 |
Mildly entertained by the fact that my email programme put the check-back message from the parliament.uk website into the Junk folder. They appear to share my opinion of the antics of some of the occupants of the Palace of Westminster. My thanks to Mil-26 and Chugalug2 for making it clear why the Hansard entry should also be in receipt of as many responses as the main petition.
|
Did the Minister's reply answer the question put to him to your satisfaction? Not for me it didn't, and Mil-26's link allowed me to say so (in company with a mere 8 others!). The only way we can express our dissatisfaction with this affair (for now) is to sign the OP petition and to answer NO to Mil-26's link :- https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans...nce#g217489.q0 |
Petition signed
Brian. I'm back too. Though I never really went well. Have written the former PM John Major and will raise with dips as and when I see them
|
Signed, and disseminated.
|
Just a quick update.
MoD has replied to Lady Sylvia Hermon, saying 'important' files will be reviewed for retention. It did not say important to whom. Worth reminding readers of the sheer volume of evidence that campaigners were asked to provide by Lord Philip in 2010/11, as MoD denied having it. Rather important things, like the Master Airworthiness Reference and the two policy directives proving Spellar told porkies when claiming the FADEC software wasn't Safety Critical. The major reason the Controller Aircraft Release said (ground) training and familiarisation only, which Lord Philip confirmed was 'mandated' upon the RAF. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:15. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.