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. 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
 

Signed of course!

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.

From yesterday's Hansards https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans...nce#g217489.q0

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.

Brian Dixon's really irritating petition that we are signing calls for ALL records relating to the crash of Chinook ZD576 to be preserved at Kew, not ALL 'important' records. The very wording of the minister's reply tells us that the government clearly has no intention of preserving ALL the records and it alone will determine which 'unimportant' records will be destroyed.

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.

Signed the petition, then followed Chug's link with NO. They can't even spell Chinook correctly, shows how much they care about it. We wonder if anything could bring so much of government into even further disrepute ... but they manage to do so.

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.