Somehow this seem to be the case with the RAF, more so then the rest of the world!

:yuk:

BDi

With respect, the case was not one of aviation law, but criminal law, about which the Judge Advocate knows a great deal. The facts of the case were about aviation, which is why expert witnesses were called, to explain technicalities and give expert opinion to the court.

contact_tower

On the contrary, courts martial (particularly against officers) are something of a rarity in the RAF, which is why they attract so much attention when they do occur.

Scud-U-Like
 

Sorry to everyone else in this thread, undoubtedly boring you all to death now! However the FACT of this case was that the a/c were flying under RIS and one of the conditions of acceptance of the legal agreement of RIS is that the pilots are responsible for their own terrain clearance.
QED there was never any case to be brought to court.

BDi

It is perfectly possible to be carrying out your job legally, but still to act negligently in the course of it.

At least we are agreed on something: this debate has run its course.