Admittedly that's a side of the story I don't know so well (the accident itself was a little over 6 years before I was born), so if you could PM me with some details that'd be grand. I'm not sure about evidence being withheld as such, but I do know that the comparative lack of hard evidence as to why the droops were raised was the primary motivator behind CVRs becoming mandatory on G-registered civil transports with almost immediate effect, which for the UK civil service was very unusual.

DozyWannabe you referred briefly, in passing, to the Trident accident in 1972 and stated that ... the autocratic tendencies of the flight commander rendered the rest of the crew's input moot...

Given the obvious care and thought you take with your posts, I say, with respect, that I think it would have been fairer if you had made it clear that this particular statement was your opinion, rather than to have stated it as accepted fact.

I suggest that few pilots around at that time would disagree with the statement that the captain could be autocratic, but there was nothing in the AAIB report to suggest that he had, in your words, ...rendered the crew’s input moot... on this flight.

If you would like to read the AAIB report, it can be found here

As I believe blind pew is hinting at, I think it would be a much more rigorous investigation these days, with more evidence being unearthed and made available to the enquiry, resulting in a rather different report, but then, that’s just my opinion! ;)

CRM 2B or not 2B
 

I was serving at the time of BEA 548 and I knew those involved. I maker no comment on the accident per se but the CRM aspect of this thread attracts my attention. I joined the company from the military where I had been an “Independent” Flight Commander. I was very aware of the stresses and strains apparent in the company chain of command (and that is quite definitely another story – which will probably never be told!). As to “bullying management” (Blind Pew), I would suggest that in those days, management was extremely benign compared to what it later became. One would have no hesitation at all in going upstairs to relate ones problems (and cock-ups) pro bono publico (or, at least, for the other crews).
I had to start at the very bottom, as a “third pilot” with only one ring, looked on with contempt by all and sundry in the crew room. I learned to hold my tongue and observe and sometimes it was not a pretty sight. Because of my background – and nothing to do with CRM, which had not even been invented then – I had no hesitation in voicing my concerns and can categorically state that on certainly two occasions I averted disaster, once with probably only one second to spare. In my dotage, morbid curiosity has got the better of me and I have actually been to see the valley where 150 people might have gone to meet their Maker. On other occasions, there might certainly have been considerable embarrassment, but not necessarily any real danger.
And sometimes, old coals are best left unraked. We all learned our lessons – the hard way. As I said, this was before the days of CRM. Or was it?

Thanks for the kind words (and thanks for the follow-up blind pew - I'll get on it ASAP!). It's not so much an opinion I arrived at myself as what I had been led to believe by most of the material I've read on the matter. Now of course, because there was no CVR to provide hard data, all the report can say for certain is what was derived from the wreckage and the FDR and any embellishment is supposition - however on balance of probability I have always understood that it was a likely contributory factor, even if indirect.

I wasn't intending to go into that much detail because the intent was to use it as a probable example of why CRM became so important, and the thread is not about BEA548.

That said, thanks for the extra info and regards! :ok:

Post-crash video of Turkish Airlines Flight 1951
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=dd1_1392461371

soft wet soil played a good agent to prevent fire , similar to one Onur Air MD80 in Eelde not very far from Amsterdam in 2003

soft wet soil
 

Cannot quite follow why this particular subject has been resurrected, with yet another picture of the accident site and the effacatious qualities of soft wet soil. Could it be that as we now have lots of wet soil, courtesy of Zeus, all those aloft over the UK are quite safe. Good publicity to revive our battered tourist industry perhaps.