Chinook - Hit Back Here
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sadly, no.
Libel/slander etc are personal to the victims. Nobody else can sue on another person's reputation. Dead men can't sue for libel (there are occasions where the estate of the dead can sue, but I don't recall them all - I think it's for debts, various land rights etc).
The importance of clearing the names of the 2 pilots is really for their families' sake. It's also good for the future morale of the remnants of the armed forces.
[This message has been edited by Paul Wesson (edited 05 December 2000).]
Libel/slander etc are personal to the victims. Nobody else can sue on another person's reputation. Dead men can't sue for libel (there are occasions where the estate of the dead can sue, but I don't recall them all - I think it's for debts, various land rights etc).
The importance of clearing the names of the 2 pilots is really for their families' sake. It's also good for the future morale of the remnants of the armed forces.
[This message has been edited by Paul Wesson (edited 05 December 2000).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Grndplt
Not quite with you old chap. Surely it is very relevant that the icing clearance did not allow an IFR transit, and committed the pilots to a low level grovel.
Had the destination been Machrihanish, I agree that the climb would have been unnecessary. It wasn't (as far as any of us know) and Wratten used the fact that they did not climb beyond the aircraft's limitations as evidence of gross negligence.
That makes the icing question very relevant.
On another suject, you can only commit libel if what you say is untrue. If those people saying horrible things about Wratten or the Boy named Sue are sure of their facts, then carry on. But as JN and Paul say, tread very carefully.
Titan, tried askthepm.co.uk but just getthe domain name seller?
[This message has been edited by Arkroyal (edited 05 December 2000).]
Not quite with you old chap. Surely it is very relevant that the icing clearance did not allow an IFR transit, and committed the pilots to a low level grovel.
Had the destination been Machrihanish, I agree that the climb would have been unnecessary. It wasn't (as far as any of us know) and Wratten used the fact that they did not climb beyond the aircraft's limitations as evidence of gross negligence.
That makes the icing question very relevant.
On another suject, you can only commit libel if what you say is untrue. If those people saying horrible things about Wratten or the Boy named Sue are sure of their facts, then carry on. But as JN and Paul say, tread very carefully.
Titan, tried askthepm.co.uk but just getthe domain name seller?
[This message has been edited by Arkroyal (edited 05 December 2000).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Titan,
Promoted instantly to the rank of absolute hero!! Thanks for the info. Will be used to the full!!
Everyone else,
I agree with John Nichol. Let's get back the the structured campaign of writing to MP's and the PM, and let personal issues remain personal, whether assumed or other. We need to stay focussed now. To go this far and shoot ouselves in the leg would be to let Jon and Rick down at the last hurdle.
Libel and slander have been looked at in great depth and, at this moment in time, are not options. The priority is to get the verdict overturned as it is unsustainable.
Focus, focus focus - write, write, write. And above all else - keep your head!!
Regards all
Brian
[email protected]
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Promoted instantly to the rank of absolute hero!! Thanks for the info. Will be used to the full!!
Everyone else,
I agree with John Nichol. Let's get back the the structured campaign of writing to MP's and the PM, and let personal issues remain personal, whether assumed or other. We need to stay focussed now. To go this far and shoot ouselves in the leg would be to let Jon and Rick down at the last hurdle.
Libel and slander have been looked at in great depth and, at this moment in time, are not options. The priority is to get the verdict overturned as it is unsustainable.
Focus, focus focus - write, write, write. And above all else - keep your head!!
Regards all
Brian
[email protected]
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Guest
Posts: n/a
Jackonicko - Wrotten storming out of the RAeS:
See:
<A HREF="http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m0COW/2000_May_18/62827483/print.jhtml" TARGET="_blank">http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m0COW/2000_May_18/62827483/print.jhtml</A>
Computer Weekly 18 May 2000 MoD in Chinook report cover-up by Tony Collins.
...Now three senior Fellows of one of the world's most eminent professional aviation body, the Royal Aeronautical Society, have disclosed one paragraph from the Tench report. They quote Tench as saying that the "involvement of some Station Commanders, Air Officer Commanding's Staff Officers and even the Commander In Chief, is an unwelcome intrusion upon what should be the complete independence of the Board of Inquiry".
...Now the three Fellows of the Royal Aeronautical Society have revealed that Sir John Day, as Air Officer Commanding No 1 Group,was involved in controlling the introduction into service of the Chinook Mk2, and reported to Sir William Wratten who in turn reported to Sir Michael Graydon.
See also:
<A HREF="http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,334249,00.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,334249,00.html</A>
...Earlier this year a report by fellows of the Royal Aeronautical Society concluded that the verdict of pilot negligence was not sustainable in the light of evidence pointing to other problems which could have caused the crash on the Mull. Wratten and Day were so infuriated by the report that they resigned from the society...
Richard Norton Taylor 20 Jun 2000
Jackonicko & JN - Speculation about Wrotten & Libel:
Jacko - You've fairly turned around, some of your other posts have, shall we say, tended towards the homophobic. In any event, as a gay man myself (sacked by Wrotten) the last thing I would describe him as is gay and I certainly can't imagine him as a weekend transvestite!
Suffice it to say, Seneca probably summed up the cause of monumental insensitivity and arrogance of the sort displayed by Wrotten when he said "All cruelty springs from weakness"
Edited to remove smiley things and excessive verbosity!
[This message has been edited by misterploppy (edited 06 December 2000).]
See:
<A HREF="http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m0COW/2000_May_18/62827483/print.jhtml" TARGET="_blank">http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m0COW/2000_May_18/62827483/print.jhtml</A>
Computer Weekly 18 May 2000 MoD in Chinook report cover-up by Tony Collins.
...Now three senior Fellows of one of the world's most eminent professional aviation body, the Royal Aeronautical Society, have disclosed one paragraph from the Tench report. They quote Tench as saying that the "involvement of some Station Commanders, Air Officer Commanding's Staff Officers and even the Commander In Chief, is an unwelcome intrusion upon what should be the complete independence of the Board of Inquiry".
...Now the three Fellows of the Royal Aeronautical Society have revealed that Sir John Day, as Air Officer Commanding No 1 Group,was involved in controlling the introduction into service of the Chinook Mk2, and reported to Sir William Wratten who in turn reported to Sir Michael Graydon.
See also:
<A HREF="http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,334249,00.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,334249,00.html</A>
...Earlier this year a report by fellows of the Royal Aeronautical Society concluded that the verdict of pilot negligence was not sustainable in the light of evidence pointing to other problems which could have caused the crash on the Mull. Wratten and Day were so infuriated by the report that they resigned from the society...
Richard Norton Taylor 20 Jun 2000
Jackonicko & JN - Speculation about Wrotten & Libel:
Jacko - You've fairly turned around, some of your other posts have, shall we say, tended towards the homophobic. In any event, as a gay man myself (sacked by Wrotten) the last thing I would describe him as is gay and I certainly can't imagine him as a weekend transvestite!
Suffice it to say, Seneca probably summed up the cause of monumental insensitivity and arrogance of the sort displayed by Wrotten when he said "All cruelty springs from weakness"
Edited to remove smiley things and excessive verbosity!
[This message has been edited by misterploppy (edited 06 December 2000).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
As Brian Dixon has said above:
"Focus, focus focus - write, write, write. And above all else - keep your head!!"
One easy way is to e-mail your MP.
1. If you know who your MP is then here is an alphabetical list of MPs from the House of commons web site. A large proportion of them have a link for an e-mail address and some even have links to their own websites:
<A HREF="http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/almsad.htm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/almsad.htm</A>
2. If you DON'T know who your MP is then go here and search through the constituencies alphabetically to find your MP. Then proceed as per paragraph 1:
<A HREF="http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/alcm.htm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/alcm.htm</A>
3. If you're not sure of your constituency (oh dear) then go here and search through the county listings - you might come across one you recognise! Then proceed to paragraph 2 and then to paragraph 1:
<A HREF="http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/clomps.htm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/clomps.htm</A>
I've already written to my MP. Good luck!
[This message has been edited by Scatterling (edited 05 December 2000).]
"Focus, focus focus - write, write, write. And above all else - keep your head!!"
One easy way is to e-mail your MP.
1. If you know who your MP is then here is an alphabetical list of MPs from the House of commons web site. A large proportion of them have a link for an e-mail address and some even have links to their own websites:
<A HREF="http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/almsad.htm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/almsad.htm</A>
2. If you DON'T know who your MP is then go here and search through the constituencies alphabetically to find your MP. Then proceed as per paragraph 1:
<A HREF="http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/alcm.htm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/alcm.htm</A>
3. If you're not sure of your constituency (oh dear) then go here and search through the county listings - you might come across one you recognise! Then proceed to paragraph 2 and then to paragraph 1:
<A HREF="http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/clomps.htm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/clomps.htm</A>
I've already written to my MP. Good luck!
[This message has been edited by Scatterling (edited 05 December 2000).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Getting back on target, Brian!
A tactical suggestion. It is sad but true that some MPs will not be overly concerned with the intricacies of the RAF's internal BofI system. In letters, particularly to non-NuLabour MPs it may well be worth adding the point that in dismissing the Public Accounts Cttee report as 'superficial', the MOD are showing contempt for a senior Cttee of the House. Opposition MPs (and some Labour ones) are currently very concerned about the House's ability to hold the executive to account.
A tactical suggestion. It is sad but true that some MPs will not be overly concerned with the intricacies of the RAF's internal BofI system. In letters, particularly to non-NuLabour MPs it may well be worth adding the point that in dismissing the Public Accounts Cttee report as 'superficial', the MOD are showing contempt for a senior Cttee of the House. Opposition MPs (and some Labour ones) are currently very concerned about the House's ability to hold the executive to account.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The web site is in the registration phase. It should be available soon. Keep logging in to see when it becomes live. First one to find out, let everyone else know. The phone number works though!!
Brian
[email protected]
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Brian
[email protected]
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ark
The lack of a website does not negate the posession of an e-mail account. Have e-mailed [email protected] and the e-mail hasn't winged its way back to me yet!
The lack of a website does not negate the posession of an e-mail account. Have e-mailed [email protected] and the e-mail hasn't winged its way back to me yet!
Guest
Posts: n/a
John, Arkroyal
There must have been written docs by the crew regarding satnav computer system reliability see
<A HREF="http://www.computerweekly.co.uk/cwarchive/chinook/cwcontainer.asp?name=CHIN0503.htm&SubSection=2" TARGET="_blank">http://www.computerweekly.co.uk/cwarchive/chinook/cwcontainer.asp?name=CHIN0503.htm&SubSection=2</A>
Also there are US Army docs on Satellite overhead changes needed to be carried out in the time period of the crash.
This is why I mentioned previously about Mobile Phone issues, as it is well documented electrical equipment on board passenger planes does have issues for flight navigation systems.
emails seems to be getting through to the relevent people concerned to make sure more information is forthcoming.
AskPM email response for question came through ok.
Colin
------------------
There must have been written docs by the crew regarding satnav computer system reliability see
<A HREF="http://www.computerweekly.co.uk/cwarchive/chinook/cwcontainer.asp?name=CHIN0503.htm&SubSection=2" TARGET="_blank">http://www.computerweekly.co.uk/cwarchive/chinook/cwcontainer.asp?name=CHIN0503.htm&SubSection=2</A>
Also there are US Army docs on Satellite overhead changes needed to be carried out in the time period of the crash.
This is why I mentioned previously about Mobile Phone issues, as it is well documented electrical equipment on board passenger planes does have issues for flight navigation systems.
emails seems to be getting through to the relevent people concerned to make sure more information is forthcoming.
AskPM email response for question came through ok.
Colin
------------------
Guest
Posts: n/a
Misterp and colinj, thanks. You are dealing with a Luddite here! Q on way to his eminence.
The Mistress, thanks for your support.
P.S.
Colinj ta for the link, interesting reading. Don't remember there being any 'frequencies' to change on SuperTans, but there is certainly more evidence of niggling problems and distractions.
Out of loop for a few days now due to work.
[This message has been edited by Arkroyal (edited 06 December 2000).]
The Mistress, thanks for your support.
P.S.
Colinj ta for the link, interesting reading. Don't remember there being any 'frequencies' to change on SuperTans, but there is certainly more evidence of niggling problems and distractions.
Out of loop for a few days now due to work.
[This message has been edited by Arkroyal (edited 06 December 2000).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
***************************
Woah! Some of the posts on this thread are coming very close to the legal line. Please please show restraint in your posts chaps.
After all the LAST thing we want is the lawyers slapping PPRuNe with legal notices now.
This campaign is too important to jeopardise.
*******************************
WWW
Woah! Some of the posts on this thread are coming very close to the legal line. Please please show restraint in your posts chaps.
After all the LAST thing we want is the lawyers slapping PPRuNe with legal notices now.
This campaign is too important to jeopardise.
*******************************
WWW
Guest
Posts: n/a
Brian & Ark,
Have e-mailed my question successfully to [email protected]. Disappointed that the Daily Telegraph didn't publish the letter I e-mailed to them yesterday.
Keep on trying.
Have e-mailed my question successfully to [email protected]. Disappointed that the Daily Telegraph didn't publish the letter I e-mailed to them yesterday.
Keep on trying.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ark, Your point about icing lims is a good one and has been looked at before. The simple fact is that had the crew climbed to SALT they would have exceeded the limitations. Indeed, they had questioned this very point in the days before the flight and had been told, in no uncertain terms, that they would be held personally responsible for any incident that arose from breaking the lims.
Wratten has tried to get around this by stating that SALT was 2800ft. Needless to say he got it wrong. The actual SALT is 5900ft - hence the crew could not achieve that with the imposed limitations.
There is, of course, on overriding factor here. Would one rather fly on in the crud or simply break the limitations? As Grndplt points out, it is a v important consideration. However, the most important thing to bang home is that we are still only speculating about what may or may not have occured. It's a question we can't answer.
Re Mobile phones. The BOI did examine this (para 37) but found no evidence that it was a factor.
Wratten has tried to get around this by stating that SALT was 2800ft. Needless to say he got it wrong. The actual SALT is 5900ft - hence the crew could not achieve that with the imposed limitations.
There is, of course, on overriding factor here. Would one rather fly on in the crud or simply break the limitations? As Grndplt points out, it is a v important consideration. However, the most important thing to bang home is that we are still only speculating about what may or may not have occured. It's a question we can't answer.
Re Mobile phones. The BOI did examine this (para 37) but found no evidence that it was a factor.
Guest
Posts: n/a
This is my 100th posting. Anyone mind if I indulge myself and dedicate it to the following:
1. My Friends - Jon Tapper, Rick Cook, Graham Forbes, Kev Hardie.
2. The Passengers.
3. The families of those who were lost.
4. All who are campaigning to have this injustice put right.
Thank you
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
1. My Friends - Jon Tapper, Rick Cook, Graham Forbes, Kev Hardie.
2. The Passengers.
3. The families of those who were lost.
4. All who are campaigning to have this injustice put right.
Thank you
Brian
"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook
Guest
Posts: n/a
Anybody wishing to press their MPs, particularly labour MPs, about this matter may want to quote the Labour Manifesto of the 1997 election. These words were all publicly spoken by Tony Blair himself:
"I want to renew faith in politics through a government that will govern in the interest of the many, the broad majority of people who work hard, play by the rules, pay their dues and feel let down by a political system that gives the breaks to the few, to an elite at the top increasingly out of touch with the rest of us."
Those last few words are particularly apt. The last few words of the following may also be useful and are from exactly the same source:
"Over-centralisation of government and lack of accountability was a problem in governments of both left and right. Labour is committed to the democratic renewal of our country through decentralisation and the elimination of excessive government secrecy."
"I want to renew faith in politics through a government that will govern in the interest of the many, the broad majority of people who work hard, play by the rules, pay their dues and feel let down by a political system that gives the breaks to the few, to an elite at the top increasingly out of touch with the rest of us."
Those last few words are particularly apt. The last few words of the following may also be useful and are from exactly the same source:
"Over-centralisation of government and lack of accountability was a problem in governments of both left and right. Labour is committed to the democratic renewal of our country through decentralisation and the elimination of excessive government secrecy."
Guest
Posts: n/a
John Nichol -
the safety altitude question is worth pursuing, but you need to be sure of the Chinook fleet's SOPs at the time. Certainly, on the C130 fleet, we used to use (may still use, for all I know) a low level navigation track leg safety alt based on 1000ft above the ground only 3 miles either side of track whilst maintaining the planned route. Any deviation from the route meant going to the sector MSA (5900ft here), but it is quite possible that the SOPs allowed the crew to use a lower figure.
the safety altitude question is worth pursuing, but you need to be sure of the Chinook fleet's SOPs at the time. Certainly, on the C130 fleet, we used to use (may still use, for all I know) a low level navigation track leg safety alt based on 1000ft above the ground only 3 miles either side of track whilst maintaining the planned route. Any deviation from the route meant going to the sector MSA (5900ft here), but it is quite possible that the SOPs allowed the crew to use a lower figure.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Scroggs,
I don't think you will find anything in the SOPs on that topic (things may have changed very recently). SH have traditionally worked to different rules, allied to the ability to land if the weather goes below limits. Climbing into cloud is not often an option, especially in view of the limited icing tolerance of helicopters without special equipment such as heated blades etc.
I don't think you will find anything in the SOPs on that topic (things may have changed very recently). SH have traditionally worked to different rules, allied to the ability to land if the weather goes below limits. Climbing into cloud is not often an option, especially in view of the limited icing tolerance of helicopters without special equipment such as heated blades etc.