Just published, a new a and critical book concerning the dodgy blame game following the Chinook crash on the Mull of Kintyre in 1994 which killed 29 people. The BoE sought to blame the pilots and that stood for many years before a grudging admission that it might have been due to other causes. New and dodgy software in an aircraft that should not have been cleared to fly as well as other suspect causes are examined in detail. Maybe it will finally prompt a proper enquiry into the whole affair. https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/193 ... k-tragedy/
Check out Amazon and the usual sources for 'The Inconvenient Truth: Chinook ZD576 - Cause and Culpability' by David Hill
Author David Hill:
I am a retired Aeronautical Engineer having worked in the Ministry of Defence for over 30 years, primarily as an Avionics/Aircraft Programme Manager.
Since retiring I have provided advice and assistance to families of Servicemen and Civilians who have perished in aircraft accidents, notably Chinook ZD576 (Mull of Kintyre), Nimrod XV230 and Hercules XV179.
In 2016, I published 'Their Greatest Disgrace', a personal perspective of the campaign to clear the Chinook ZD576 pilots. (Mull of Kintyre 1994).
In 2014, at the behest of Sir Roger Gale MP, and on behalf of families of deceased RN aircrew, I prepared a report into the loss of two Royal Navy Sea King ASaC Mk7 helicopters (Iraq, March 2003). It demonstrates known performance degradation between the AEW Mk2 and ASaC Mk7 wholly coincided with the three main Contributory Factors. This was submitted to the House of Commons Defence Select Committee, and published in May 2019 as part of a new book 'Breaking the Military Covenant'.
The final part of this trilogy is 'Red 5', outlining the malicious prosecution of Martin-Baker after the death of Red Arrows pilot Flt Lt Sean Cunningham in 2011. The book reveals evidence that both police and Health and Safety Executive refused to investigate, providing links to video evidence demonstrating the charge against Martin-Baker was without foundation. This concealed guilty acts and left MoD free to offend again. And it has, exposing current and future aircrew to unnecessary risk.
The proceeds from my books are donated to various charities, including Help for Heroes.
Chinook Crash Kintyre 1994
-
TheGreenGoblin
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 17596
- Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2019 11:02 pm
- Location: With the Water People near Trappist-1
Re: Chinook Crash Kintyre 1994
I read 'Their Greatest Disgrace' and was impressed by Mr Hill's case against the "slimies", i.e. career officers and politico's in the MOD and the usual political cabal in multiple departments, in and around Whitehall and the cabinet, and their obfuscation and attempts to cover up the truth (i.e. lies). I have now purchased both 'Cause and Culpability' and 'Red 5' on the basis of his good reputation, and the excellent 'Their Greatest Disgrace' and your ever-reliable recommendations FD2.
Ref. Red 5, I had a long chat about the death of Flt Sean Cunningham (a young South African born pilot) with two friends who work for Martin Baker, who explained the whole ejector seat mechanism and what had actually been sent to the MOD and the RAF as maintenance and operational advice in the years prior to this avoidable accident, and their opinion (partisan perhaps) was that Martin Baker had been completely stitched up in order to hide the effects that Treasury funding cuts were having on the maintenance of equipment and the retention of trained and competent technical personnel right across the military services.
Much reading to be done and, as all suggested titles are in a electronic format, I shan't incur the opprobrium of my better half who despises dusty aviation and military titles as much as a 'hausfrau' with a broom might despise a toad in her kitchen!
Ref. Red 5, I had a long chat about the death of Flt Sean Cunningham (a young South African born pilot) with two friends who work for Martin Baker, who explained the whole ejector seat mechanism and what had actually been sent to the MOD and the RAF as maintenance and operational advice in the years prior to this avoidable accident, and their opinion (partisan perhaps) was that Martin Baker had been completely stitched up in order to hide the effects that Treasury funding cuts were having on the maintenance of equipment and the retention of trained and competent technical personnel right across the military services.
Much reading to be done and, as all suggested titles are in a electronic format, I shan't incur the opprobrium of my better half who despises dusty aviation and military titles as much as a 'hausfrau' with a broom might despise a toad in her kitchen!
Though you remain
Convinced
"To be alive
You must have somewhere
To go
Your destination remains
Elusive."
Convinced
"To be alive
You must have somewhere
To go
Your destination remains
Elusive."
Re: Chinook Crash Kintyre 1994
I now have a stack of reading material like you GG and have taken to reading during the afternoon to try and get through it. The dog doesn't mind as long as she gets her morning walk.
I'm certainly looking forward to getting into 'Their Greatest Disgrace' and a pleasant surprise at only £3.99 on Kindle, but as proceeds go to a worthy cause I hope it sells well.
The FADEC software was 'dangerous' or at least suspect and the CA Release to service was not legitimate. In June 1994, it is claimed, aircrew at Boscombe Down refused to fly the HC2 until the FADEC software had been revised.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Scot ... nook_crash
In December 2007, Defence Secretary Des Browne agreed to conduct a fresh report into the crash.[12][13] On 8 December 2008, Secretary of State for Defence John Hutton announced that "no new evidence" had been presented and the verdicts of gross negligence against the flight crew would stand.[14] On 4 January 2010, doubts of the official explanation were raised again with the discovery that an internal MOD document, which had been written nine months prior to the incident, described the engine software as 'positively dangerous' as it could lead to failure of both engines.[15][16] The 2011 Review concluded that criticism that the original board had not paid enough attention to maintenance and technical issues was unjustified.[17]
On 13 July 2011, Defence Secretary Liam Fox outlined to MPs the findings of an independent review into the 1994 crash, which found that the two pilots who were blamed for the crash had been cleared of gross negligence.[18] In doing so, the Government accepted Lord Philip's confirmation that the Controller Aircraft Release (CAR) was "mandated" upon the RAF. Issued in November 1993, the CAR stated that the entire navigation and communications systems used on the Chinook HC2 were not to be relied upon in any way by the aircrew, and therefore it had no legitimate clearance to fly. Knowledge of the CAR had been withheld from the pilots; by withholding this when issuing their Release to Service (RTS) (the authority to fly), the RAF had made a false declaration of compliance with regulations.
I'm certainly looking forward to getting into 'Their Greatest Disgrace' and a pleasant surprise at only £3.99 on Kindle, but as proceeds go to a worthy cause I hope it sells well.
The FADEC software was 'dangerous' or at least suspect and the CA Release to service was not legitimate. In June 1994, it is claimed, aircrew at Boscombe Down refused to fly the HC2 until the FADEC software had been revised.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Scot ... nook_crash
In December 2007, Defence Secretary Des Browne agreed to conduct a fresh report into the crash.[12][13] On 8 December 2008, Secretary of State for Defence John Hutton announced that "no new evidence" had been presented and the verdicts of gross negligence against the flight crew would stand.[14] On 4 January 2010, doubts of the official explanation were raised again with the discovery that an internal MOD document, which had been written nine months prior to the incident, described the engine software as 'positively dangerous' as it could lead to failure of both engines.[15][16] The 2011 Review concluded that criticism that the original board had not paid enough attention to maintenance and technical issues was unjustified.[17]
On 13 July 2011, Defence Secretary Liam Fox outlined to MPs the findings of an independent review into the 1994 crash, which found that the two pilots who were blamed for the crash had been cleared of gross negligence.[18] In doing so, the Government accepted Lord Philip's confirmation that the Controller Aircraft Release (CAR) was "mandated" upon the RAF. Issued in November 1993, the CAR stated that the entire navigation and communications systems used on the Chinook HC2 were not to be relied upon in any way by the aircrew, and therefore it had no legitimate clearance to fly. Knowledge of the CAR had been withheld from the pilots; by withholding this when issuing their Release to Service (RTS) (the authority to fly), the RAF had made a false declaration of compliance with regulations.
- Chinook_Crash_Memorial.JPG (28.17 KiB) Viewed 127 times