See Here 😀

Brian

Thanks, hadn’t seen that. I expect the charges will creep up, year on year :rolleyes:

As long as that doesn’t catch on at other museums.

Yep… (three things, actually).
.

I wouldn’t like to enter into speculation.

Although I expect that in their minds, most people would have one particular cause as being the
most likely.

Allowing the aircraft to fly again so soon, would suggest (to me anyway) that they have a good
idea as to what went wrong.

Time will tell.

There seem to be a number of different (contradictory) statements coming (allegedly) from the MoD/RAF

That’s not true. They can and do display as an eight ship from time to time.

Indeed, I saw them display with eight aircraft in Guernsey, some years ago.

It wouldn’t be straightforward bringing in an ex-team member, even if he’d flown in the slot before,
as there would be new manoeuvres to learn.

There’s also the morale of the team to consider.

Going back to my ATC cadet days :rolleyes:

I always understood that an Airport was for civil aircraft
An Aerodrome was for military aircraft
An airfield was used by either, but had no fixed buildings.

“Lets just keep speculation out of it” – that could/should be the forum’s watchword!

I imagine we all agree with that, but when do theories become speculation ?,
and when does speculation become bad taste ?

Many people have speculated openly in the media as to the actions of Jon
Egging, immediately prior to the crash. Is that bad taste ? I don’t think so.

I’m sure that most of us have talked to work colleagues and friends, as to
what we think happened. Where do you draw the line, and who draws it ?

With the recent no-fatal accident at Duxford, if someone had been killed,
would speculation as to the cause also have been a taboo subject, even
though everyone could see what happened.

A balance has to be struck between apportioning blame, and theorizing,
and a balance between saying things which might upset someone, and getting
too touchy feely.