Well this thread got tawdry pretty quick. The basic story seems not to have changed since Day 1, though I do admit that I did learn a bit while looking through the various bits of data. But somehow the fact that ‘witnesses’ have now come forward has been construed as a change to the basic story – and with more to come (but not so far) it seems. I can understand why forum members are beginning to draw conclusions and notice similarities with other organizations when none of the ‘new’ data really seems to add much.
Over maybe 35 years I have been involved in a large number of aviation stories which have led to witness interviews. These interviews rarely add more than a bit of period colour because the human memory is a dodgy source of reliable, primary, factually-correct data. On a couple of occasions, two pilots in different aircraft on the same sortie have offered completely different recollections (like whether it was night or day; raining heavily or clear blue) and in a number of cases I’ve been able to prove that a ‘witness’ – though nominally in the correct branch of service and serving in the relevant location – either didn’t serve there at the precise time in question, or was on leave/in bed/on the loo/whatever.
So one lesson which I learnt is that each witness tells a different story and most are usually wrong in what they think they saw or (of more relevance here) what they recall years later.
So yes it’s an interesting story but there appears to be nothing to add. And if wreckage is found then that has to be a good thing, so good luck that you do: it will be a fitting memorial to a sad but ultimately straightforward event. I think most here would be supportive of that, so long as there isn’t some daft ‘angle’ behind it all.
But that of course won’t stop folks coming forward with their homespun theories of what might have happened, and such stories will I’m sure will be lent great credence by being offered from people who ‘were there’, but most likely not actual witnesses because of course such things are largely impossible to prove at this distance.
Sign In
