And not, it seems, to the benefit of Safety, Passengers, Aircrew, or Attendees at Airshows.
It might, however, be pertinent at this juncture to point out that the SACAA Report was (most likely) written by some persons who’s first language was not English. There were a number of (English) spelling, grammatical, and punctuation, errors.
Thus, we may conclude that some of the TC complaints may be valid – not (I suspect) that they will change the findings.
Some people did things to that aircraft that they should not have done.
Some people did NOT do things to that aircraft that they should have done.
Criminal culpability? Depends on your Criminal Code – and who you know!
Resmoroh

If this initial Report is taken in context with the recent SACAA Report into the Thunder City accident, it seems that however different the two incidents may have been there is a degree of commonality.
1 Individuals/organisations did things to aircraft that they were not licenced, or ordered to do.
2 Having done it, whatever was done was not checked with sufficient rigour as being either right, or safe.
3 Individuals/organisations did NOT do things to aircraft that they should have done.
4 Having NOT done it, it was not checked with sufficient rigour that the aircraft was safe to fly in accordance with the manufacturers/operators SOPs.
Just keep that in mind at the next airshow you and your family visit (wherever it may be). The majority of aircraft will have been serviced to the highest standards. A simple majority is not enough!
Je reste ma valise – and wish I was a lawyer!!!
Resmoroh

I am trying to get this incident/Report into some sort of perspective.
My experiences (as an operational airfield meteorologist) in Fighter Command were limited to Meteors, Hunters, and the dreaded Swift. I then returned to the V-bomber world. So I looked at Wiki. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Electric_Lightning).
Q1 – Is this a fair representation of the Lightning’s history (never mind the detail – I can read between the lines with the best of ‘em)?
Q2 – UK CAA clearly knew that these a/c were a bit of a ratbag – thus a clear NO FLY in UK airspace? (Good on ‘em!)
Q3 – Who, therefore, sanctioned the sale to whatever South African organisation (of whatever sort) – and why?
Q4 – who actually OWNED the a/c before sale?
Q5 – Who benefited from the sale?
Q6 – What was the sale price – and where did the money go?
Notwithstanding the organisational nonsense that led to the prang, there still seems (to me) to be a considerable amount of “murk” surrounding this problem. Many commentators have appeared to zero-in on the time/life expired components in the ejection equipment (quite apart from Pilot Decisions) as the likely ‘cause’ of the fatality. I get the distinct impression that if an RAF Lightning Pilot got more than 3 warning lights at the same time he just pointed the a/c to RAF Dogger Bank and pulled the chain!
Please be aware that I am not about awarding blame – but simply trying to understand what lead up to this accident.
We are, I suspect, grateful that this (or similar) accident did not occur in UK airspace. Else there would be no flying at air-shows of any a/c more than two weeks old! I hope I jest – but I suspect that UK CAA would like just that
HTH
Resmoroh

exmpa, I think you are being a little harsh – but you have hit upon the reason for this foreseeable accident. The SOPs and FRCs were written to Mil Spec. If the a/c is taken on to a civil organisation then it MUST be looked after in the same way. Or – write a new set of SOPs! And as BAe had stopped supporting that a/c then this is going to be very expensive, if not impossible! So I ask the question again (and nobody seems to want to grasp this nettle!) why did TC take this problem on board (or why were they allowed to take this problem on board?!!). Nobody (except, possibly, the manufacturers) has ever got rich flying Lightnings. Indeed, some did not survive the experience!
Resmoroh

Quite apart from the Maori spiritual approach to the problem, it seems to me that there are some folk who are still appalled that such WW2 aviation (and similar) sites are desecrated. I agree. But until such time as persons convicted of this sort of crime (and I include stealing metal WW2 memorial sites) are not just given a slap on the wrist and 50 hours Community Service, but are sent to prison for a very, very, long time and/or made to feel real pain by being birched, then this sort of behaviour will not stop. To hell with Human Rights. Make ’em suffer – and then it will (I guarantee you) stop overnight. If it doesn’t then increase the pain and imprisonment. Eventually, even the lower orders will realise (with their reduced intellectual ability) that it’s not worth the candle to steal this sort of thing (and I include those to whom they sell their ‘salvage’). But you can only ensure this by electing a government with the guts to do this via legislation. If not then please just use this forum to bleat about it.
Resmoroh
PS If the Mods find this offensive then remove it – we will all know where their sympathies lie.

If all else fails go to the Museum of Berkshire Aviation. They know everything about Miles a/c – and if they don’t then they’ll know who does!
Resmoroh

Peter 45, Hi,

OK, so if you have access to the book in question, and it has not provided much that you did not already know, then I need not go through the Norwegian index to check.

I am a retired Met Man, and although I can handle an aircraft I am not a Pilot. So how “They” did what “They” are supposed to have done is outwith my area of expertise. The only other source I can suggest is:- http://www.airfieldinformationexchange.org/community/forumdisplay.php?4-Airfields. They might know about any/some temporary/clandestine airfields and/or seaplane bases that might have been used for the purposes you are interested in.

Or, as we often say in this sort of research “If they don’t know, they might know someone who does!!!!”.

HTH
Resmoroh