Comments:UK Civil Aviation Authority issues update on Shoreham crash response

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.

Start a new discussion

Contents

Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Armchair detecting021:36, 27 January 2017

Armchair detecting

The notes on maintenance don't conclusively show anything, but they do suggest mechanical issues with the plane. Unclear if Hill had any involvement in that.

The idea of scheduling an inquest when there's still clearly months of investigative work is silly. There's good reason to open and postpone inquests in these circumstances; it ensures they're in the system ready to go. But late 2017 would be more sensible; even then, a trial or other delay could push it yet further back.

BRS (Talk) (Contribs)21:36, 27 January 2017