Officer backs RAF cover-up claim Flight lieutenant claims home was raided after Chinook letters

Jim MacKenzie, a flight lieutenant and Gulf War veteran with 26 years' service in the RAF, told The Herald he had decided to speak out ''in the cause of the dead pilots who carry the injustice of being labelled grossly negligent''.

He says that while the initial board of inquiry may not have been aware of the real destination of the fatal flight, senior officers ''must be in possession of all the facts''.

Flt Lt MacKenzie also claims his Lancashire home was raided by three men who said they were from GCHQ, the government spy centre, the day after he wrote to a number of MPs expressing his concerns and that a number of his personal computer files were confiscated.

The men warned him that, as a former officer, he was still bound by the terms of the Official Secrets Act not to disclose sensitive information obtained during his military career.

The powerful Commons public accounts committee last week criticised the verdict of the original Chinook inquiry into the disaster as ''unsustainable'' in labelling Jonathan Tapper and Richard Cook solely responsible for the worst peacetime accident in RAF history.

However, the prime minister refused to overturn the board's findings and convene a new inquiry, and Geoff Hoon, the defence secretary, dismissed the PAC report as ''superficial''.

Flt Lt MacKenzie was in charge of communication and information systems at Machrihanish from 1992 until 1993. He said last night: ''During my time at the base, it was common knowledge amongst RAF personnel that the top security experts from Northern Ireland came to Machrihanish once a year - in June - for their anti-terrorist conference. Indeed, it had happened during my time there.

''The security personnel were segregated from the rest of the station and were rarely seen. No official correspondence was ever produced to cover even the administrative aspects of their regular annual visit.

''I was therefore taken aback when the RAF inquiry stated they were en route to Inverness.

''On December 2 this year, I had a chance meeting with a Royal Marine who had been stationed at Arbroath at the time of crash and was one of the first on the scene to cordon off the site. He told me it was common knowledge that the Chinook had been tasked to fly low level around the Mull and land at Machrihanish, where the conference was taking place as usual.

''He added that low-level flight was necessary to keep below Prestwick radar, thus allowing the helicopter to land unobserved for obvious security reasons.

''I am well aware of the strong case being put forward on the failure of the on-board computer equipment as being the most likely cause of the crash. But if the pilots were following orders to fly low to avoid radar detection, this must surely be a contributory factor to be taken into account when apportioning blame.

''It could be argued that the RAF tasking authority was negligent in dispatching an aircraft to carry out a flight in circumstances where weather conditions, route, and aircraft reliability were all in question.

''It is time for the RAF and the MoD to come clean on the circumstances surrounding the last flight of Chinook ZD576 to let these brave aircrew finally rest in peace.''

Flt Lt MacKenzie has now written to Geraldine Smith, his local Labour MP, in Morecambe and Lunesdale, to David Davis, chairman of the Commons public accounts committee, and to Lord Chalfont, chairman of the Mull of Kintyre action group, asking them to force the MoD to admit the real destination of the flight.

Menzies Campbell, Lib-Dem defence spokesman and a leading campaigner for a new inquiry, said: ''If indeed the destination of the Chinook was Machrihanish and the pilots had been instructed to fly at low level for security purposes, it would put a whole new complexion on the issue.

''It would certainly underline the justified claims that the high standards of proof of negligence demanded by the RAF's own regulations could not have been satisfied.''