Don't disagree with anything stated, except one small part...
Everything should be open to the public to be investigated and discovered. However, use of safety investigations is not the place to do it. A criminal or civil action investigation is.
Indeed, I agree with that 100%. Maybe I misread, or misinterpreted your meaning of "protections," or MikeD's interpretation of "sanctity." Absolutely, let the investigators investigate and do their job - I've no issues with that at all.
I just think that their charter is also to
inform the public. Not necessarily to
educate the public - but to inform it. I think the individual is responsible for their own education - but I believe the individual needs to have a place of education, in which to derive their education (redundancy intended). In that light, I simply thought that the investigating organization could do as much as reasonably possible to make relevant information available to the public, so that it can educate itself.
I certainly don't want the fact finding process to be hindered by anyone, as that serves no one in the long run.
The two incidents that I have been a part of both caused large amounts of damage to military aircraft, which are for all intents and purposes public property. It is important for those that come after me to understand and learn from my mistakes. If I withhold that info, no one benefits. However, to use what I provide or is discovered, under the guise of a safety investigation, to hold me liable for any errors would completely undermine the whole safety program concept.
My statements were about Commercial and General Aviation Accidents in Public Places.
If the United States Military is involved in an aviation accident on Federal Property, then that seems to be a matter of Military Jurisdiction and thus, a matter best dealt with by the Military. I have zero problems with that whatsoever. Whatever core competencies brought by the military to resolve such matters and make adjustments (improvements to safety of flight), should be engaged and I trust that they are engaged in such matters.
But, what happens when a Military Aircraft causes (using your words) "large amounts of damage to military aircraft" AND to
personal property, while over flying the public en route? I think this presents an interesting question:
Should the public have the right to all evidence involved, including but not limited to CVR data?
In that case, we'd be talking about a piece of military equipment. We could be talking about the entire aircraft. These are very interesting questions, indeed. These events have happened in the past - most recently (I believe) was a an F-18 Hornet having gone down directly on top of a Multi-Unit, Multi-Family Apartment Building/Condo. I forget exactly where, but I know it was not long ago. I believe in that case, the USN stepped in fairly quickly to offer reparations for damages, but I did not follow the entire story through to its final conclusion, if there was one.
As I said before... Two investigations for an incident should be understood and tolerated. However, their paths do not need to meet.
I actually have no problem with that and I think the matter of building-in stronger
flight safety through information that comes out of one investigation process makes sense. However, in cases where the public was physically and/or psychological impacted negatively, then I believe the public should have the right to all information related to their future safety at a minimum.
As I said, if the matter is contained on Federal property used for military purposes, where the military is involved in operating an aircraft, then that should be investigated and aired out among the military entities designated for such purposes. The public, through its support for political candidates can make changes in how the military conducts such operations, but that comes with a vote AND the understanding that some tax dollars will result in such incidents and accidents along the way. The public has to maintain "common sense" about such military operations, IMO.