Macfarlane’s book does not contain First Officer Gabriel’s initial written statements, if any. It does, however, contain part of the evidence given by Ron Chippendale in a US court case. According to that evidence, First Officer Gabriel told Ron Chippendale that be believed that the track went directly to McMurdo Station and that it crossed over Ross Island and Erebus. (Macfarlane pp349, 350) For some reason, Ron Chippendale did not keep any record of the statement. (Macfarlane p351)

When he came to give his evidence to the Royal Commission, First Officer Gabriel said that he did not believe that the track would cross Ross Island and Erebus. If the track is put to one side, we are left with the position of the waypoint. On that matter, there is at least some evidence that First Officer Gabriel’s initial statement, to Ron Chippendale, was that the waypoint was at McMurdo Station.

At some stage after speaking with Ron Chippendale First Officer Gabriel would have been interviewed by ALPA’s lawyers, who would then have a drafted a written statement.  It is not known whether the statement was provided to First Officer Gabriel in advance or presented to him at the hearing rooms on the day he was to give evidence. What is known is that the latter tactic was used on Captain Simpson.

Before preparation of First Officer Gabriel's statement began, ALPA’s lawyers had had access to most of the documentary evidence, which established that three flight plans to the McMurdo area were available at the briefing of 9 November 1979:

1. A flight plan dated October 1977 which First Officer Cassin used to program the simulator and which was later found in the wreckage. The longitude of the McMurdo waypoint was 166 degrees. There were no markings on the document found in the wreckage. (Macfarlane p104, p220)

2. A flight plan dated 7 November 1979 which Captain Wilson brought to the briefing. The longitude of the McMurdo waypoint was 164 degrees. The waypoint was underlined. (Macfarlane  p79)

3. The “as flown” version of (2) above, also brought to the briefing by Captain Wilson. Again, the longitude of the McMurdo waypoint was 164 degrees. The waypoint was highlighted. (Exhibit 206C)

Of the three flight plans, (2) and (3) suited ALPA, whereas (1) did not. ALPA’s lawyers chose the following words for First Officer Gabriel: “During the talk through of those notes Captain Wilson handed out some flight plans from a previous Antartic flight. He told us they were there for us to look at but we were not to take them away with us. I looked at a flight plan depicting the route to McMurdo and I remember that the McMurdo waypoint was either underlined or highlighted in some way.”(Macfarlane p232)

The written statement continued as follows:

“At some stage during the talk through I made a comparison of the TACAN coordinates which Captain Wilson had mentioned were noted on the HI NDB-A plate and the coordinates of the McMurdo way-point on the flight plan which I had in front of me. In making that comparison I realised that the flight plan “McMurdo” way-point was to the west of the TACAN.” (Macfarlane p233)

That statement was true of all three flight plans. In (1), the waypoint was 17 minutes of longitude west of the TACAN. In (2) and (3), it was nearly two degrees west. 

At the hearing, First Officer Gabriel read out the written statement and was then questioned by the various lawyers. The transcript, at page 1727, includes the following:

AT THE STAGE WHEN THE COMPUTER FLT PLANS WERE BEING HANDED AROUND DID YOU YOURSELF TAKE A MENTAL NOTE OF WHAT THE COORDINATES FOR MCMURDO WERE . . . I AM NOT SURE WHEN IT WAS DONE FROM WHAT I RECALL THE FLT PLAN WAS IN FRONT OF ME FOR A WHILE AND AT SOME STAGE DURING THE BRIEFING IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THE TACAN COORDINATES HAD BEEN WRITTEN ON THE BRIEFING SHEET AND I THINK THEY WERE IN BALL POINT PEN ON ONE OF THE CHARTS AND I CAN RECALL AT THAT STAGE JUST NOTICING THAT YES ITS OFF TO ONE SIDE IT IS A BIT EAST OF THE MCMURDO POSITION.

Of the three flight plans, only one had the TACAN “a bit east of the McMurdo position”, that being (1). In (2) and (3), the TACAN was over 20 miles to the east. The flight plan First Officer Gabriel sighted must therefore have been that used to program the simulator. The longitude of the McMurdo waypoint was 166 degrees, because the waypoint was at McMurdo Station, not over 20 miles west. That explains why First Officer Gabriel asked no question on hearing the audio say that the waypoint was at McMurdo Station. It also explains why he asked no question when the simulator was repositioned to the McMurdo waypoint and ended up over McMurdo Station, not 20 miles west.

What of the evidence about underlining or highlighting? That could have been an invention by ALPA’s lawyers which First Officer Gabriel went along with. Alternatively, the flight plan used to program the simulator and the flight plan found in the wreckage are not necessarily the same document. That used to program the simulator might have been marked in some way.

First Officer Gabriel’s evidence was, eventually, consistent with his having sighted a McMurdo Station waypoint at the briefing, which was also what he said to Ron Chippendale (according to Ron Chippendale).

On a related matter, although Macfarlane’s book is a useful as a source of information, the additions by its author are not. His deranged rantings are peppered with allegations of lying and perjury against all and sundry, yet Macfarlane’s book provides a revealing insight into his own bona fides. In support of one of the stupid points he attempts to make, Macfarlane seeks to establish that First Officer Gabriel’s understanding from the briefing was that the McMurdo waypoint was to the west of McMurdo Station. At page 351 he quotes part of the evidence given by First Officer Gabriel in response to questions by one of the lawyers. The quote appears to support Macfarlane, but the transcript shows the very next question to be “Are you speaking now of what you did and thought at the time of the briefing on 9 November?” Answer: “No it was after the briefing.” Macfarlane left that bit out. Later, when First Officer Gabriel is questioned about the briefing, his evidence is consistent with the waypoint being at McMurdo Station, not 20 miles west.

“As an aside, and not that it's my call to make, but I'm not sure why the need to create three separate threads for Simpson, Gabriel and Irvine ... “

It was an attempt to keep any responses, from you in particular, on the subject. It didn’t work.

"The overriding reasons I disagree with your belief that the pilots at Collins' briefing thought the waypoint was at McMurdo Station are threefold :

 1. Capt. Simpson - both in his written statement and under cross-examination - made it clear that while he was surprised at the waypoint's distance from the TACAN, he did not believe the waypoint was either in the wrong place or anywhere other than where he expected it to be when considered in isolation."

Captain Simpson’s written statement and cross-examination occurred while he was labouring under an assumption that was probably wrong, namely, that the flight plan he sighted at the briefing was one of Captain Wilson’s. That possibility was never suggested to him by ALPA, for obvious reason.

"2. The 1977 flight plan used at the briefing appears to have related only to the simulated exercise - which itself related to an NDB that all present knew had been withdrawn some time previously.  To my mind it doesn't make any logical sense for any of the pilots present to have believed the old NDB was their waypoint - firstly because their more recent sample flight plans (two of them) clearly stated the waypoint to be elsewhere and secondly because the old NDB had been withdrawn - so using its location as a waypoint would no longer make any sense."

Re-read the evidence. Even though the NDB had been withdrawn, Captain Johnson decided to practise the cloud-break procedure nevertheless, using the NDB.

The two more recent sample flight plans did not “clearly state” the waypoint to be elsewhere. The flight plan was a list of waypoints, one of which had a “4” instead of a “6”.

"3. Regardless of whether they thought the route took them over Erebus or not, if they believed the waypoint to have been McMurdo Station or the TACAN then that assertion would have supported ANZ's case.  Why then did they instead choose to act as witnesses for NZALPA (which, in Les Simpson's case at least, went against the grain) and the families, when sticking with the company would have been far less risky career-wise?"

I don’t know, but so what? The three pilots gave their evidence. As regards First Officers Gabriel and Irvine, their evidence was consistent with a belief that the track was to McMurdo Station. Captain Simpson’s evidence was not, but his initial statements were.

"I can't agree with your notions that NZALPA and their lawyers obstructed Simpson, Gabriel and Irvine from saying what they wanted to say - not least because none of them ever made that assertion at any point since - even post-retirement when to do so would have cost them nothing."

Wrong: Captain Simpson made that very assertion.

"Finally, with respect I have to take issue with your characterisation of Stuart MacFarlane's work as "...deranged rantings ... peppered with allegations of lying and perjury against all and sundry".  As I said before, he is as entitled to his opinion as you are entitled to yours."

Firstly, you can drop the feigned politeness and the repeated "with respect" insertions. This is an anonymous forum. Be as rude and disrespectful as you please, but please stay on the subject. As regards Macfarlane, he was not entitled to support his opinion by deliberately misleading readers when quoting evidence. He quoted a passage from the evidence and made it very clear that it was what First Officer Gabriel believed about the location of the waypoint and that the belief was acquired during the briefing, not days after – but the quote ends just before First Officer Gabriel is asked whether the belief was acquired during the briefing, to which the answer is “No, it was after the briefing.” That was an obvious attempt to pull the wool over readers' eyes, done under the assumption that no-one would check - which underlines just how thick Macfarlane was / is.