The Commissioner rejected the explanations he had heard to the effect
that Captain Simpson's information seemed to point to quite a minor
movement to the up-dated position of the TACAN. He stated that there
appeared to have been clear advice by Captain Simpson that the "false"
waypoint was 27 miles west of it. In addition he rejected the possible
explanation that the advice had been misinterpreted by Captain Johnson
to whom it had been given, and he adopted instead what in paragraph 245
he described as "the second explanation":

"(b) The second explanation is that both Captain Johnston and the
Navigation Section knew quite well that the McMurdo waypoint lay 27
miles to the west of the TACAN and that since his track had not
officially been approved by the Civil Aviation Division it should
therefore be realigned with the TACAN and then someone forgot to
ensure that Captain Collins was told of the change. Such an
interpretation means that the evidence as to the alleged belief of
a displacement of only 2.1 miles is untrue."

Then in paragraph 255 (d) he said this:

"If, as I have held, the Navigation Section knew the actual
position of the McMurdo waypoint as being 27 miles to the west of
the TACAN, then why did they not submit to Captain Johnson, or to
flight Operations Division, that the waypoint should remain where
it was? One view is that the Flight Operations Division expected,
in terms of Captain Johnson's letter to the Director of Civil
Aviation dated 17 October 1979, that the next edition of the Ross
Sea chart NZ-RNC4 would contain the official Air New Zealand flight
path to McMurdo, and that the safest course would be to put the
destination point back to the approximate location at which Civil