Yuri,
I agree that Beauchamp would not have lied out of loyalty, but WSL may have provided other incentives. George Behe, in his book "Speed, Safety & Sacrifice", argues that WSL bribed Hichens. I certainly see plenty of motive for WSL (and to a certain extend the BOT) for wanting to touch up what could have been seen as an act of cowardice. As I've said, I don't think Barrett and Hesketh
were cowards, but there were some very exaggerated expectations about duty and all that back then. That WSL would have had a motive to convince Beauchamp to lie is just my opinion and certainly not one that I can prove. But for the record, WSL was not all that interested in fully cooperating with the US investigation: witness Ismay's attempt to have the crew shipped back as soon as they arrived in New York.
Beauchamp aside, I can't think of a single reason for Barrett to lie about the key issues here, for reasons I have already listed. But no matter how you slice it, one of them is wrong! And since Hendrickson backs up Barrett, I'll go with Barrett being correct.
As you say, and as I have previously said, Beauchamp MAY have been mistaken. I think he probably did help draw fires in BR#5 (but NOT in BR#6). However, his testimony sure makes it sound like he drew fires in #6. It's interesting that they never get around to asking him specifically if he was in BR#6 when he drew fires; there seems to be a fair amount of wiggle room built into his testimony. Assuming that it could have been proved that he did not draw fires in #6, I doubt he could have been successfully prosecuted for perjury since he could always just claim he was mistaken and actually referring to what he did in BR#5. (The plot thickens.)
Would anyone care to take me up on a 6-beer wager as to what they will find if and when they get a submersible into BR#6? I bet they find coal in all the furnaces!
Cal