Firstly, many thanks guys for all your thoughts and ponderings on this issue. As part of the UK tri-Service engineering convergence team responsible for making all air engineers (RAF/RN/ARMY) sing off the same hymn sheet and operate to the same maintenance procedures and principles to enable jointery, I was tasked with investigation into the area of Flight Test...hmm easy enough i thought... not so horatio...
The problem with this little bit of policy was that it crossed over from the new tri-Service engineering publication the (Joint Air Publication) into the predominatly aicrew oriented converged JSP 550 (old JSP 318). Immediatly I found major differences between the 3 services on the way we conduct flight testing, train Test Pilots, even what we call the people who do it.
Getting all three Services to agree has been a nightmare, unfortunatly I can't use this forum to say what defintions etc we have agreed upon as the chapter is subject to approval by all the Front Line Commands. (Will let you know the outcome and send you all a copy of what we have come up with if your interested).
My next area of interest is Flight Test Schedules (commonly referred to in the UK as the 5M), 2 services allow junior pilots to carry out activities in accordance with the 5M (as long as the authoriser is happy) however, in one UK service only pilots with an inordinate amount of flying time may become "Unit Test Pilots" after a "laying on of hands" by the Station Commander.
There is a "work around" carried out called airborne checks. To converge this issue is also very hefty as it impinges on how the FTS are written (either in blunt intructions or a more wordy walkthough type method), how knowledgeable authorisers are about the 5M, Rotary or FW testing issues, basic training regimes for all 3 Services...and a pleathora of other issues.
Its good to see that the muddy waters on this issue extend all the way across to the States Shaun!
Once again many thanks to your inputs and please feel free to build on this topic.
Rgds,