Originally Posted by
Chugalug2
T105:
The issue isn't serviceability, it is airworthiness, or rather the gross lack of it. The situation passed beyond embarrassment decades ago. It certainly extends way beyond ATC gliding. It is so widespread, so challenging, and so beyond the ken of the MAA, the MOD, and the RAF that frankly they don't have a clue as to where to go next or what to do to begin solving it. Airworthiness, or rather the gross lack of it, is now the number one issue concerning UK Military Aviation. There is no quick fix, indeed solving it will take many more decades. How we get there is very debateable, but where we start shouldn't be. The MAA, the MOD, and the RAF have to bite the bullet and admit the truth. UK Military Airworthiness was deliberately subverted by RAF VSOs from the late 80s onwards, and the cover up has to stop now. Unless and until that happens this scandal will simply go on gnawing away at the very vitals of UK Air Power.
To give some measurable detail to the size of this problem May I offer the following personal opinion on the current state of “airworthiness” in the RAF fleets.
1. Using the assumption that LITS got to all of the FJ Fleet in the early 2000’s, then all of those fleets would not be airworthy.
2. Using the assumption that all IPTs worked to similar criteria and opinion toward regulatory requirements in the early 2000’s, then all of those fleets would not be airworthy now.
I know that the (two) Fleet was subject to gross data investigation as soon as the (one) Fleet data was found to be so poor and that it was thought to be too late, even then, for the (three) Fleet...one well-known contractor quickly purchased an independent maintenance management system to counter the effects of RAF systems and data.
I have high hopes that the C17, A330, A400, Shadow and Sentinel Fleets will probably have good data...because, I believe, that data and component management is not managed by the RAF.