Bertie Thruster said:
With hindsight I wish I'd kept a diary of those months, listing the many faults we had to contend with, the shortage of spares and the non-existant engineering documentation. We fixed FADEC faults by swapping the units over, as we had no spare ones! (I wonder where those F700's went?!)
First – I’m not a Chinook person, and having seen the God-awful state of the only one I’ve been in (a new Mk2, but post-1994), I’d never fly in one. Ever. However, I do know that while we have many different aircraft, their safety is governed by the same rules within the MoD. Bertie raises key issues pertaining to known facts about the aircraft fleet in general. He mentions faults, spares shortage and lack of engineering documentation. Three related issues there, as precisely the same process (PDS) governs maintaining safety, configuration control, managing systems integration, resolving obsolescence, maintaining drawings, maintaining engineering documentation, investigating faults, ensuring SNAEC 118s (aircraft) and ESPANS (avionics) for spares are issued (which dictate what spares are bought),etc etc. And the guy who manages PDS is the only named individual in any MoD contract, as he has delegated airworthiness / type approval authority. Some of it mundane, but collectively very important.
Looking back to 1994, the MoD in general, and the RN in particular, had endured 3 consecutive swingeing (25%+) cuts in this area, which may explain lack of support to you Bertie. Jump forward, nothing has changed, and the process is widely ignored.
Clearly there is a certain weight of factual evidence in this area. If you lacked up to date engineering documentation, then by definition the aircraft safety case was not current, as the audit trail would be incomplete. It follows it should not have CA Release at the build standard in question. (Did it have a Whole Aircraft safety case or, for example, was it deemed safe at a certain, perhaps older, build standard, and subsequent mods simply deemed safe in themselves? There is an enormous difference. And that’s not even mentioning SEMs). The process is clear. No engineering documentation > no trials > no CA Release/MAR. Having said this, I wish I’d a fiver for every time DEC or C2 has directed that pubs and spares be ditched first, to save money. In that case, the PM must examine his conscience and decide whether to risk disciplinary action by declaring planning blight (as safety, sustainability and viability is compromised). Few do.