JB,
Thanks for getting back on that.
My main point though, wasn't what each of the individual risks was about, or what the ES or recommendations say, but
it would be interesting to see how the IPT manage them - what 'target' were they aiming at, did / do they aggregate risk (6 x HRI B potentially = an overall A) etc.
which would still seem to be missing, and I agree that if BAES can't say if the risk is ALARP, pre or post implementation, then it is all "woolly".
I also think your statement "that aviation is very unforgiving of compromised airworthiness standards no matter how great the operational imperatives" is very apt.
As an aside, I got round to reading JSP 553 Change 5, effective 1 Nov, today. It has an interesting addition that says if any platform can't meet the stated airworthiness targets (or limits as delegated), this must be recognised in the safety case and the appropriate DG informed.
sw