05-130 & Maos
I think the main problem with this initiative is a common one across MoD. The current system is perceived not to work, but nobody stops to ask why a system which worked perfectly well for donkeys years no longer does.
In this case, it’s the same old story. Political dogma demands “efficiencies”. The simple method is cutting funding on the basis that we’ve cut the number of aircraft by x%, so support can be cut by x%. But many of the important things in 05-130 (and the perfectly good Def Stans which already exist) ARE NOT VOLUME RELATED. They cost the same whether you have one a/c or one thousand.
The perfect example is in paragraph 1. The MoD has a “requirement for the establishment and maintenance of airworthiness”. Correct. But a requirement doesn’t become policy unless funded – which is THE basic rule of financial and requirement scrutiny, and it’s completely lost on most in the MoD. This is why the MoD’s “We have a robust regulatory framework” claim is hollow. Yes, good framework, but it merely articulates a requirement. No foundations and no funding, and it falls around you. This is why so many initiatives or programmes progress, apparently successfully, for years, only to flounder at the last minute because the scrutineer says “Yes, good idea, but there’s no money so forget it”. In this case, some very well intentioned people are working on this thinking; it’s a requirement so let’s crack on. But has the sponsor confirmed his funding source?