"Hansard 22 Feb 2000
Mr. Tim Collins (Westmorland and Lonsdale): The Secretary of State referred to safety in RAF training. Will he say more about that in relation to my constituents in Cumbria? They accept the absolute primacy of national security, but they were most concerned about some of the reports as to the possible causes of the air crash in Shap, in Cumbria, at the end of last year. Will the right hon. Gentleman give a categoric assurance to the people of Cumbria, and of other areas affected by low-flying aircraft, that no reductions will interfere with the primacy of safety--of people in the air and on the ground?
Mr. Hoon: I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising that issue. I have just given that assurance. Safety is paramount and will continue to be so--both for those who fly the aircraft and for his constituents on the ground. I am happy to be able to repeat the assurance that I gave him in writing when he properly raised those matters with me. "
So then....
The issue that is faced is how do you prove military aviation is safe?
What process do you use?
What regulation do you follow?
European civil aviation is safe - How do we know? Because it is regulated by the Part M regulation. This is similar to Def Stan 05-130.
Part M requires you to set up a Continuing Airworthiness Management Organisation (CAMO) which has to demonstrate to EASA (through a bond) that it has sufficent money to fly and maintain the aircraft within it's scope. That would be a novel approach to the current military.
If you think that the Military are different (special needs?) then how come CANForce have implemented something similar? They fly F-18 on operations dont they?
Check out
http://admmatapp.dnd.ca/taa/taa/
The reality is that risk management is the culture. Risk implies increased probability.
If the "as maintained airframe" is safe, then ask the company that designed it to underwrite the airworthiness.
The processes in place are flawed. Chug and others are correct. The aircraft should be generated servicable, and if, and only if, at time of WAR the need arises to manage risk occurs, then you should fly, and then recover the fault at the first opportunity, not at a time somewhere down the line that it suits you.