EdSet100 wrote:
Chug,
Have a look at page 2-22 through to Page 2-24. BAe was involved in the hazard analysis. It wasn't a case of self-policing, as you seem to suggest. It would be very difficult to challenge your boss about a risk when the design authority backs him up with an "improbable" assessment.
There used to be an RAF retort of "Not me Chief, I'm airframes". It seems that is the line of your defence for the RAF, even the MOD. Flash news people: "Flight Safety concerns you!" Another old tag that seems to have gone the same way as the rest of the RAF as was. So the responsibility for Airworthiness does not reside with the owner/operator (MOD/RAF) but with the manufacturer (BAe)? Do you ever step back from this mad house and wonder what the hell is going on here? BAe, RAF, MOD are all either inappropriate or proven unworthy to exercise Airworthiness Authority over our military air fleets, ergo we need someone who is. The model is the CAA, the answer is an independent Military Airworthiness Authority!