May I offer some comments on Airsound’s post.
1. Marshall Aerospace don’t deny MoD contacted them, just can’t recall when. I don’t know what their formal appointment is, Aircraft Design Authority or Custodian, but either way it is utterly inconceivable that they didn’t know about ESF from very early in their involvement with C130. Their contract with MoD to maintain the build standard (and I’m assuming MoD have met this basic airworthiness requirement, although I acknowledge it’s been widely deemed optional and a waste of money for many years) should contain a DIRECTED sub-contract on Lockheed to facilitate dialogue about this very subject (aircraft safety design). It is equally inconceivable that they don’t have voluminous records of their efforts to have MoD fit ESF, over a very long period of time.
2. Vulnerability
Extract from Def Stan 00-970 Part 1/5 Section 9 - Vulnerability to Battle Damage (Read in conjunction with my comment on Marshall Aerospace above)……..
“The Chief Designer SHALL (i.e. mandatory) consult with the Integrated Project Team Leader (IPTL) and establish whether, and how, the vulnerability of the aeroplane Defined and Specified Threat Effects (see below) will be assessed and consider how subsequent design changes, if any, will be introduced”.
Table 4: Table of Defined Threat Effects
(Includes)
(a) Inert bullets
(b) Inert fragments
(e) Incendiary bullets
That is, it is a requirement to conduct and maintain a Vulnerability Analysis. The very Threats and Effects which XV179 was subjected to are spelt out in the Def Stan (bullets/fragments), so one cannot claim not to have thought of them. This Analysis will be much like a Risk Register, in that having identified the threat and effect there MUST be a mitigation plan (e.g. fit ESF) and the decision as to whether or not to implement it and the rational underpinning the decision MUST be recorded.
3. Corporate Memory. It is a basic requirement of JSP553 (Airworthiness Regulations) that Corporate Memory be maintained. The Regs do say (correctly) that much of this requirement is met by maintaining various standards, like Def Stans and JSPs. This would seem to have been acceptable in this case, as evidenced by my previous posts which clearly demonstrate these Standards contain numerous and very detailed references to ESF, going back 30 years. It remains, therefore, for those responsible for the aircraft to actually read them, inwardly digest and take action.