I think there comes a time when one has to peer out from the confines of one's own little world, where all the i's are dotted, the t's crossed, and see the "big picture". Little purpose to the exercise if the technical feedback/ implementation loop has responded as intended, if some 2* has placed a giant spanner in the works and brought it to a grinding halt. With respect the difference between the civil and military worlds is that the operators in the one are obliged to implement safety related procedures ordered by an independent regulator, whereas in the other they are not, because there isn't one!
Don't you feel your tone is a bit patronising Chug? You appear to infer some process or technique is missing in the defence approach, present in a civilian system, that would have had a bearing on the hazard analysis mistake identified above? What safety related procedures that a civil independant regulator would have insisted upon are relevant to this mistake?
I am part of the great unwashed who don't understand many of the cryptic initials
So why do you claim to know the answer and see the big picture? I fear you're only proving you don't really know what you are talking about.