He stated that while the fleet is not ALARP it is still airworthy and it is still safe to fly as they are working towards that standard.
The way I see it is that those who say the aircraft is NOT airworthy can DEMONSTRATE it is not by comparing and applying expert opinion and known facts to the REGULATIONS.
Those who opine it IS airworthy CANNOT demonstrate it, and have arrogantly ignored both the experts (whom they pay for) and their own MANDATED regulations (which they clearly have never read or don’t understand).
As it is extremely difficult to demonstrate airworthiness in finite terms (especially when the records show that the funding necessary to maintain the necessary evidence has been slashed and the whole process is regarded as optional) then it is a very foolish man who asks the experts and then ignores them. (The regs also require the reason why independent advice is ignored to be recorded in the Safety Case, which I’m sure is being duly amended as I type).
I’m sure Mr Walker recognised this and, while the rules prevent him making public all his thoughts I assume the QC’s Review will be informed. One then has to hope that is not tainted by MoD interference.
I’ve read all this before – on the Mull thread.