Further to John’s post, this is not the only rebranding that is going on. ADRP are now DMSD (don’t ask). Suffice to say that the regs have always said “If you have a query on Airworthiness policy, contact ADRP” (as Secretariat to the Defence Airworthiness Group).
Now, the Airworthiness “system” is labyrinthine to say the least, with committees galore; all doing sterling work. The policy and regs they issue are, by and large, robust. But the practical IMPLEMENTATION is where the day to day problem is.
A practical example. I once went to ADRP for advice on how to deal with the fact that our mutual 4 Star had declared airworthiness optional, resulting in my aircraft being no use to man or beast; the response was “get another job”. (Friendly advice, well intentioned). As in many walks of life, there is NO WAY someone 6 or 7 grades down is going to over-rule the big boss or even challenge him. Its policy you see, and Civil Service rules say that if you don’t like a policy decision you accept it or resign. The problem is if you accept and implement that policy knowing that you are making a false declaration, you have a moral dilemma (in addition to committing a fraud). Compounded when Min(AF) supports 4 Star.
Is it little wonder MoD has problems?
PS – I chose otherwise. I ignored 2 and 4 Star and made the aircraft safe. Those here who were at Boscombe at the time know exactly what I'm talking of. But, you can get away with it on your own aircraft, but can't force other offices to do the same. They are the ones with blood on their hands.