Fair comments, in some respects. Unfair perhaps to have a go at SRG on the timing of CAP 781 because my understanding is that it was already in preparation before the incidents at BRS. It was then further delayed by a review in the light of what happened at Bristol before the draft was finalised. Its irrelevant anyway because CAP 760 which WAS published before the incidents has as much if not more relevance.
To my mind it is very simple. The AAIB report should have asked and answered the following questions:
- Was there a performance failure by the individual aircraft operators?
- Was there a performance failure by the aerodrome operator - BRS?
- Was there a failure in oversight by the regulator - SRG?
and a more general question:
- Is there a need to review the system by which aerodromes are licensed and their performance and management assessed?
If these questions have not ALL been addressed then IMHO the report is deficient. And there is no reason as far as I can see why the AAIB (which reports to the department for transport) could not thoroughly assess the role of the SRG (which reports to the CAA, an independantly funded and operated specialist public body) in the context of this incident. The questions go back to the credibility and independance of the AAIB.
More worryingly, if the AAIB isn't prepared to thoroughly review the actions of its peers then how, as a nation, can the Brits criticize the French and the cozy government/Airbus relationship? It could be the death of our national sport...
Last edited by Pinkman; 18th Jan 2009 at 11:48.