Let us hope that all that is emerging on this thread does so in the Inquest, for I very much doubt that it will be seen as "pertinent" by the BoI! The common factor appears to be reduced experience of supervisors be they Regulatory ones in the MOD or Executive ones on the Squadrons. The old adage of "Pay peanuts and you get monkeys" appears to be as true as ever. For these measures, of authorising inexperienced non-engineers to sign-off Airworthiness measures as being in compliance when they clearly are not or posting in inexperienced executives to ensure the very supervision that they need themselves, lead to tragedies like Mull and Catterick. BTW vecvec, none of this will be of interest to you as it ALL involves Airworthinesss of which you proudly claim to be oblivious! Others ask what is to be done? Just ask yourselves why these things don't happen to the airlines. It is clearly not because they are driven by financial imperatives, as is also the case with the military these days, but despite that. It is because all aspects of Airworthiness are enforced upon them by independent authorities, ie the CAA and the AAIB. The ability and experience of their supervisors and trainers is even so monitored and tested. That is what UK Military Aviation now needs as a matter of urgency to save it from itself, ie an independent MAA and MAAIB.
Self Regulation does not work and in Aviation it Kills!
Last edited by Chugalug2; 21st Oct 2009 at 14:17.