Tuc
I'm in violent agreement with you as usual. Having previously been an ILSM I have been exposed to the mantra that doctrine that support will always maintain pace with the project. However, I've yet to see that realised on any programme. The support agreement has always been slipped and the budget plundered to pick up procurement shortfalls. Moreover, with simulators going the PFI route, it is nigh on impossible to build a simulator on time bacuase you are reliant on flight test data to design it. Consequently, you cannot fix the simulator spec and price until the design is very mature.
Back to the question I was trying to get to the bottom of, and I was hoping S/W might answer. What assumptions are the human error stat used in the fault trees based upon. It seems logical that it is based upon an average level of training and competence rather than the average number of keystroke errors a secretary makes. When I have looked at fault trees, the human error case is considered in many accident chains. If this assumption is invalidated because of lack of flying hours then the safety case also becomes unravelled.
regards
retard