Squidlord said:
"I think that's an incorrectly narrow view of "current MAA work" though I would always expect much of the MAA's work to be based on audit and review. And I agree that one of the MAA's biggest challenges is to build up a large competent staff (imo, it does already have many competent staff but not enough). Perhaps (either as a short-term or permanent feature), the MAA will contract out where it is lacking in competence and/or resource, just as the CAA does."
In my personal view the former MAR had little or no real control over their remit. They either misinterpreted the values they promulgated in manuals or didn’t understand that many were interpreting them in other ways – or just not following them. All a sign of not monitoring the effectiveness of regulation at ground level and enforcing a change of behaviour to the required pattern.
It is a classic mistake to assume that the processes written are actually being performed. Still, it’s much cheaper to just sit back and assume…
The MAOS rules, apparently written by the old MAR incumbents, plainly don’t make any real sense and even include forms that just don’t exist, and never have done (another classic assumption). But they expect people (well, civvies) to work to them anyway – and possibly, they wonder why there’s some questioning of what is required.
That the old rule makers have moved to new positions within the new MAA organisation doesn’t put much faith into that organisation’s future successes!
As for the competence of MAA personnel…if 80% are military - they will almost all move away from the fires they start when in office.
I would rudely assume that most will not want to go into the Abbeywood blocks as a matter of choice - So an individual's morale may be at a low when incumbents start - and may continue through their tour!
It will take approx 12 to 18 months to become properly familiar with the rules and regulations involved in initial and continued airworthiness matters. Given that a Tour can be screened for up to four to five years, only two or three years of meaningful duty time can be expected before an incumbent begins to wind down for his next move. Inefficient at least, but mainly disjointed and inconsistent.
There are some very capable, proficient and able people who are good at regulation and at steering errant organisations in the correct direction for compliance with a single interpretation of a specific rule – but they are not as cheap as existing civil servants or servicemen.
..awaiting the incoming :-}