This to me is ALARP and the way forward - even Mr H-C seems to think so? Does that revoke the AW or MAR cert?
No, because the Release is based on a defined Build Standard. What "revokes" (or progressively invalidates) the Safety Case, and hence the Release, is failing to maintain that Build Standard. This is the part MoD doesn't do well, following policy directives from nearly 20 years ago. I think the Services do manage Operational deviations from this very well (broadly, assuring Fitness for Purpose), but Rigga's point...
any missing maintenance could be performed or re-checked on re-entry to a "Controlled Environment".
is rendered very difficult by lack of funding and experience in the domain which is meant to "catch up". Such retrospective work was largely cancelled in the aforesaid cuts of the early 90s. ("Maintenance" being in the broader sense, not spanner wielding). Coupled with the refusal to fund the mandated "continuous review" of safety what this does is create gaps in the audit trail which are never filled. You get away with it for a while, perhaps even a lifetime, but somewhere the lack of defences in depth catches up with you.
Rigga
The details quoted are civil but the practices can easily be adopted with a bit of willpower and some decent leadership. They cost nothing but training sessions, supervision and the enforcement of intended standards by REGULATORS, who know what is needed and what tricks are used to get around it, not short-term career climbers or long-term pension seekers.
Agreed. So, given the composition of MoD, you're advocating a totally independent MAA?
