Ah Ha- the third party Propulsion Provider abrogation defense ............
"If this was significant, and was known to be significant, we would have liked to have known about that," Mr Joyce said.
And yet-
Rolls Royce was responsible for all maintenance on the A380 engines, Mr Joyce said.
Given that RR has mod'ed engines on the floor of the Airbus Factory and operators have them on wing, 'apparently' and I seem to recall it raised somewhere, that the issue was mentioned/documented by the European Regulator last or earlier this year????
As an Accountable Officer, (or was it said here- that in fact a Mr L Someone?? [ex AN & VA] wears that responsibility?????.....), what does the QF Engineering/QA audit history tell us about this emerging 'Issue' ?????, so as we comply with our responsibilities (at least as I understand them...??) to The Act and in-turn Pax/Shareholders....... Particularly, given it being a new type and engine.
Not being pedantic- but since the 'buy in of significant operational critical functions/responsibilities, don't need to provide' model (be that Training or Aeronautical Systems) was launched in our jurisdiction circa 2000-ish to keep the air fair/fare. Does- 'it broke and it's not my fault' now suffice as compliance with the Regulator?????......., or do the Regulator monitor your preferred supplier of whatever at your expense, so as you can set and forget until a helpful regulatory operative gives you a call???
For the sake of saying it- well done that Crew & training system, a journey that explored new ground on many levels, and more so as further details come to light, I reckon.
Rgds
S28- BE