Tourist
Seaking Mk7 had strobes which did not have every single i dotted in the paperwork.
You have been misled or are misleading. Benefit of the doubt and all that.
I did a 3 year tour from 97-00 in a central services post, providing minor help to many programmes, one of them SK7. The programme was known as good entertainment value because of two events. First, the RN’s Aircraft Support Executive had withdrawn all support for the programme because they wanted brand new SKs. Second, DHSA technical staff were under instruction to answer questions on AEW2 airworthiness with “no comment”.
Strange but true. It meant we were working to the PE programme manager, instead of DHSA, who we’d normally expected to pass our endeavours to PE.
HISL was a Naval Service Mod, meaning PE and Westlands had nothing to do with it. It had been schemed for the AEW2 before my time, probably about 1995, but was not requested for the SK7. It was not in the trials aircraft during the first phase of flight trials. (MoD claim it was, but the photos don’t lie).
Late in the day, about mid 2000 as I only caught the beginning of this, the SK IPT (Mr "no comment”) suddenly asked for it to be in the SK7, and the design should be read across from the AEW2. Not the SK6, as implied by Tourist in an earlier post. The programme manager asked the right questions, Can we have the drawing pack, the trials results, the EMC assessment, the updated safety case including HISL. The IPT couldn’t or wouldn’t provide any of them so read across was refused. The lack of a safety case was the end of the matter. I remember this because as a result of the decision I left the meeting with no action and without my small input the safety case could not be valid.
So, the “i” you think it unnecessary to dot in the paperwork was the safety case itself. Did I mention Haddon-Cave?