Rigga
I agree but I'd just like to make it clear I think there are some very good, knowledgeable people in both the Services and CS who know how to do this. It is just they are a diminishing breed because the capability has not been sustained over the years, not least because of the deliberate rundown of airworthiness ethos and funding. Time is running out to make use of this trained workforce because, by definition, too many are approaching retirement age.
I'm sorry, but a personal account. A few years ago, a very highly trained and (hitherto) competent project manager phoned me for advice. Inevitably, he'd been told to make a false declaration and had a decision to make. (Obey, or meet his legal obligation to PUS). His question was "What will happen to me if I refuse". The answer was harsh disciplinary action and no more promotion - a formal ruling handed down by the Chinook, Nimrod etc 2 Star and CDP. He chose to sign. Got his promotion. But, I suggest, for ever more he is between a rock and a hard place because everyone knows he did this. And, what does he tell his subordinates to do? Many will be young, direct entrant graduates who don't receive any other training (the problem with the "old" rules is they assume many years training and proven competence). Their first exposure to MoD is this ethos. It doesn't take long for it to be all pervading.
Ideal solution? Not just proper training, but wholesale dismissal of those staffs who have been complicit; something I acknowledge MoD will never do. So, yet another reason to take them out of the loop altogether. You always get back to independence. The "model" is a simple variation of the System Co-ordinating Design Authority (SCDA) concept, which is one of the fundamental building blocks of maintaining airworthiness anyway (as the SCDA maintains the Safety Cases of integrated systems of systems).
Oh, the decision my mate was told to make? Cancel an SCDA contract, and hence all work on Safety Cases, to save money. Good job all this was withheld from the subsequent BoI and Coroner's Inquest, eh? The BoI noted the (supposedly) integrated system of systems wasn't functionally safe, but didn't understand why.