Thank you for that. It is food for thought and discussion.
I was hoping to spark an open forum discussion on the post accident flight test of radio navigation aids. Hopefully it would bring in the users (pilots) of radio navigation aids, the providers and operators of said facilities, the engineering brethren, plus the flight test pilots and navigation aid inspectors to discuss how they each and collectively saw the purposes, obligations and liabilities of the process.
Why? In this increasingly litigious world, many aspects of aircraft operation are examined forensically in the event of a serious incident - and more so in the event of a fatal accident where damages may be awarded. I can not recall when there was last a post accident flight within the UK where the interface between the user, the operator, the service provider and the flight inspection organisation was last tested. Perhaps this is an appropriate time to open the door.. especially with the addition of SES Regs.
There seems to me to be a disconnect between the ICAO documentation, which has an All-weather Ops base, and CAP 670 - Air Traffic Services Safety Requirements which approves and regulates Flight Inspection Organisations and deals with the operation of, inter alia, radio navigation facilities. This document appears to be predominantly engineering requirement based with little specific operational exposure.
This theme seemed right for exploration. Elsewhere on this site analytical discussions take place on engines, airframes, systems, performance, operators, knowledge base and even public expectations and perceptions. If this Forum is wrong, please could the Moderators move it. If the topic is inappropriate please would they delete it.
Rather than develop my thesis any further right now, are there any takers for a safety audit type discussion?
Just a couple of immediate questions – in the event of a post fatal accident tomorrow where a radio navigation facility might have been involved. Who does the flight test? Who calls for it? What does the test involve explicitly? And what may the follow up liabilities be? All these things should be in place now – and maybe they are.