Good post kintyred and well said chug.
These threads should, at most, have posts such as kintyred's, so that others can learn from these experiences and prevent recurrence; and someone knowledgeable simply pointing out the solution(s). If you're not interested professionally in the solution, fine, no need to store it away or comment. By all means propose different solutions, but don't criticise those who do need to know, and have to sign for it next time. What we have here on pprune and in MoD is people who rubbish the idea that the problem should be fixed at all. You really do have to wonder at their motive.
One solution to that bearing problem is correct implementation of the hitherto mandated Design Review process. On 4.6.98 the MoD Project Director responsible for (inter alia.) Chinook was formally notified that it had become practice to completely waive Design Reviews, make a false declaration that they had been conducted properly and successfully, and had been fully paid off. He did not reply. This was then elevated to his 2 Star and 4 Star, both of whom formally ruled that such fraud was acceptable. This general principle, and its applicability to airworthiness declarations in particular, has been upheld regularly, most recently in July this year by DE&S, in a letter to which the MAA were party to. That is the "Stone Age" that the MAA refuse to address, and which so many here advocate. It is why I post here.