Rigga, what an excellent post.
In my opinion the MAA is now changing the rules to revert back to where they were pre-H-C. I believe the MAA will soon become just another Dept. of MOD, more worried about its budget than doing anything right, effective or productive.
My own experience, while from a slightly different viewpoint, is exactly the same. MoD no longer waltzes round this issue in replies to Ministers. They quite openly confirm the old “pre-Haddon-Cave” practices (not regulations) remain acceptable. That is,
inter alia, correct implementation is optional and instructions to render aircraft unsafe must be obeyed. The DE&S secretariat responsible for drafting and issuing these replies routinely quotes and upholds past rulings by 2 and 4 Stars to this effect; and, in fact, did so as recently as last week when citing a 1999 ruling by Sir Robert Walmsley, Chief of Defence Procurement. (I like to think this is where Haddon-Cave was aiming when he made his scathing remark about submariners managing airworthiness). Walmsley, lest it be forgotten, was rabidly anti-engineer, anti-airworthiness. I accept he had other distractions during his tenure (!), so equal blame lies with his 2 Stars and Director of Personnel, Resources and Development, who egged him on in his rulings. All were sufficiently stupid, or arrogant, to place these in writing. DE&S confirms the MAA support these historical rulings. The MAA were formally notified of them by two Ministers, but did nothing.
I think one point is always worth repeating. It was not the regulations that were lacking, but the implementation.
Finally, the MAA are and always have been just another MOD department. They have made no attempt to do the right thing, choosing to ignore the root cause of the problem.