Originally Posted by
dragartist
Zulu,
I came up though the design route to become the EA for some serious kit. I received commendations for my work on Granby and Jacana. The citations majored on my attention to detail and not compromising safety. I turned some jobs round very quickly to give the front line the tools you describe.
I recognised it was time to leave when my moans about the compromises being made were being shunned.
Let me give you just one example that may have some relevance to this thread. it would have been 2000 or 2001. A safety manager (C1 Grade CS) post was established in the team I can't recall the blokes name, he was insignificant. he was soon diverted to Business Management tasks. The IPTL at the time had is priorities wrong in my mind. I don't think I am alone in my view.
As Tuc has stated several times on several threads there has been a gradual watering down of the resources supporting efforts over the years.
Only following C H-C was money being thrown at Safety. Too little too late and too poorly focused. What I saw was it being contracted out to the likes of Q2, ERA etc. The in house expertise had gone never to be recovered.
I once worked for the military advisor to C H-C he taught me a fair bit. the most significant thing was to fully understand the kit I was responsible for.
Standing by to repel boarders.
All very commendable (pardon the pun) and I suspect our paths may have crossed in a previous life, but none of that IMHO excuses your previous comment about the inquiry in the case of this accident which in your words " it has to go back to those in 76 who put ink to drafting film" and which was echoed by Tecumseh's slight about "designers".
The original designer may, and I emphasise "may" have failed to notice a flaw in his/her work, but that doesn't mean that they should be pilloried if subsequent reviews etc didn't spot it either.
If, as I think you are suggesting, the reviews are not carried out thoroughly and dilligently, and the recommendations followed, then we're in full agreement that heads should roll.
Where we seem to differ is in our view of whether the designer is responsible if the review/clearance 'system' fails in its duty.