Originally Posted by
tucumseh
Zulu
I must admit I didn't think of myself as a "poor sod", I rather enjoyed the job! I had good teachers.
I agree with the issue of nuances. But when signing off the work (a delegation granted only to engineers, my complaint being non-engineers are now allowed to self-delegate) you are signing to say the work has been carried out in accordance with the contracted specification. The MoD engineer is, uniquely, allowed (required) to exercise engineering judgement and defer issues, but only in exceptional circumstances. A typical example would be interface parameters not yet established from a parallel development. But, the good book says;
A Critical Design Review (CDR) is defined as a review to determine if the detailed system design meets the performance and engineering requirements (including safety) of development specifications. During CDR, the MoD must ensure that all design areas are adequately examined, that design weaknesses are identified, and that solutions for design-related problems are available. The MoD must use the results of the CDR to assess the readiness of the system to progress to the next acquisition phase. The design reviews and associated testing of design features let the MoD review the complete system design and evaluate its capability to satisfy total mission requirements, safely. The CDR should be effective and not rely on later production efforts to resolve design deficiencies.
Ever so slightly ambiguous, but it needs to be to allow deferments. But what it doesn't allow is a false declaration that the design is safe, knowing it is not!
Now you've opened another can of worms:
In my experience of dealing with MOD: the "
contractual specifications" including the technical content, and the "
the performance and engineering requirements (
including safety) of development specifications" are often completely different documents.
One sometimes a mere sub-set of the other, thereby allowing (encouraging?) a desk officer (and as you say, sometimes a non-engineer) to sign off a milestone as being complete in accordance with teh contracted spec, whilst still not meeting the development spec.
I think you and I agree that those gaps should be closed, but financial pragmatism dictates otherwise. I'm not defending that, just saying how I see it.
Now I really must get on with some proper (paid) work.