A number of responsibilities come with this appointment, notably as stated in the AMC for RA5102(1):
1. When a contractor is appointed Design Organization or Co-ordinating Design Organization, his responsibilities to the MOD should include:
a. Design of the materiel, including all necessary development and testing, to the requirements of the contract specification.
b. Preparation, updating and custody of specifications, drawings and other data associated with the design of the materiel.
c. Preparation, collection, analysis and maintenance of data comprising evidence of design and system safety in accordance with a Safety Management Plan agreed with the PTL.
d. Submission of reports, as required, on progress of the work.
e. Preparing an appropriate certificate of design and its submission for MOD
acceptance (See RA 5103).
f. Ensuring that the design will be suitable for production in facilities agreed between the contractor and MOD.
g. Design of packaging as required for the materiel.
h. Preparation of, or supply of information for, the necessary technical
publications.
i. Collaboration with the relevant PT and it’s agencies in the preparation and provision of information for maintenance of the materiel.
j. Post design services.
The only problem I have with this is that it calls into question MAA's understanding of the fact items (a) through (i) are also a SMALL PART OF (j).
The purpose of Post Design Services is to "Maintain the Build Standard". That is a pre-requisite to a valid Safety Case (as a given issue of the Safety Case is based on a given Build Standard), so is contracted in the same contract. There are 17 primary components of a Build Standard, each with secondary components. The above list (a - i) comprises both primary and secondary, so there is a significant part missing.
Where is that fully articulated in the MAA documentation, and where are the mandated procedures for implementation, now that the Def Stan has been cancelled without replacement? The above smacks of being made up at a brainstorming half hour, when all they had to do was update and re-validate existing mandated policy. But that would be to admit there was nothing wrong with the "old" regs, which would divert attention back to those who decreed them unnecessary. In any case, I really do doubt if MoD still has a copy of the "old" regs. I know D/Stan doesn't.
And where is the necessary training and expertise, given the formal appointment of the Technical Agency (who manages all this stuff) requires donkeys years of previous experience and proven competence? The MAA and Bernard Gray have admitted this doesn't exist, so what recruitment standard is now applied? By definition, the standard required for delegation has been diluted; something reported often and consistently from the early 90s.
MoD's problems in this area stem from the verifiable fact, confirmed by the likes of the Inspector of Flight Safety, Lord Philip, Director Internal Audit, Equipment Accounting Centre and more, is that in the period 1991-93 the RAF Chief Engineer issued instructions that ALL of the above should cease forthwith. Haddon-Cave accepted this, but despite the raft of evidence claimed it was 1998. (Presumably all the above backdated their reports!) The day the MAA acknowledge this truth is the day I'll walk away.