JimL, DB, HC, and 212Man all bear listening to as they all have a lot of experience and background in the topics under discussion.
Even if the debate gets spirited as it does at times.....they all bring a lot to the table even if we do not always agree with everything they say. That difference is usually the result of how they say it rather than the content and is always relatively minor.
HC,
The question is, who should be the authority on such matters - the OEM (who builds but doesn't operate the type) or the folk with the most real-world operational experience?
The answer is "Neither" and "Both".
The OEM should be the Technical Authority and the Operators (perhaps working in unison with each other) should be the Operational Authority and through a collaborative effort arrive at the Industry Best Practice Standard for the particular aircraft.
As I have said before, the folks who design, build, and certify the aircraft "should" be the best source for Technical Information but as you point out they do not have the "Operational" expertise the Operators do.
An Operator might have the preponderance of experience and background re Operating the Aircraft but may not always have a complete exposure to all the different climatic or environmental conditions the aircraft is flown in. If the Operators joined together in a collaborative manner and draw from multiple sources the final product at each Operator would be far better.
An example, a well known Operator had its own EOP re Engine Starter Generators that varied greatly from the OEM's Standard Procedure and did so years long after the cause of the changed procedure had been resolved when the OEM, through Operator Reports of Bearing failures had determined a bad batch of Bearings had been produced. One that Batch had been located, removed from service, the problem went away.
Without a joint effort by the OEM and the Operator, such things can happen that adversely affect the operation of the aircraft. Thus, my view the OEM and Operators must be involved in the process of developing, monitoring, and producing Operational Procedures but each should focus where they are best suited to do so.
As to Jim's idea of a single Certification Standard.....if we look at the Big Airplane World, it is well know that Boeing and Air Bus have two different approaches to how their AFCS systems operate yet both are Certified.
Does that constitute a single standard capable of providing for differences or is it two different standards in your view?
We know the 92 and 225 are similar but different.
Are you suggesting in the future all the OEM's have to design systems that are the same in design and function or just in function? Are you suggesting Pilots should be able to move from Aircraft Type to Aircraft Type built by different OEM's and all the buttons and switches and controls operate exactly the same in every flight condition?