PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Typhoons Need Midair Collision Avoidance System, Safety Officials Say
Old 14th Jan 2015, 17:30
  #16 (permalink)  
tucumseh
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 3,226
Received 172 Likes on 65 Posts
Herod

Quite right.

Make no mistake, there are some in MoD who chose to interpret this HSE definition as meaning MoD don't need to bother if the aircraft holds under 50. The same people who continue to advise Ministers that, if a safety related fault or defect is identified in an aircraft, only that tail number need be fixed.

But well done, again, Dick Garwood for daring to voice these opinions. And, of course, they only are opinions, because the MAA does not get funding to mitigate the risks, so is really only a monitor, not a true Authority (or manager or leader). As it took great delight in pointing out during the Mull Review when asked by Minister about safety. I wonder if DG will now ask his MoD masters and Ministers to change the official line that only one MoD employee has thought it proper to have safe aircraft, and that this employee was utterly wrong. A line reiterated last year, yet again, by DE&S Secretariat. And copied to the MAA.


Para 9
The Secretary of State will have been informed of the societal concern with regard to Typhoon MAC by the Chief of the Air Staff in accordance with MAA requlations.
Slightly odd wording. Surely he'd just phone CAS and ask "Have you written to SoS?", and then make a firm statement in the report?

My main concern upon reading this report? Reinventing the wheel. Does his staff not know that many of the intiatives are mandated policy? The section on Def Stan 00-970 completely ignores the fact 00-970 was mandated in every aircraft related contract by Controller Aircraft. The problem is that direct entrants to MoD (the majority now) have been taught for over 20 years that no Def Stan is mandated. Trouble is, they use this as an opportunity to save money, by removing the standard from the contract and allowing the contractor to deliver sub-standard designs. There is no appreciation that if you waive one relevant standard, you must invoke another, because standards are one of the 4 pillars of airworthiness (along with Compliance, Independence and a Safety Management System).


Ah, Independence. Defined by MoD as;

“Being commercially and managerially independent of the (insert body) both to preserve objectivity and to minimise pressure for premature acceptance.”


Does the MAA satisfy this definition?
tucumseh is offline