A&C,
I am not questionig the Tutor Contractor's capability, I am saying that the RAF seem to have given up on certain areas of technical expertise. Whilst these have no-doubt been assessed as not affecting thier 'real job' of keeping front-line aircraft airworthy, it does seem that this is the root-cause of the present grounding of two aircraft types.
I am sure this is an outcome of the usual Cost/Benefit analysis (a process I have no real beef with since it is virtually essential when dealing with the reality of a limited budget). However the same process should have revealed the lack of oversight expertise as a 'risk'.
Bearing in mind that that risk was realised, it should also follow that you don't want to make the same misstake twice. Ergo they should be identifying this failure as a definite item that needs to be corrected if they are not to end up in the same situation again, rather than try pot-luck with another contractor who hasn't already screwed up.
You mention Part-145, and who approves and oversees that standard? an independent organisation that has the expertise to say that the do or don't meet the standard!
Please don't take this as a personal criticism, I am really just trying to say that in all these situations you do need a source of expertise that can spot when an organisation is not doing work that is up to the agreed standards.
Flug