PhilipG
Flying Lawyer my point in post 1392 was that I would not like to be sitting on the board of the CAA at the moment, particularly as a non exec.
I understood your point.
I don't share your view.
I make this comment as there is no reference in the AAIB report of any changes having been made to CAA procedures,
I would not expect to see them in the SB. If you are interested in learning about the changes the CAA has already made, you will need to look at the CAA website. The most recent changes were published on line about a week before the SB was issued.
The next batch of changes is likely to be published next month.
Information concerning the ongoing review is also available.
the AAIB report does suggest a number of changes are at least desirable.
I agree some are desirable.
Others are not practical and/or not proportionate, in my view.
It could thus be construed that as exhibited, the CAA at least in this part of its operations is not a learning organisation and the Board was quite happy with the arrangements that were in place, not a view I would like to try and support.
Your suggestion is based upon a false premise: See above re changes already made.
I would be content to defend the CAA's pre and post Shoreham stance.
As I said earlier, I don't share the shock/outrage expressed by some. (I explained some of my reasons.)
Whilst no-one could fail to have great sympathy for the deceased and their families, the proper way forward lies in an unemotional dispassionate assessment of what changes to the pre Shoreham system need to be made to reduce future risk(s). Short of prohibiting air shows, zero risk is not attainable.
I disagree with some aspects of the CAA's ongoing post Shoreham review, primarily constitution and process, but that is a separate issue.