Chug, Others,
Perhaps I might be allowed to offer a couple of observations here.
I think A and C brings up a good point - just how WOULD any organisation run (presumably by the government) that was 'responsible for the regulation, surveillance, inspection and assurance of the defence air operating and technical domains' (this text taken from the MAA website) be truly 'independent'?
I've suggested before that the RN, ARMY and RAF should all have organisations in place to 'enhance the delivery of operational capability through the continual improvement in military air safety, appropriate culture, ....and practice'. The MoD should properly be the guardian of higher 'joint' regulation affecting air safety. My suggestion for more 'independence' would be met, in my view, a (very active) supervising board made up from recognised experts and professional organisations. But hey, that's just my view.
The reasons I make these points is that the Air Cadet gliding scandal (and scandal it most certainly is) raises some issues that should, in my personal view, be addressed in public. These are simple training aircraft being used by school children and flown by volunteers. Here's my stab at a starting list I'd like to see answers to:
Was a full airworthiness and safety audit of the fleet conducted on their initial introduction to the Military Register and who signed it off? (As Tucumseh would remind us, this has ALWAYS been a requirement). Did the Vigilant and the Viking have proper safety cases and risk registers? Did they have approved and controlled configurations? Did they have proper accredited DA support?
What had 22 Group RAF been doing with the Air Cadet Fleet since 2010 when they took full charge? Who has been responsible for supervising the maintenance of the fleet? How about the PT in DE&S? Plenty of very senior people around there who should be answering some questions.
What exactly was it that was serious enough to warrant, in 2014, the whole fleet of ATC gliders and aircraft to be grounded over an Easter week, which is one of the Air Cadets busiest? Can't have been 'technical issues' across two fleets, could it? Are we looking at a systemic issue?
But to my mind, one of the biggest questions to be answered is this - where was the Military Aviation Authority? Hadn't they carried out audits of the Air Cadet Fleet? (They were, after all, RAF aircraft). Wasn't the PT checked out? Hadn't they checked out 22 Group?
My final point - these issues deserve much better answers than the spin and froth that has recently been offered up in an RAeS publication.
Anyone on PPrune got any details on these issues?
Best Regards as ever to those trying to get Cadets into the air
Engines