Have Boeing yet paid up for the Chinnook FADEC issue? Have the Chinnook IPT staff paid for their incompetence in taking in the DA and TA roles and then procuring a helicopter which could not be certified for use in the UK?
To be fair to Boeing, they had nothing to do with the FADEC issue, having been frozen out by MoD's procurement strategy. However, one could legitimately ask how the Mk2 had a valid safety case when FADEC had no certificate of design; but again, Boeing would simply point out MoD didn't provide it. And, that MoD's own system worked, in that both Boscombe and DHP stated the aircraft was not permitted to fly. This was mandated upon ACAS.
To be fair to the Chinook IPT, it was formed in 1999 and the decisions regarding the Mk3 were made at least 3 years earlier. The individuals concerned did not transfer to the IPT in 99. Someone in DHP was indeed the TA, and this is proper; but one should ask if he was suitably qualified and experienced (or even knew what a TA is). DHP did not declare themselves DA, but did make decisions that normally rest with the DA. The key question is - did anyone in DHP see the Director of Flight Safety's 1992 report which called into question Boeing's ability to act as a DA? Their boss, the Chief of Defence Procurement has stated he didn't see the report, as it was concealed by the Chief Engineer, ACAS and CAS.
If one wanted to point a finger at Boeing, the ZA721 accident in the Falklands in 1987 is the obvious case.