Arc and others,
I'd like to come back once again, just to address one or two points that seem to be emerging.
There seems to be a feeling that the cause of the problem is the new MAA regulations. Shaft109 seems to infer that any a/c type would be grounded. (I sincerely apologise if I've drawn the wrong conclusion here).
There has also been a reappearance of the view that the problems were, at least in part, due to contractorisation of the maintenance of the aircraft.
In my view, as I've said before, the problem is not the MAA regs. While they are not well structured and are hard to navigate, getting a fleet of utterly basic aircraft past them should have been a walk in the park. It's important to note the fact that the problems found in early 2014 must have built up well before the MAA regs were issued in 2010. The problem is that the MoD and the RAF have been unable to execute basic airworthiness management functions (e.g. recording of repairs) in accordance with their own (pre-MAA) regs.
As to contractorisation, if the RAF had gone for a wood and canvas aircraft, then going out to contract would have been a sensible move as the mainstream RAF wound down its own trade skills base. (Declaration - my late father was one of the RN's last people qualified to carry out repairs to wooden airframes - and that was in the mid 60s). As I've posted before, the problem doesn't lay with contractorisation, but rather with an apparent inability to properly manage and supervise the contracted activity. Honestly, it's really not rocket science. The fault here lies with the commercial and engineering personnel in MoD and the RAF whose job it was to make sure that they were getting what they'd paid for to the quality standards required.
Let me reinforce this, using my own direct experience. If a contractor were carrying out repairs to aircraft in my fleet, I would be getting my QA section to check that the people doing it were properly qualified, that they were using the right materials and processes, and that the job was being properly recorded. I'd also have got the first repairs thoroughly inspected, and had further checks carried out on a regular basis. This is not theory, or being wise after the event. This is what engineers did in real life where I served.
Blaming 'the MAA regs' or 'contractors' is understandable, but in my view, wrong. It lets those truly accountable off the hook. They need to stay on the hook, in plain view, and wriggle. Uncomfortably.
Best Regards as ever to those sorting out the wreckage,
Engines