Originally Posted by
tucumseh
JTO
In other words, you agree with me!
MoD is long past the stage where it can appoint its own permanent staff in sufficient numbers.
The MAA cannot make inroads into this culture, and I’m not sure it wants to or even understands.
I'm not sure I do, at least in part. I am comfortable with the MAA doing its thing and in its reporting chain. Where I am not comfortable with is the attitude of the MAA by which it pushes issues back onto the Duty Holder chain whilst washing their hands. They don't even appear to have a moral compass let alone a duty of care to ensure that issues are resolved at the earliest practical level.
The DH staff are frequently exposed to intolerable issues that should have never been accepted by the PTs. The MAA expend their horsepower critiquing how quickly the DH staff can uncover the buried truth and the speed of the DH reaction to the seemingly endless crisis points. The PTLs and those with airworthiness responsibility appear to be flameproof and carry on photocopying their errors or misdeeds, typically with the MAA rep in the room who says nothing.
So why do I support the MAA - well with the one distinct exception it does have a structure and capability capable of ensuring airworthiness in a military environment. If the performance and actions of the MAA were critiqued as part of an independent MilAAIB investigation I am convinced that its emphasis would shift from ensuring that the DH or operators get the blame, to assuring that the MoD (including the MAA) is actually abiding to the standards that the SofS thinks he has set.
If and when major systemic failures are found during an incident or accident investigation the MAA staff, who through indifference, inaction or undue professional deference have failed in their duty, should be having sleepless nights. Authority without responsibility or accountability is having a deleterious effect on military airworthiness.