Chug, re your 2nd para.
If I came across that way it wasn't intentional. The pre-MAA approach didn't involve a MAA, the contractor was expected to certificate the platform to the satisfaction of the project office and sensible discussions about Def Stan compliance could be undertaken. It's probably worth saying that the Def Stan is an imperfect beast. Some parts are first class (eg escape systems), some parts are a bit behind the state of the art (inevitable with newer technologies) and other important aspects of design aren't covered at all. Into this scenario steps the MAA, it is sensitive to the circumstances which caused it to come into existence and some members of its leadership were away from their comfort zone. What could possibly go wrong?
As it happens, I believe that the contentious issues could have been discussed in an adult way if the will existed but the imposition of punitive cost savings on MOD by the new government meant that the technical aspects could be used to mask the Cameron\Osborne involvement.
EAP