New military aviation 'body' to set up.
Mandator:
Apologies for butting in, to both you and NUFC, but the glaring difference between these two Airworthiness Authorities is that the one you speak of has not caused needless deaths by deliberately not enforcing its own Regulations. For any shortcomings that it may have the CAA would be a quantum leap in airworthiness provision if it presided over the Military Airfleet in the same way that it does the Civil one.
if you think that the CAA is a repositry of airworthiness best practice, I fear you have not had much to do with them over the years.
I have dealt with the CAA with regard to airworthiness for many years and found them, more often than not, very fair and they've stuck to the rules (sometime too rigidly!) but they stuck to them.
Sometimes, you can even force the CAA to stick to their own rules too. Try that with the military Un-set Jelly/Knitted Fog systems!
Sometimes, you can even force the CAA to stick to their own rules too. Try that with the military Un-set Jelly/Knitted Fog systems!
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if the 3 star will have the final say on accident reports, like they have done up to now? I seem to recall in past reports that if they disagree with the
report they tell the board to look at it again.
Or will they have to back the findings of the independent panel of experts? Will these experts include civilians? Will the experts be trained to CAA accident invesigator standard? Or will the MAA be a tour in post for an individual, then to be posted somewhere else after 2-3- years?
report they tell the board to look at it again.
Or will they have to back the findings of the independent panel of experts? Will these experts include civilians? Will the experts be trained to CAA accident invesigator standard? Or will the MAA be a tour in post for an individual, then to be posted somewhere else after 2-3- years?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Mods
Dear Mods
If deemed appropriate, could the mods merge this thread with the main Haddon-Cave thread?
BTW re MAA accident investiagtions - if there is a conflict of interests, the BOI Pres can report directly to the PUS and bypass the chain in toto - a improvement on the present.
If deemed appropriate, could the mods merge this thread with the main Haddon-Cave thread?
BTW re MAA accident investiagtions - if there is a conflict of interests, the BOI Pres can report directly to the PUS and bypass the chain in toto - a improvement on the present.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 659
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAA Head
Personally think this MAA thread should be kept separate from the H-C one.
A good start would be to ensure that this "3 star" is not a man in a uniform and ideally is recruited from somewhere external to the MoD who can arrive without the current RAF and/or MoD regulator baggage.
Simply promoting the next available 2 star RAF officer into the slot would be nothing short of ridiculous - however I suspect that is what will happen.
A good start would be to ensure that this "3 star" is not a man in a uniform and ideally is recruited from somewhere external to the MoD who can arrive without the current RAF and/or MoD regulator baggage.
Simply promoting the next available 2 star RAF officer into the slot would be nothing short of ridiculous - however I suspect that is what will happen.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Northampton
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seafuryfan
Regarding the second paragraph of your post -- I put this very point to the CAS on Wednesday the 16th of this month following the statement by Bob Ainsworth in the house. He assured me that they would be appointed for their professional qualifications and experience, that it would not be just another post in the career chain. I also pointed out that people who work in the CAA, AIB, etc do not have a professional development that requires them to "move on" just when they become competent in their current post.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: On the outside looking in
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My concern is where are they going to get 250 people (accepting not all of them will be "hands on") who are suitably qualified, experienced, available, willing to move to those jobs???
sw
sw
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: norfolk
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the intentions are to shut a couple of squadrons, there is your 250 bodies required, no probs. Whether you wanted to be in a particular job or place has never bothered the MoD up till now, you went on a training course, became an expert and went to places you were told to go.
I do beleive that it should be higher % civilian though, with a mix at all levels, as stated before , they will not be looking at their career path and knowing that they will only be in post 2-3 years, it would also help to stop the new broom syndrome, especially the re-invent the wheel one.
I do beleive that it should be higher % civilian though, with a mix at all levels, as stated before , they will not be looking at their career path and knowing that they will only be in post 2-3 years, it would also help to stop the new broom syndrome, especially the re-invent the wheel one.
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 76
Posts: 3,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Way back in the olden days, while working in the instrument workshops we lived in fear of the AIB inspectors, civilian chaps who enforced airworthiness standards in RAF, FAA and AAC workshops. They were the military equivalent of CAA Surveyors. Of course they cost a lot of money and weren't productive, so they had to go in one of the never ending defence reviews. 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 659
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
250?
Well as I understand it from a recent brief I sat in all the current DARS guys will all move into it plus all the Abbey Wood airworthiness and Wyton maintenance sections, then there is all the defence airspace management community, plus the guys that regulate MoD contractor flying, etc. I gather there is also a move to get ACAS's RTS guys in there as well. That adds up to a lot of people. Not too sure how all this fits with the desire to shrink both the military and civil service.
CK,
So how one earth is the new MAA to be independent if it merely comprises re-assigned, re-titled current staffs?
I believed that the whole thrust of the H-C recommendations is that that a new military airworthiness organisation should be set up as the MoD has patently proved itself incapapable of assuring continued airworthiness.
What is being proposed is looking more like just a reorganisation of current MoD resources under an existing 3* officer. Where will the fresh ideas come from? Why are they not looking to import experience from outside?
So how one earth is the new MAA to be independent if it merely comprises re-assigned, re-titled current staffs?
I believed that the whole thrust of the H-C recommendations is that that a new military airworthiness organisation should be set up as the MoD has patently proved itself incapapable of assuring continued airworthiness.
What is being proposed is looking more like just a reorganisation of current MoD resources under an existing 3* officer. Where will the fresh ideas come from? Why are they not looking to import experience from outside?
Ah, I wondered who'd spot that one first, Wilson!
It was the whole thrust of the recommendations made to Mr H-C that the new MAA be separated entirely from the MOD.
Whereas the whole thrust of the recommendations by Mr H-C are along the lines that it will be part of the MOD but Independent!
Explanations on a post-card please.
At least it will provide employment for the Sign Writers.
It was the whole thrust of the recommendations made to Mr H-C that the new MAA be separated entirely from the MOD.
Whereas the whole thrust of the recommendations by Mr H-C are along the lines that it will be part of the MOD but Independent!
Explanations on a post-card please.
At least it will provide employment for the Sign Writers.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst H-C would suggest that the MAA should be separate from the MOD the biggest issue is who would pay for it? If it were to be separate from the MOD then would it sit in the NHS budget? How about Social Services? Transport would fit better but would we (Servicemen) want the MAA working for the SofS for transport? Clearly not. It has to be working for the MOD and responsible to the SofS for Defence.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 659
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree Vec, and for that reason it will never ever be independent. Hence my earlier post suggesting that at the very least the new head should be a non military man recruited externally. A least it would be a (small) step in the right direction.
As to what they will (should) do, I think Blacksheep has partially answered that one.
As to what they will (should) do, I think Blacksheep has partially answered that one.
