The Nimrod Review - Official Documents

The Nimrod Review
21.59
21.60
Objective
21.61
21.62
514
with the operation of the aircraft are undertaken by STANEVAL who audit flying activity at the Units; their
reports are copied to the Central Flying School. They do not, however, provide the AOAs with an operational
assurance system.
By contrast, the CAA examine Airworthiness regulatory compliance by employing experienced and certified
surveyors who look at the maintenance standards on the aircraft in question; and, in parallel, aircrew assessors
fly with the commercial operator aircrew. In the Nuclear Safety Organisation, the ‘inspectors’ have experience
of the roles which they are inspecting, have themselves been fully trained and deemed competent and assess
the organisation and individual on compliance against the regulations.
In terms of best practice within the MOD, the Army have the lead, undertaking physical audits of Army Air
Corps helicopters annually, an initiative that has recently been proposed for the RAF AOAs as part of its
Quality Assurance processes.
The aim of the following Recommendations C is to enable the Services to build a cohort of Airworthiness
appointees in both the Equipment and Operating authorities who will be suitably qualified and experienced
to be able to ensure complete Airworthiness regulatory compliance across the domains. These Airworthiness
appointees will need to be trained and examined on Airworthiness regulation and acceptable means of
compliance, with Airworthiness responsibilities cascaded from senior to junior levels using Letters of
Airworthiness Authority, without unnecessary interference from the Regulator.
Ownership of Airworthiness must be taken back in-house and no longer outsourced to Industry.
Recommendations C
21.63
In order to achieve this objective, I make the following Recommendations:
Recommendation 21.C.1: All holders of engineering Airworthiness posts (at SO2 equivalent and above)
shall be required: (a) to have achieved professional status as Chartered Engineers; and (b) to have
acquired appropriate experience in the Forward air domain.
Recommendation 21.C.2: All personnel with Airworthiness responsibilities shall be required to undergo
formal Airworthiness regulatory training, examination and periodic reassessment.
21.64
For the avoidance of doubt, for Recommendation 21.C.2: (1) Training in the Regulation of Airworthiness
should seek to ensure all personnel are fully conversant with: (a) Airworthiness Regulation generally; and (b)
their specific regulatory responsibilities and compliance requirements; (2) The Regulator will need to sponsor
and approve a suite of suitable courses in the Regulation of Airworthiness which include formal training
and assessment in Airworthiness regulation and which are tailored appropriately for the various roles and
rank levels; and (3) It is intended that this scheme should be comparable to the Nuclear Safety management
structure whereby all personnel about to be employed in responsible positions receive formal and examined
training followed by a period of further training and supervision before being signed-off as competent; there
is then periodic (at least annual) re-assessment of competence by the Nuclear Regulator.
Recommendation 21.C.3: The Chief Engineer and Flight Safety/Operations specialists supporting the
Duty Holders at each level shall be clearly identified and hold senior rank.