The Nimrod Review - Official Documents

21.114
21.115
Type experience
21.116
Summary
21.117
Objective
21.118
Chapter 21 – New Military Airworthiness Regime
their own accidents. The answer is to remove the convening power to the independent authority of the
Regulator.
Third, it is vital that the results of military accident investigations are collated, analysed and the wider trends
and lessons learned disseminated across the relevant domains and Defence generally. Currently, the manner
in which BOI Reports are handled is somewhat haphazard. This is another reason why the SI process should
be in the hands of a central Regulator.
The current SI process is, in any event, not ideal for dealing with accident investigations when Industry is
involved. Industry may be involved in military accidents either through Industry supporting or operating the
aircraft as part of their Depth role on the MOB, or where military aircraft are being flown by civilian crews,
or where Service crews are operating a civil-registered platform. Whilst the technical, operating and support
issues are the same, the process associated with a SI versus a civil accident investigation are quite different
and have different legal requirements.
It is important, in my view, that the engineering and operational members of SIs have relevant experience
on type. The pool of suitable candidates for appointment will probably have spent much of their career
operating/maintaining the aircraft concerned. Aircrew will have undertaken a conversion course (usually six
months) to fly the aircraft. Aircrew and engineers associated with type will normally have extensive experience
of the aircraft, its operations and diagnosing problems with the aircraft in normal day-to-day operation. The
three members of an SI should have a comprehensive knowledge of the aircraft, its systems and the normal
operating procedures. It would take much longer for an uninitiated investigator to acquire the necessary
background information, let alone to garner a full understanding of the aircraft. Civil and military aircraft are
different. Civil aircraft have broad similarities. Military aircraft differ markedly. Larger military aircraft tend to
be extensively modified and are often older designs than those in civil use. Fast jets are completely different
to larger aircraft and have nothing in common with civilian aircraft. Military aircraft operations are (on the
whole) completely different to civilian operations. The SI team understand the particular regulations within
which the aircraft and its crews work; they also understand the stresses of military operations and the context
within which the aircraft will have been operating. The majority of crashes are the result of human factors,
engineering issues or operating factors (e.g. bird strike). Determining what happened is a result of analysing
available data about the crash/incident and the people best placed to do so are those who are ‘educated’
both in the aircraft’s systems and the way in which it is operated. Currently, what is missing is a knowledge
of how to go about proving theories, what tests might be useful and practical etc. The AAIB is (and has
been) a valuable source of guidance to previous BOIs carrying out military air investigations as well as often
conducting a parallel/joint inquiry with AAIB inspectors appointed to assist BOIs. In the case of XV230, it
produced a report which coincided in all essential detail with that of the BOI.
In summary, therefore: (1) Currently, the SI system is not independent and seen to be independent. It should
be. (2) Currently, there is no joint military accident technical investigation team that has the skill set and
training to investigate the whole spectrum of military aircraft accidents. There should be. (3) Currently, there
is no satisfactory system for drawing together the results of BOIs and learning the lessons of BOIs across
Defence. There should be. (4) It is important that engineering and operational members of SIs have experience
on type. and (5) Even closer liaison between the military and the AAIB would be valuable.
It is important that SIs are, and are seen to be, non-partisan, independent, skilled and professional investigations
in which the Services, Industry and the Public can have complete confidence. Presidents and members of BOIs
need to be given appropriate education, training and support to be able to carry out their investigatory role
525