"Perhaps the lesson we are just now learning is that it's time to put aside the glory of ANZAC, to probe beyond the courage of our soldiers, sailors, and airmen, and for the first time objectively answer one important question – just how good is our Defence force, really?"
.
3 comments:
Seaworthiness audits leading to formal Release of systems to naval service very similar to the functional and regulatory objectives of Airworthiness Reviews or "Boards" were proposed originally by Navy's Test Evaluation and Acceptance Authority (RANTEAA) in 2001/02 and not as recently as the Lowy Institute outlines. RANTEAA's proposal arose from a review directed by (then) CDRE Crane - Navy's Systems Commander. The review was instigated as an element of the follow up actions to both the 1996 Blackhawk accident, the inquiry into HMAS Westralia's fire and also an ANAO audit of Navy's acceptance processes in 2002.
A question presently silent that needs now to be asked I propose is: Given the deficiencies the Rizzo review has found with the integrity of the operational and technical regulatory management of Navy's, mostly Safety Critical systems, how has Chief of Navy assured the fitness for purpose and safety of his systems?
Is Kurt still around?I liked the old blog better.
Have they not heard about Knowledge Mangement for a start
AS5037-2005
HB189-2004
Post a Comment