, in the case of the Nimrod it was a complex chain of events going back years.
The report, understandably, focused on events nearer the accident, a mix of overstretch, some funding, but at heart chains of command mix ups and confusion.
But the in flight refueling system, where the leak that caused the explosion came from, was a very hastily added mod in 1982 in the Falklands war.
In it's original NATO ASW role, such a system was not needed (nor for P-3 Orions or Atlantiques either), but to provide support from Ascension Island to the war zone ex Vulcan probes were fitted with the rest of the internal gear being quicky fabricated.
Afterward, for the most part, it was unneeded, save for the odd exercises and deployment.
After the 2003 period, the Nimrod found a new role in (again like the USN
P-3's) overland survellience, command and control, first in Iraq, then Afghanistan.
The Afghan one needing, from a base in Oman, a lot of in flight refueling.
All the while the fleet was very aging and the complete rebuilds to the MRA.4 standard hit very serious delays, including most notably the discovery that the Nimrods were virtually hand built, so each new wings, being to the same measurements, had shall we say issues.
Had the original MRA.4 program ran to anything like it's original schedule, that ill fated Nimrod in 2006 might well have been a MRA.4 conversion (which is so extensive, each one gets a new serial number, they are in effect new aircraft).
The UK does, compared to other European NATO nations except France, spend more on defence.
But, they are also the most actively deployed.
Even with some billions of extra £ over several years to fill urgent procurement gaps which comes from outside the defence budget. (Everything from new light machine guns to UCAV's).
All forces have gaps, much (justified) comment in recent times over the number of support helicopters for example, but though France has a larger fleet overall they have nothing in the Chinook class. Swings and roundabouts as they say.
Add in the strains of almost constant deployments, something bad was going to happen somewhere.
It's always been this way, even when during the Cold War when twice as much was being spent, even too in the more immediate post war period, still with much of the 'old' worldwide role and conscription, still needed a controversial budget boost for the Korean War
So now there is extra caution.
Those A330's are eagerly awaited!