Originally Posted by
Mee3
That's a cheap slap on EC.
Not to be discussed any further here, but my trust in airbus has worn very thin after the 225 accident in Norway.
Can agree that the last assertion is a bit cheap, but the first is a fact from the 225 accident.
Originally Posted by
Cyclic Hotline
Is this the straight 332L2 transmission and rotor system?
Not many similarities with the L2 on this one, more similar to the 225 but with only four blades.
Sleeves, pitchlink, blade horn, droop restrainer support seems by looking at the pictures very similar to the 225.
The sleeves are actually shorter on the this aircraft compared to the 225, if you compare to the photo of the rotor head of the norwegian crash you will see it.
At last it's no doubt where they adopted the design from.
Originally Posted by
blakmax
Pablo 332.
This is my concern as well. I fail to see how paint can fail in this manner. I am a specialist in adhesive bond failure forensics and such a failure in an adhesive bond should ring alarm bells even if it is not a direct cause of the failure. I ask again if any part of that structure is adhesively bonded? If it was bonded then adhesion failures such as that are an extreme warning of exceptionally poor bond strength. If not, then questions must be asked about how paint can just peel off like that. Such a surface finish provides absolutely no environmental protection whatsoever. Adhesion failures in adhesive bonds or paint are indicative of exceptionally poor preparation processes. And before anyone suggests it, a crash event can never change the failure mode in adhesive bonds or paints. The interface is already exceptionally weak and impact can not cause such a change in failure mode.
Regards
Blakmax
Paint peeling off is not uncommon in this area, at least not on the 225 which by the pictures seems to have used the same paint type, AH replaced this with a glossy light gray color after a while. Maybe they replaced the paint type only for civilian aircraft, I don't know.