Choppy - you are a cad arent you.
You're stubborn, I'll give you that.
we've established you have learning difficulties over the years so lets make it simple......again:
When a component is found to fail less often than another, checks and measures are reduced appropriately.
in the case of engines Vs tail rotors, its in the region of 4:1.
Our "authorities" bless them all, have experience and access to experts and stats.
With these tools, they risk manage the issue and produce best practice. If it doesn't work, they review.
No-one has come up with a better solution yet but i am sure they would love to hear from you.
Commercial ops departures have been revised and reviewed several times over the years as the odd engine failure pops up.
But sorry to burst your bubble choppie but tail rotor failures during departure (even when they are under extra strain) don't feature much in the stats.
Now i know we are a nanny state in the UK but we haven't quite reached the stage where every problem requires evasive manouevres - yet. If we did we'd either engineer tail rotors out of existence or stop flying altogether.......there....is that easier to understand?
Remember choppie....we're not talking about those radio controlled helos you fly.........
SEE POST NUMBER 79
Last edited by Thomas coupling; 4th Nov 2018 at 14:24.