One of the big problems with the Merlin/101 is the extensive use of composite materials - yes they are light and strong but, unlike metal components, there is no Non-Destructive Testing technique for assessing possible damage/failure of components. The crack in the TR at Culdrose was known about and being monitored - just as well they didn't leave it too late then!!
In the bad old days, aircraft were built and tested in role and failures occurred and were rectified (often after loss of life) - are you telling me we should still accept such risk? Are Airbus going to release their new double decker monster plane until it has been exhaustively tested and proved safe for public transport? I don't think so, the negative
PR of killing 500 plus passengers in one go would preclude that. But, are Westlands happy to convince the military that they have an airworthy aircraft, despite some high profile failures so that jolly jack tar and the rest of the cannon fodder in the military can play crash test dummies for tthe R & D dept? it would seem so.