I think Lu's efforts are entirely laudable and he is obviously devoting a lot of time and effort in his quest. I do feel though, that he is arguing more than one point at a time which is clouding his original intention. What does the crash mentioned above have to do with his report? Why splah the names of two dead people all over the internet? Generally, wazzing around at very low level when inexperienced, is a bad thing. They may very well have had the same outcome whilst flying a Schweizer or Enstrom.
Another thread deals with low Nr in autorotation, which many respondents have suggested may be due to excessive flat pitch and may need checking. That's pretty nomal stuff which applies equally to the 212 (all types of course), so why does Lu need to imply that those who made that suggestion are being hypocritical after responding to his other thread about the design 'flaws'? What is the problem he is espousing? the 18 degrees of right cyclic in the cruise, the excessive flapping that results from sideslip, the collective rigging procedures, mixing flapping hinges with a teetering head or the mast bumping that can happen (hardly uniquely) under low g?
I agree that the R22 is less than forgiving but hope this is not a crusade driven by obsession. How many Cessnas and Pipers crash every month with broken nose wheel struts after heavy/bounced landings? A hell of a lot, does that mean they have a design flaw?
Anyway, full marks for perserverance and I hope you get a satisfactory answer from the NTSB.
------------------
Another day in paradise