Given all the above, the marine engineering community is hardly well positioned to deliver anything of real significance (about strength of composites in aircraft).
Points well made, Tallsandwich.
By way of footnote, I would add:
a) With most nautical craft, excepting a few military vessels, it is relatively difficult and exceptional to be able to push them - deliberately or accidentally - up to and beyond the engineered design strength limits.
With aircraft, however, driving the airframe, engines, and systems up to and beyond design limits is possible during each and every operational use of the machine, as well as sometimes during ground handling and maintenance.
b) An important consideration relating to questions about service life of composite components vs traditional metal, wood, and other mfg techniques is that composites are typically "created" in place, with strength and durability reliant on invisible qualities derived from that creation. Like barrels of wine, each unit has some hard-to-quantify variability when made that creates unknown implications for its ultimate competence in service.
Lacking informative means to assess the future durability of composite materials incorporated in individual assembled units and units in the field, we seem to be operating in an uncomfortably dark zone of adverse possibilities. While this standard may be acceptable in military use, where composites have provided distinguished service, a much more conservative approach seems warranted in Civil Aviation, for use by the general public.