Helicomparitor does not have the capacity understand what I said and did for HUMS in modern helicopters. Furthermore, he is not my designated transcriber. I would appreciate it if he did not even try, on either count, because his failures are so painful.
As 212man has said, the HUMS on the S92, "The SAC HUMS is the first truly integrated HUMS system on any modern type (even more so than ARMS or M'ARMS)...."
I claim some small credit for giving the S92 HUMS advocates the resources to make that statement from a valued customer come true. What I specifically did as Program Manager was to mandate the S92 HUMS as primary, required kit, assure that the HOMP capabilities and maintenance manual tie-ins were part of the basic premise of the S92, and to set the requirements for the read-back and diagnostic software that is integral to the usefulness of the device.
I also believe that 212man is quite correct, when he further said, "and is so integrated that perhaps SAC have failed to realise the importance of appropriate information/guidance to aircrew on the information it yields."It will take time for the true potential for that excellent operational, maintenance and failure data to be properly mined to gain what it can teach us. HUMS is an essential part of the 21st century helicopter.
Can HUMS protect us from the majority of accidents? No, because pilot error is the primary cause of accidents. Since helicomparitor rejects safety kit like EGPWS, we cannot blame HUMS when the aircraft he helped equip fly into terrain and the sea.
Wait, perhaps we can improve passenger safety and prevent pilot error. We could program HUMS to check the operator's name on the crew manifest and tell passengers to stay off helicomparitor's poorly equipped helicopters.