JimL,
You are saying exactly what I have been for the past week or so.
My question to you is a bit more direct.
Why is it incumbent for someone outside the "Regulator" supposed to raise an issue.....don't the Regulators have a responsibility to monitor events as they happen and question both operators and manufacturers?
You use the singular...."Regulator" and not the plural....."Regulators".
Why did the situation you so correctly describe escape action by the Australian, American, British, and Canadian Regulators?
Why did this situation get by the Operators?
Why did this situation get by Sikorsky?
Who in the hell is supposed to be looking ahead amongst all those groups?
My answer.....every one of them!
Yet, not one person, regulator, or operator saw need to raise the flag!
There is no excuse for such a thing to happen in this day and time with all the studies, concepts, procedures, reporting venues, and communication capability we have at hand to identify such issues.
What is going to happen now.....the Regulators going to step up to the plate and admit their failure?
Will the Operators step up and admit their failure?
Will Sikorsky own up to its failure?
Or will we see the Regulators point their fingers at someone else, the Operators slink off into the bushes and hire some high dollar lawyers, and Sikorsky do the same?
I suggest there ought to be some Government Employment vacancies crop up very soon for a start. Operators need to do their soul searching as well.
Needless to say....Sikorsky is going to be given lots of assistance in finding their faults in this.