OK, Rainboe
may I offer, without any hard feelings, some middle ground that we could maybe agree to..
I remember when I heard of the Beechjet events. My first thought at that time was, well, those poor folks obviously must have had some sort of fuel contamination, may be a water and / or strange water/PRIST issue, whatever..
The Beechjet events still do not seem as clear cut, as remember that a short time after that, PWC issued some Service Bulletins for those engines in Beechjets and C-560s, one is half ( single channel) FADEC with hydromechanical back-up and the other fully hydromechanical on the FCU side, and those SBs actually rerouted some hot bleed air to a sensitive part of the FCU that was presumed to maybe have become "frozen", albeit as PWC stated in a high humidity environment..
so the Beechjet events actually may not fall into the "iced compressor" category, but then who knows..
Now to the Boeing, NASA. FSF studies AND some revised AFM info on Airbuses and Boeing etc. regarding possible "Compressor Icing"..
Guess we can agree that the stuff in and close to highly convective weather at altitude is touchy..
could we agree now on the following: new engine technology, that employs highly tuned and efficient compressors, may in fact be more susceptible to airflow disruption by the phenomenon described in the Boeing AERO article than older tech engines....?!
air traffic has increased immensely over the last decades, the altitude bands in which we fly are a tad different from the ones 30 - 40 years ago, and last but not least ( my favorite theory, as you may have found from my other posts), could it be that more airplanes at altitude fly closer to convective weather than ever before ( maybe due to some false sense of safety by modern crews using modern weather avoidance equipment..)???
Now , could all these factors taken together mean, that we start to see stuff, that simply had not been encountered on a statistically significant basis 30 - 40 years ago???