The Huey went through it, the 206 went through it, the Puma went through it, the Boeing 727 went through it, the DC-10 went through it, the DC-4 went through it, the Boeing 377 went through it, and now the 92 is going through it, as is the 139
So how come the lessons learned from previous engineering "oversights" are not being applied to the latest helos? Looking for cracks every 10 flying hours on a 92 or using an aluminium hammer to check for debonding on tailbooms on the 139 is not exactly showing signs of technological advancement is it?
Get design right first time round and there will be no need for "B" variants to address serious safety issues.
Roll on the teleporter "A" model, send the real guinea pigs first before PAX...beam me up Scotty.
Max