Maybe they have changed the "chip" to back to the T970 specs
No. Don't think so. The 972 thrust is required for the LAX T/O and as you see the 380 has returned to daily LAX sched.
As far as the 146 goes, as long as you choose your seat well, I believe it will get you there.
Can't recall an uncontained failure except for its operational service in OZ. If the engines weren't poisoning the pax with oil fumes they were failing at a rate that paid for engineers homes in the overtime they generated.
If I were to choose my seat well for a "fruit bat" (Oz name for a 146) flight it would be in the terminal waiting for another type aircraft. ( I am probably being overly harsh)
Amongst us engineering types the BAE 146 is the only aircraft you have to check the front and back for bird strikes if reported. Boeing 744 is my pick,
Back to Trent failures.
I have a recollection of Cathy grounding its fleet of RR powered A330s.
Something about an angle gearbox failing structurally due to out-sourcing poor quality control in machining.
The CEO of Cathy grounded all its A330s where ever they were in the world as it was unable to predict a life span of the engines as some engines failed at 3000 hours and some close to 50.
This is a vague memory from the 90s but it would appear this type of trouble has struck before.