Washing blades after every flight?
I'm wondering if washing your blades so much contributed to the debonding. I don't wash mine very often at all and fly in corrosive environments: dust in AZ and rain in WA. Yes, my 1200- hour, 6yo blades have been repainted twice, but there is no evidence of debonding.
As for the fuel bladders, that is not a "required" upgrade -- at least, not until overhaul. (I'm Part 135 and my POI is not requiring it.) The SB is a knee-jerk reaction to an accident that occurred in WA a few years back that resulted in a post-crash fire. Robinson is, as usual, attempting to protect itself from future legal action by recommending this "improved" fuel tank system. If we don't get it and have a fire, they'll point to the SB and blame us.
You talk about Robinson profiting off the fuel tank retrofit. I guess the cost of R&D and FAA approvals don't count in your calculations. Saying they profit from every tank sold is like saying we profit from every dollar we collect beyond fuel costs. I'm not saying there's no profit for Robinson. I'm saying that profit is likely not nearly as big as you think. Perhaps the discount on the tank purchase before year-end is more reflective of their actual costs?
While I feel your pain, having had problems with other Robinson components over the years, I don't think that pressure from owners is going to make a difference. And I can't imagine that threatening a class action lawsuit would get you very far, either. Even if you did succeed, the lawyers are likely to far more than you'll ever see.
No aircraft is perfect. Design changes happen all the time. If you don't like your Robinson, why not just sell it and get something you think won't have any problems? Good luck with that.
Last edited by heligal; 19th Jul 2011 at 13:18.