I very rarely post comments because I like to deal in facts, or with accurate information available at the time. The problem with comments on accidents prior to an official report is that unless you are part of the investigation we do not know. What may look or seem obvious to a layman is not necessarily correct. To even suggest that by just looking at a general picture of a part of an accident wreckage, a person can determine whether or not that the part failed pre or post impact is unwise and unhelpful.
My current information about the first R66 accident is that the wreckage has signatures that are consistent with a Low RPM Rotor Stall event. The accident is still under investigation. The engine EMU might be helpful.
I note the reference to "experienced pilot" in the second R66 accident.
Perhaps it would be wise to check on the type of experience the pilot has rather than just saying "the pilot was experienced.
What would be the worst type of "experienced pilot" flying a two bladed helicopter?
I will leave the question open.
RHC are not in the habit of misleading anybody when it comes to the causes of accidents.