HC,
It not just French/English conversions where language lets us down but also in English/English (in this case English/American).
My use of the word "Engineer" is in the American usage....as in Design Engineers and not the British usage which in American is "Mechanic"....those that use hand tools etc...in the maintenance and repair of things.
I particularly note the issues raised about the assumptions all serious MGB failures would produce "spalling", that there would be adequate oil flow to move any foreign matter in the oil within reach of magnetic sensors, and the decision that oil sampling was no longer necessary.
We are talking about possibly the most important component of a helicopter when we talk of Main Gear Boxes....yet we are confronted with decisions and designs that fail to meet all contingencies.
How many times we heard that kind of comment about the S-92 MGB design?
All I am looking for here is the exact same kind of analysis by those that are so critical of the Sikorsky S-92 and its Engineers. No one gave a damn about their feelings....why should we treat the French Engineers any differently?
The discussion is all about the design, its flaws, and how to correct them and the certification system so we have "safe" aircraft to fly.
IMHO.....until the Gearboxes in question are re-designed to correct their shortcoming in detecting such failures...identify all foreign objects in the oil the come from gear/bearing/race wear and cracking....and oil analysis is re-instituted as a standard practice...and less reliance on HUMs as the main Gearbox Health measure is a standard engineering practice, I would suggest the industry has not adequately addressed the situation.
Now HC....care to discuss the technical issues raised in the Report?
In your view...what do they tell us about the current state of EC MGB design and safety monitoring of the gearboxes by flight crews, maintenance crews, and the Manufactuer?
Where do we go from here to improve the situation?
As to worrying about the feelings of people....how about we get concerned about the feelings of the next of kin of those that get killed in a second occurrence of this kind of failure.....or will it be the third occurrence if we accept the Report's findings?