Lu
You missed the important point of my post above. I have no argument with the FMEA process and the regulation under which it serves (25.1309, 33.75 etc.) I do have a problem with the lack of real teeth in the adherence to this regulation by part 39 Continued Airworthiness..
If the FAA/JAA were to really tie these two parts together they could get at both the corrective actions and the root cause.
In the case of Alaska Airlines, I can not understand what really went wrong other than s**t happens and the NTSB is likely to recommend only that better maintenance should have fixed this without really delving into the more global tie in between maintenance and design system safety.
Hopefully the aircraft designer will have learned a lesson here as well and drive this lesson back into future designs without waiting for the NTSB to figure it out.
Maybe John Goglia of the NTSB will get some teeth into the upcoming hearing by addressing this subject