Bluskis,
You are repeating yourself! If you were to read what I said on this engine failure related thread you would see I have always talked about "mechanical" engine failures. Pilots are the sort of people who happily take responsibility for themselves, and through training can minimise human engine failures. It's the mechanical things, like crank shafts snapping, that we cannot directly control. When you talk to pilots that is what is perceived to be the risk.
There is something you have totally missed here. If you claim to see "engine problems on average every 300 hours" the NASA report should be ringing alarm bells in your head. The NASA report shows (to my satisfaction if not yours) that non human induced engine failures (which is what it is measuring as you like to point out) are infrequent. According to NASA figures, there is a 99.35% chance that you will routinely complete 300 hours of flying SEPs on 6 hour legs, yet you seem to see problems regularly.
What does that tell you? The only explantion I can come up with (apart from you are making it up) is that you are seeing a serious problem with human induced engine failures. Some people need training, in fact from what you are saying the whole system is falling apart.
Personally I doubt that is the case, there is another more obvious explanation.
Cheers
Slag