ha yes but Bravo I think we are seeing that some Super Puma's are more Super than others...
One truely wonders how that approach was used in the approval process. Over simplification no doubt but do you just take AS332L2 then say you've ran the new gearbox on a rig for X hours and therefore we are good to go with the EC225?
The focus on the emergency gearbox cooling system is all well and good but remember thats just the short term fix if you have one type of in flight issue. As has been said before when parts of the gearbox are departing through the fuselage a cooling system isn't going to save you.
The only real solution short term is limit the torque of the 225 to protect the gearbox that it has and for the manufacturer to give a strict limits on checks. Although one might note that in the case of REDL the suggestion was that existing detection methods wouldn't have provided further indication of issues.
Now I know the failures are different but with no explaination why a 3000hr gearbox shat itself which was lifed to 6000hrs and with 2 further gearbox issues in 2012 I think an engineering solution is needed not just a software update and the responsibility dumped on the operator or worse maintenance for the operator. Would you want that on your conscious?
Last edited by Pittsextra; 26th Oct 2012 at 17:00.