I've already said that some of my colleagues would call our management tw_ts to their faces.
Nothing changed there I see!
49, You are quite right that almost without exception, pilots like to get home to their easy chair and pint at the end of the day and would not knowingly fly and unsafe aircraft.
The qualifier is "knowingly". We have to admit that as Pilots and by transference....Passengers "trust" or have "faith" the aircraft is in fact safe to fly in all regards.
Engineers too, with almost no exceptions, have a Conscience they know they shall have to live with, should they provide a Pilot an aircraft that is un-airworthy. They too take it on "faith" the parts that are make up that aircraft are as they should be when made by the OEM.
Sadly, our "faith" is challenged by an event or events that cause us to have concerns.
We have to fall back on "faith" again that the system works to ensure that as few of these events occur as is humanly possible.
There in lies the rub....."the human".
As long as humans are involved in the process, we have to accept the process shall never be perfect. We have to do everything that is reasonably possible to ensure the process prevents our human frailty from tripping us up. Again, that requires more "faith" yet from us.
As i see it....the Passengers who ride the Super Puma are in need of assurance the "process" is going to be examined and every reasonable effort made to ensure the Super Puma Aircraft is as safe as it should be. Pilots, Engineers, Designers, and Test Engineers along with the AAIB and CAA are going to do that before they themselves express their confidence in the situation.
If the Pilots will fly it.....then you can feel confidant that you are taking a very reasonable risk. As in all flying there are risks.....we just have to make sure they are reasonable risks.
Hopefully, that is what will transpire during the coming few weeks and months.