Llama: You're splitting hairs methinks.
The Portuguese report even cites: High error rates in its findings.
From Canada:
The Cormorants have turned out to be a pilot’s dream, but a mechanic’s nightmare. The tail rotor in the adapted military version had a design flaw that our technicians are forced to wrestle with on a regular basis. There are reports that their ratio of time spent in maintenance, compared to time spent in the air, outstrips even the Sea Kings – at a breathtaking 30-to-1. But this shouldn’t have come as a surprise – our Cormorants are both Early Birds and Twisted Sisters.
If only pigs could fly.
[Colin Kenny is former chair of the Senate Committee on National Security and Defence].
Availability incorporates reliability. Why is it that the Brit Mil 101's even after their adequate engineering package are still finding they need 50hrs maintenance on the cab each time it flies for an hour then? Surely the logistics and supply line is adequate. Surely the knowledge bank and workmanship is adequate. Could it be the complex systems onboard? Could it be the aluminium lithium skin panels or carbon composites that are casuing problems. Could it be the three engines perhaps? Maybe databus EM screening issues? I think I'll stick to plain old: unreliable.
A Bentley in a white van world.
