what you are seeing in the referred document is the downside of a century old safety approach - certification.
parts used in aircraft just can't be used. they have to be approved for use.
that approval requires exhaustive testing.
so while "certification" is supposed to create an environment of robustly designed components, in fact what it does is to lock in place the first approved design of something.
as we see in the less rigorously controlled environment of the ordinary motor car the technology has moved on quite a pace and yet there are none of the problems we face with certified locked in place old designs.
some of the problems are masked by only allowing licenced maintenance.
the licence maintainers get accustomed to working with the crap designs and become quite practised at keeping them serviceable.
I'll give two examples of crap designs that are locked in place.
The marvel schebler carburettor works quite reliably but is totally reliant on the soft gasket material between the case halves to effect a seal.
the cases have 4 bolts holding them. if you use anything but the soft gasket material you find that the case halves distort and the carby leaks.
in reality the case needs 6 bolts to hold so that it doesn't distort.
the design of the carby will never be changed because of the astronomical costs of recertifying it.
a dry vac pump has a frangible part in the drive to prevent engine damage if it seizes. problem is that the frangible part fails well before any deterioration in any other part of the vac pump. this is masked by having them replaced every 500 hours. internally the vac pump has a small nut on a bolt that is prevented from coming off by just 3 centre pop marks in the end of the bolt.
it is an absurd design that would be done differently in a new manufacture.
it will be with us for years because it is "certified."
while litigation provides compensation to the injured parties, in concert with the requirements of "certification" it is substantially preventing progress in the design of new systems.
Certification has existed for a century now and litigation have existed for a lot longer. surely it is time for a different approach that both allows for development and prevents the need for litigation by ushering in more competent designs.
"certification" really is way past its 'use by' date.