the core of the problem isn't the corrosion, the cracks or the deterioration.
the question is why owners want to persist with old aeroplanes?
the answers are easy to see if you look.
design standards, those things that are so poorly understood, haven't been maintained by engineers for years. they have been adulterated by clerical arse coverers for years to the point that they are near on meaningless.
why weren't corrosion issues addressed at the design phase?
why were companies allowed to design for a throw away 12 year nominal life?
couldn't anyone see the current issues developing?
litigation, the great contribution made by lawyers,
has seen what were cheaply produced aeroplanes so loaded up with insurance costs that they became inordinately expensive investments.
amortisation against income tax has not been available to owners for as long as I can remember.
only businesses can amortise and write off the value of an investment against the income it generates. so while businesses can dispose of a zero residual value item and replace it with a new one to be written off over time the poor old private owner is stuck with an inordinately expensive item that stays at its purchase price.
certification has at its core a huge logic fault.
if I buy a car and I prang it that is my problem. the manufacturer has no real issues once the guarantee period has expired.
I'm free to drive and maintain that car as I wish within roadworthiness guidelines. if I prang the car the manufacturer isn't hauled in front of a court and made to pay huge penalties. outside of the warranty period we have effectively gone our separate ways.
as a result of this and other factors cars are cheaper than aeroplanes.
why in hell does the legal system pursue aircraft manufacturers to the point that none are even commercially viable now?
why is it that CAsA were sued 10 million for the crash of the restored warbird when it suffered a cracked jet pipe?
CAsA had nothing to do with the aircraft manufacture, nothing to do with the aircraft restoration, nothing to do with the maintenance. so why was it liable?
why it was liable is a legal pox that needs to be corrected.
all of these factors conspire to make aviation a hopeless industry.
issues with LAME's, commercial viability, crappy old aeroplanes are all just symptoms of an environment that hasn't been healthy and hasn't worked well in decades.
since you've micromanaged it into a death, thanks for nothing CAsA.