Thanks for the support Cockney Steve.
I stress that this is not a QC issue. The QC guys can only check test data they are directed to follow. Adhesive disbonding is TIME dependent and almost all QC check tests are short-term strength tests, and therefore they will not interrogate the conditions that cause longer term bond durability issues.
The legal liability issue is not as clear as you may believe. For a start, I firmly believe that RHC has in all general probabilities complied with the regulatory requirements so I would expect that their legal eagles would direct any defence along those lines. I have actually been approached by one OEM to provide expert advice along those lines but they have never followed through with the offer, and I suspect the offer was an attempt to shut me up rather than to actually address the technical issues at the basis of the problem.
The vexed issue is that if any manufacturer actually knew that even though they demonstrably complied with the regulatory requirements but also were aware that these requirements produced principal structural elements that had a demonstrated history where they failed to maintain continuing airworthiness and that the risk factors were made aware in published scientific papers, and even though they were aware of the deficiencies in ongoing airworthiness of their structures they continued to issue airworthiness directives which ignored the available evidence of the risks to airworthiness and were aware that their ADs failed to address the issues which constituted the risk, is the defence of "we complied with the regulations" sufficient to defend against legal action? I doubt it.
The objectives of my regular postings are to make the end users aware of the deficiencies in airworthiness management of the very structures which support their lives every day, and to also make them aware of the lack of understanding of regulators, crash investigators and manufacturers with regard to the fundamental causes of adhesive bond failures.
For many years I have suggested that adhesive bond failure issues would only be rectified by legal litigation about a smoking hole in the ground with x number of poor b*stards in body bags. I know the FAA is addressing the issues but that may take a considerable time to reach fruition and their outcomes will not address the airworthiness of heritage structures.
I have published a number of papers on the subject of adhesive bond failures, and I have even conducted a number of courses on adhesive bond failure analysis and prevention over a number of years see
www.adhesionassociates.com. so any competent manufacturer should be aware of these issues. The FAA certainly is.
Within some conditions, I'd welcome the opportunity to support legal action on issues related to failures of bonded structures, but I am essentially retired on an adequate pension so I am not seeking life-supporting income. My only objective is to drive adhesive bonded structures to manufacture reliable structures.
Regards
Blakmax